# Organic Chemistry Professor Fired Because His Course Was Too Hard



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

I'm sure you've heard the news by now. An organic chemistry professor at an American University was fired because students signed a petition saying his course was too hard. Organic Chem Prof Fired Guardian Newspaper 

And I read this in the news today: Two teens were charged with the murder of their Spanish teacher who had given them a bad grade. Two teens charged with murder of Spanish teacher

I put this cartoon up on our bulletin board a few years ago, and it seems even more relevant now. 









I started my student teaching thirty years ago this autumn. And in that time I've seen standards fall. The pressure to give ever higher and higher grades while actual ability has decreased. SAT scores in reading have declined over years, while there are more and more students in universities who claim they got straight As in high school. 

It's easy for a teacher to say that their standards haven't fallen, and try to buck the trend. But it's tough. We get pressure from the administration and parents to pass students no matter how poorly the students do. Skipped a test? Came in at a later date to write it. Didn't do your homework? We don't give zeroes anymore because a zero indicates poor behaviour, not poor performance. We're not supposed to give zeroes anymore, because you are marking behaviour and not ability. We don't give any grades and percentages to any student under 15 years old, we assess on a proficiency scale of a variety of competencies (skills). And starting next year, we can't report on behaviour, good or bad, in the classroom. 

I've had several students this week complain about my marking of their tests. I had a shouting match with one student in front of the entire class, he claimed he was correct, and I said his answer was wrong. He wouldn't give up. And he wouldn't let us leave the argument until a later time, so I just gave in and gave him the marks. Even though he was wrong. I'm too old and tired to fight anymore. This is in spite of the fact that there will be other tests in the future that can replace this test. I just wanted to get on and teach the class the next lesson. Retirement can't come soon enough. 

From the students' perspective, the pressure to do well is enormous. You need higher and higher grades to get into university now because there is grade creep worldwide. I used to think that I wouldn't have got into university today with my grades from forty years ago. But of course, if I were a student today, I'd probably have straight As. I was a smart kid, but I had a few Bs and Cs. 

This is my rant. Tomorrow night will be parent-teacher conferences. Feel free to comment, have your own rant, or ignore.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

I agree with everything you wrote. I started teaching in 1980 and after 32 years knew it was time to get out. I was a dinosaur who believed (I still do) that learning is hard work; it takes time, patience, commitment and a willingness on behalf of the learner. By the time I left, too many students didn't want to study, do homework or even work in class. Their cell phones were all-important. Students, parents and administrators developed the attitude that if the kids weren't learning it was the teacher's fault. Standards and accountability - gone. Teaching was no longer fun and it really was when I started. Even up to the end my AP Calculus classes were great, but even then in the last years kids came from precalculus less and less prepared and I heard it a lot: your class is too hard. 

We have a serious problem in the United States with kids just being stupid. They don't read anymore. They sure can't write and their math, science, and history knowledge is pathetic. As I travel the world looking at schooling I am often amazed at what I see in places like China, Japan, England, Germany and elsewhere: school is serious business and their students work hard. Not so here. A bunch of spoiled brats.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

I've taken and Accelerated Organic Chemistry class. Two semesters in eight weekends. Six hour courses on Saturdays and Sundays.

Damned right it was hard. Who the hell thinks learning Organic Chemistry is easy?

Of course, I didn't take the classes during a pandemic. It was in-person.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

OTOH, (re the fired chemistry teacher)



> An NYU spokesperson defended the firing, emphasizing high student withdrawals and bad course evaluations. The statement said the decision was also based on complaints about dismissiveness, unresponsiveness, condescension and lack of transparency about grading


Maybe standards are just fine and this particular teacher - who said he had been thinking of retiring - was no longer up to the job.

As for the story about the murder, it seems improbable that this should be seen as a "sign of the times" where today's students will do anything to get their way. Of course, an internet search will turn up stories of teachers being murdered by their students (even one case where thirty years had elapsed since the student was in the teacher's class), but I suspect a statistical analysis that puts such incidents in the context of the number of student/teacher relationships will show how rare these are.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

There's a teacher shortage (at least here in California), and THIS is just one of the reasons why.

During and after the recession, school districts across the country, faced with *declining tax revenues*, were forced to reduce their teacher workforces in a number of ways. Some educators lost their jobs, while salary cuts and changing working conditions caused others to leave the profession. And that was way back in 2014.

Teacher burn-out from teaching during the pandemic, often virtually, really decimated the ranks. The school at which I work has trouble getting substitute teachers, and has to pull in on-campus teachers to "fill in" during their prep period.

Kids have come back to school after the pandemic with poor social skills, and sometimes with attitude (not so much where I work, but elsewhere). 

And teachers are very upset with far-right extremist attacks over fictional accusations. Out here teachers are being accused of attempted to "recruit" kids into socialism or being gay or transgender. They're accused of teaching "woke" culture (in curious objections to teachers actually teaching in-depth History), or CRT (Critical Race Theory), a course description that is only taught in law schools. Out here we've heard claims that teachers are "pushing" animalizations (particularly cats), and providing litter boxes in bathrooms for the students. Really . . . the accusations are super crazy.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

I know that in my old white man rant the two examples are not indicative. I'm not in fear of my job or life. As a teacher, you can't expect things to be the same as they were a generation or two ago. And in fact, many things are better now, as it is a much kinder and more responsive education system. There is less bullying now (by peers and teachers), you can be an openly gay teacher or student. We have programs for everyone in our schools, classes for students with profound mental disabilities, physical disabilities, classes for indigenous students, AP classes, leadership classes, and dozens of clubs catering to every interest.

And many of my students are pretty good. They are capable of many things. 

But every teacher here thinks standards have dropped over the years. And there is a myriad of reasons.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

As a chemistry teacher, I empathise, but there could well be more to this than meets the eye.....and besides, Organic Chemistry is daftly easy anyway 🤣🤣


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Some professors are actually jerks who can neither teach nor design exams. I had one such professor, he was a "big shot" in the hydrogen fuel cell world and clearly thought teaching was beneath him, he had one of his PhD students do the majority of it. 

When it came time to do the final exam, he thought it amusing perhaps to have just four questions, worth 50, 100, 150, and 300 marks. The first 2 questions were challenging, the last 2 I didn't even know where to BEGIN to start solving them. Staring at a blank page with 450 marks at stake is not a good time and I had a full-on anxiety attack and had to ask to leave the room. When I returned, I ignored the questions and wrote the professor a letter letting him know just what I thought of him and his stupid exam.

Surprisingly I passed the course, which means the majority of students must have failed his test and they bell-curved the hell out of it. It just pointlessly stresses a bunch of already stressed-out students who have their futures (and tens of thousands of dollars tuition) at stake.


----------



## CnC Bartok (Jun 5, 2017)

Couchie said:


> Some professors are actually jerks who can neither teach nor design exams. I had one such professor, he was a "big shot" in the hydrogen fuel cell world and clearly thought teaching was beneath him, he had one of his PhD students do the majority of it.


Sadly, there are quite a few of those types. None of my university tutors regarded the actual teaching as a significant part of their raison d'etre.....


----------



## Nate Miller (Oct 24, 2016)

I can appreciate that alot of you guys are teachers, but on the way in to the office I stopped for coffee and the young adult jockeying the register clearly couldn't do simple arithmetic, so whatever is going on in the schools here in America, its not working.


anyway, I dont want to start ranting. I have to go get out my garden hose. There's a school bus coming by in a few minutes and I have to go out and keep those pesky kids off my lawn


----------



## Denerah Bathory (6 mo ago)

Regarding the remarks in OP, wow, didn't realize canada has gotten this bad, that wokeism has gotten to this level of degeneracy. Revolt against the modern world.


----------



## Chi_townPhilly (Apr 21, 2007)

We all have our anecdotes... but the general trends seem clear enough to me...

I saw a study that, in USA colleges- around the time I was born [which would reveal my age... but it WAS over half-a-century ago], the letter-grade 'A' was awarded about 15% of the time. In the most recent measured year, it was awarded 40% of the time, and _was the most frequently-awarded letter-grade._

As for the dilemma of the OP... I don't know- how soon until you can comfortably retire? Maybe take a pay-cut to teach in the kind of Academy where your concern for a suitable learning environment and reward for performance would have a better chance of being shared by your employer?! 

Here is my compartment of this country, $100,000 is enough to see about five students through a pre-college Public School Year. What does that quintet of students receive, these days, in return for that hundred-grand of expense?!?


----------



## Floeddie (8 mo ago)

I guess you have to hand out participation awards to everyone in the class so that no one will get their little feelings hurt? Today's children..... <shakes head sadly>. Retirement is good.


----------



## starthrower (Dec 11, 2010)

Bassist Victor Wooten has a recording of his mother talking on his first solo album and she said, "kids haven't changed, parents have changed." Everything is money today. It's prioritized over all things of value and importance.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

An 'A' is the most frequently awarded grade? Doesn't surprise me at all. Hundreds of our students are on the honour roll, so many that it's meaningless. At least with the elimination of letter grades and percentages for students 15 and younger, there is no more honour roll for them. 

As I age, my cynicism and sarcasm increase.


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

It's an unfortunate situation. I grew up in an area known for intense pressure to get into top colleges, wealthy people cheating the system with admissions scandals, and high rates of teen burnout. This is an area where people are already worried about college acceptance when their kids are in preschool. It's also a broader trend in the U.S. that parents think they should have complete control over the classroom and teachers are consistently demoted in terms of their influence and their ability to set standards (along with a general continued undermining of public education in favor of private). 

I don't know what the "solution" is. It's not a new problem (read John Williams' "Stoner" for an older example, also just a wonderful novel), but I think a lot of it starts with toning down the pressure on kids. If you tell kids they're a loser with no future if they get a B and they must get into Stanford or an Ivy League (something common among many families around where I live), it's no wonder they react with such hostility to the teacher who gave them a low grade.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Tristan said:


> It's an unfortunate situation. I grew up in an area known for intense pressure to get into top colleges, wealthy people cheating the system with admissions scandals, and high rates of teen burnout. This is an area where people are already worried about college acceptance when their kids are in preschool. It's also a broader trend in the U.S. that parents think they should have complete control over the classroom and teachers are consistently demoted in terms of their influence and their ability to set standards (along with a general continued undermining of public education in favor of private).
> 
> I don't know what the "solution" is. It's not a new problem (read John Williams' "Stoner" for an older example, also just a wonderful novel), but I think a lot of it starts with toning down the pressure on kids. If you tell kids they're a loser with no future if they get a B and they must get into Stanford or an Ivy League (something common among many families around where I live), it's no wonder they react with such hostility to the teacher who gave them a low grade.


Good points.

Here in the US there has been a conservative/religious/corporate push to 'privatize' schooling (which actually includes "home schooling", and they've been using demonization of teachers to push us all towards that goal.

It's a freaky balancing act between rigidly controlling what teachers can say and do in the classroom to keep standards up, yet simultaneously cheapening academic standards via grading devaluation.

In order to be able to send your child off to a private school you actually have to be able to afford it, so if the trend continues, only the poor will remain in public schools. We're all aware of the disparity of quality between school districts (and schools) in wealthy areas vs. poorer areas.

In a related note, the push to prohibit teachers from actually teaching ACTUAL history, and the contexts, and the consequences, especially in regards to race relations, is appalling. For some reason fundamentalists and those raised in cultures of systemic racism have decided they will crusade against "wokism" and "CRT". CRT is NOT taught in elementary schools or high schools or 4 year colleges - it's a curricula taught only in law schools. "Wokism" is an ill-defined catch-all term used in a derogatory manner in an attempt to demonize the concepts of diversity and acceptance of different points of view, not only of LGBTQ+ issues, but also those of women's issues, and civil rights issues of minority races.

There's a teacher shortage nation-wide, as teachers are objecting to the poor funding of schools and school programs, poor teacher salaries, and the pressure on teachers to fully educate students while leaving out parts of their education. 

But the Education crisis is just another facet of the nationwide crusades to force a particular religion (and its beliefs) on everyone, suppression of science and history, anti-intellectualism, misogyny, and racism.

And, of course, the *ARTS*, including *music*, are often the first things to suffer when a nation has a metaphorical autoimmune _disease, where it deliberately chooses to do things that are contrary to being a healthy nation. And, now, of course, *science*. _


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

pianozach said:


> It's a freaky balancing act between rigidly controlling what teachers can say and do in the classroom to keep standards up, yet simultaneously cheapening academic standards via grading devaluation.
> 
> In order to be able to send your child off to a private school you actually have to be able to afford it, so if the trend continues, only the poor will remain in public schools. We're all aware of the disparity of quality between school districts (and schools) in wealthy areas vs. poorer areas.
> 
> ...


Yes, in a simplistic terms the men in power want to control everything. When has it ever been different down through history? And why is the world this way? I think we can understand it from a scientific point of view. This doesn't condone it but how else could it be, pianozach?


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Luchesi said:


> Yes, in a simplistic terms the men in power want to control everything. When has it ever been different down to history? And why is the world this way? I think we can understand it from a scientific point of view. This doesn't condone it but how else could it be, pianozack?


Yes.

Power. Money. 

Privatization of prisons has already happened here, and they'd like to profit off education as well. And by "they", I do mean those "in power", who remain that way by monopolizing the wealth.

There is a lesson still learned from the French Revolution: When you suck the lower classes dry, and they have nothing left to eat, they will eat the rich.

Here in the US the wealthy have learned, somewhat, just where the fine line is between revolution and complacency.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

pianozach said:


> Yes.
> 
> Power. Money.
> 
> ...


heh, good post, but you didn't give an answer.


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

I noticed a difference in the attitude and behavior of high school students from the time I graduated from high school until I began teaching public school after getting my masters. 6 years and a complete change. However, over the course of 35 years of teaching (mostly college) my grading never changed. Always a few A's, a decent amount of B's and C's and a few D's and F's. Then I retired. A few years later (about 3 years ago) I was asked to sub a high school Music Appreciation class that was for college credit (the professor was hospitalized and then died early in the semester). I was flabbergasted to see that only a handful of students had the textbook and none of them took notes while I lectured. I literally had to instruct them to (1) get the book because I would be testing on things from it that I did not cover in the lecture and how to discern what the author deemed important via italicized/bold fonts (2) take notes of things that I wrote on the board and make sure they understood what they meant (3) for test discussion questions, the requiring to write complete sentences (with the empahsis on plural since one sentence is not a discussion!). However, to the dismay of the students my grading was still the same: a few A's, a decent amount of B's and C's and a few D's and F's.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

When I started university in 1983, the world's population was 4.7 billion and now it's just less than 8 billion. (We'll reach 8 billion before the end of the year.) In 1983, education was about 40% of the provincial government's total budget, now it's about 20%. For years, education has been underfunded. We now make up the shortfall by enticing international students, who pay to be educated in a public school. Almost 10% of our students are international students.

The process to get to university is very competitive, and university is very expensive. Students now pay about ten times as much as I did thirty-nine years ago. 

We have a much more responsive and compassionate education system now. We educate everyone now, from the best and brightest all the way to the bottom of the class. We don't kick students out of school anymore for delinquency. Over 98% of eighteen-year-olds and younger are enrolled in school, but fifty years ago, it was about 70% to 80%. And the graduation rate is much higher than it used to be. 

All that sounds like good news in the last paragraph, and it is. But we've done this by lowering the floor, not raising the ceiling. It's now being documented by psychologists, and I've noticed this anecdotally, our high school students are more like elementary students - maturity and development are behind. Twenty-five-year-olds of today behave like eighteen-year-olds fifty years ago, and eighteen-year-olds of today behave like thirteen-year-olds of yesteryear. I have two assignments I've kept from when I was in grade 9 (fourteen years old), and there is no way any of my current grade 9s could manage this. That work would be equivalent to a current grade 12. And I was no Rhodes Scholar. 

We can pine for the good old days, and lament about the ability of today's students, but there's no going back. I don't think we can even slow the current trajectory.


----------



## regenmusic (Oct 23, 2014)

It's sad that the historical wisdom is being actively fought against in America. All the wise sayings of the ages are things the modern generation will never hear unless a few make sure they do.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

There are a lot of skills many young people can't do, or aren't being taught how to do:

Their mental math skills are not good, and this is reflected in young people's inability to make give the correct change. Students reach for a calculator for even the simplest mathematical operation. 
They can't read cursive writing. They're not taught it anymore. It's now become a secret code of the older generations. 
Higher-level problem skills are not what they used to be as many high school students can't do Sudoku puzzles or Ken-Ken. No one taught me how to do these puzzles, I figured them out by myself. 
Many high school students can't read analog scales very well, including rulers, thermometers, clocks with hands, and graduated cylinders.

Many students have a very short attention span. A few have admitted to me that they don't watch movies because they get bored. I used to show documentaries in class, but I don't anymore. Few young people read entire books and novels. 


I would like to see students have more tenacity, resilience, and initiative. But it's hardly surprising that they don't exhibit these character qualities because the eighteen-year-old students are more like thirteen-year-old students of a generation or two ago. 

It's not possible for young people today to be like young people of yesteryear because it's a different world today. Young people also don't know how to use a rotary phone, read a large foldable paper map, drive a manual transmission car, or post a letter.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

senza sordino said:


> Many students have a very short attention span. A few have admitted to me that they don't watch movies because they get bored. I used to show documentaries in class, but I don't anymore. Few young people read entire books and novels.


I find this to be true not only for school-aged children, but also a lot of adults well into their 20s. A marred ability to engage. It extends to: long-form music, films that aren't vacuous drivel, public lecture type talks and even 'meetings'. I'm not a psychologist, but having read a bit about it over the years it does seem that several strands and developments in culture (particularly media culture), but also individualist consumption economics have altered thought patterns. Is it mere coincidence that every man and his dog is now imagining himself to be suffering from ADD/ADHD? 

There's a curious contradiction in modern culture where we know more and yet know less at the same time. Or rather more is known, but less is learned and by fewer and fewer people. It seemed up until about the early 80s that the access to learning and information trend was going in the right direction. 

As for the 'underfunding', well we know that's a choice. Governments (of the type under discussion) aren't at all 'currency constrained' nor is there a dearth of potential resources; they are more knowledge constrained and ideologically driven.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

senza sordino said:


> There are a lot of skills many young people can't do, or aren't being taught how to do:
> 
> Their mental math skills are not good, and this is reflected in young people's inability to make give the correct change. Students reach for a calculator for even the simplest mathematical operation.
> They can't read cursive writing. They're not taught it anymore. It's now become a secret code of the older generations.
> ...


You've made some interesting points. I'm in classrooms as a "Music Specialist" most days, and much of what you've written is somewhat true. I've seen a student that couldn't read an analogue clock. I've seen many students that cannot focus on stuff (although the reasons for the lack of focus vary from student to student.

At the high school level many students seem addicted to their cellphones; it might be games, texting, or social media, but they sneak peaks and honestly think we don't see it.

However, for things such as using a rotary phone, using a fold-out map, driving a manual transmission automobile, or posting a letter, you are showing your age. For the most part *these are obsolete skills for obsolete technology*. Very few people still know Morse code, or using a teletype (my mom ran the teletype machine at a Sears catalog store in the 1960s), fountain pens, a hand pump for water, cassette tapes, a wringer washer, fax machines, slide projectors, mimeograph machines, vinyl records, or the card catalog at the library. I work with teens on theatrical productions all the time, and there is a mountain range of stuff referred to in shows of which they have no idea. I did a production of *Chicago*, and they didn't know what spats were. I just MD'd a production of *Rent*, and they hadn't a clue of dozens of the cultural references, from Abbie Hoffman to Bohemia; in fact, the song La Vie Boheme has this lyric -

"_*Ginsberg*, *Dylan*, *Cunningham* and *Cage,
Lenny Bruce, Langston Hughes"*_

*And not a single teen knew ANY of the references.*
.

At the same time, there are plenty of 65+ individuals that can't figure out how to use a computer, or open the door of a Tesla, or knows who or what The Weeknd is. It works both ways.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

pianozach said:


> However, for things such as using a rotary phone, using a fold-out map, driving a manual transmission automobile, or posting a letter, you are showing your age. For the most part *these are obsolete skills for obsolete technology*. Very few people still know Morse code, or using a teletype (my mom ran the teletype machine at a Sears catalog store in the 1960s), fountain pens, a hand pump for water, cassette tapes, a wringer washer, fax machines, slide projectors, mimeograph machines, vinyl records, or the card catalog at the library. I work with teens on theatrical productions all the time, and there is a mountain range of stuff referred to in shows of which they have no idea. I did a production of *Chicago*, and they didn't know what spats were.


I don't think this is a valid excuse though. There were hundreds of things/names/ideas/practices that had fallen into disuse, but which I knew about. Gramophones were by far no longer in use when I started listening to music, but if someone had asked me even then: 'do you know what a gramophone is?' I would have said: 'yes' rather than 'no' and I'm pretty sure most people I know would have said the same. Fast forward about ten years and I heard a girl ask her mother about a vinyl disc in a record shop (at the time CDs were dominant): 'what is this, how does it work?' People can make excuses about things like this, but to not know what such a thing actually 'is' is simply ridiculous. There's no doubt her older relatives, including parents would have been playing them.

We had a twin-tub for the washing at home, but still I knew that dolly tubs existed prior to that or boiling clothes in a copper. The more people read the more they encounter things they don't know about and which might not be current. Where I am quite a lot of people read, but with the excess of books that there is now, you find them in boxes for free and they have them to take away on shelves in the supermarkets as book shares. Outside the city (which is an ancient university city) the material people read includes quite a lot of idiot material like 'Deepak Chopra', semi-religious self-help manuals and junk novels like Dan Brown.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Chat Noir said:


> I don't think this is a valid excuse though. There were hundreds of things/names/ideas/practices that had fallen into disuse, but which I knew about. Gramophones were by far no longer in use when I started listening to music, but if someone had asked me even then: 'do you know what a gramophone is?' I would have said: 'yes' rather than 'no' and I'm pretty sure most people I know would have said the same. Fast forward about ten years and I heard a girl ask her mother about a vinyl disc in a record shop (at the time CDs were dominant): 'what is this, how does it work?' People can make excuses about things like this, but to not know what such a thing actually 'is' is simply ridiculous. There's no doubt her older relatives, including parents would have been playing them.
> 
> We had a twin-tub for the washing at home, but still I knew that dolly tubs existed prior to that or boiling clothes in a copper. The more people read the more they encounter things they don't know about and which might not be current. Where I am quite a lot of people read, but with the excess of books that there is now, you find them in boxes for free and they have them to take away on shelves in the supermarkets as book shares. Outside the city (which is an ancient university city) the material people read includes quite a lot of idiot material like 'Deepak Chopra', semi-religious self-help manuals and junk novels like Dan Brown.


People used to read. Not so much anymore. We have TV and Youtube.

Les Miserables had an entire chapter about the Paris sewer system, an engineering marvel of epic proportions at the time.

And Theatre teaches so much theatre and culture, and science and art. And engineering and construction.

So while you may know about the existence of gramophones, and their function, you could probably figure out how to operate one as well given your familiarity with LPs. You might have a bit of trouble riding a horse, or driving a horse&buggy.

I'm reminded of *Star Trek VI*, where Scotty is going to share how to make transparent aluminum with a 20th Century businessman. He's shown the computer and begins by saying, _"Computer . . . . Computer!"_ When it doesn't respond, McCoy hands him the mouse. Scotty speaks into the mouse, _"Hello, computer"_. 

I laugh myself silly at this scene, as the *Mac Plus* (which I lovingly referred to as a *Banana Jr.*) was my first real computer. It came with an optional 20MB hard drive that I thought was an enormous amount of memory. I finally got close to filling it up, and upgraded to a 170 MB hard drive. Ah, those were the days. My current computer has 8 GB of RAM and 999.35 GB of storage.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

pianozach said:


> People used to read. Not so much anymore. We have TV and Youtube.
> 
> Les Miserables had an entire chapter about the Paris sewer system, an engineering marvel of epic proportions at the time.
> 
> ...


I bought a Mac Plus from my brother who was selling them out of his garage (back when Apple allowed that). They weren't selling too well for him. High prices, probably $3000 or more back then.

These days Apple makes change after change so that many of my old programs don't work anymore ..and I've spent quite a lot of money on them. Very annoying because they did the simple tasks I bought them for, very well - very small programs. 
The only convenient solution I've found is to buy a new machine and don't update the old ones. Crazy! I bought a new Mac mini recently and it's about twice as fast as I'm used to, but really? everything was fast enough.. And the copying for backups is only a little bit faster, because there's always that problem with tiny files slowing down the copying process anyway.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

A good teacher motivates students to learn, by figuring out how to engage them with things they're attracted to. If this teacher's students signed a petition against him, he must've been a crap teacher.

Organic chemistry isn't an easy subject, but it's certainly a subject that can be made fascinating. I had an OC teacher named Duane Kibby who I still quote today and remember his name.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

pianozach said:


> My current computer has 8 GB of RAM and 999.35 GB of storage.


Sadly, I have 9 TB.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

NoCoPilot said:


> A good teacher motivates students to learn, by figuring out how to engage them with things they're attracted to. If this teacher's students signed a petition against him, he must've been a crap teacher.
> 
> Organic chemistry isn't an easy subject, but it's certainly a subject that can be made fascinating. I had an OC teacher named Duane Kibby who I still quote today and remember his name.


I think you're right. 

I've taken classes for difficult subjects, including "accelerated" classes (a semester class in four weekends) in Inorganic Chemistry, Organic Chemistry, Physics, and biology. 

For dozens of students to actually sign a petition that a class is too hard probably means the teacher isn't doing it right. There can be many ways of failing as a teacher, including belittling students, setting them up to fail, or simply poor communication skills to make a subject understandable.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

pianozach said:


> For dozens of students to actually sign a petition that a class is too hard probably means the teacher isn't doing it right.


OTOH



> “The unanimous vote, with one abstention, for an investigation into the case of Professor Jones shows that we believe the university needs to put its house in order,” White said.


Faculty demand investigation into Maitland Jones Jr. firing - Washington Square News (nyunews.com) 

And then...



> The debate over the firing of NYU organic chemistry Prof. Maitland Jones Jr. misses the point: It’s neither that his tests were too hard nor that his Gen Z students were too entitled. It’s that introductory courses should be gateways into the STEM professions, especially for students underrepresented in these areas, not elimination rounds in a cutthroat competition in an imagined world of scarcity.


Commentary: To make STEM inclusive, students need to feel they belong | LA School Report


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

> And teachers are very upset with far-right extremist attacks over fictional accusations. Out here teachers are being accused of attempted to "recruit" kids into socialism or being gay or transgender. They're accused of teaching "woke" culture (in curious objections to teachers actually teaching in-depth History), or CRT (Critical Race Theory), a course description that is only taught in law schools. Out here we've heard claims that teachers are "pushing" animalizations (particularly cats), and providing litter boxes in bathrooms for the students. Really . . . the accusations are super crazy.


I don't think false accusations are driving teachers away from schools. More so, teachers who do not want to teach woke ideology are driven out. Some of the accusations are very true and it isn't only far right extremists that have noticed and taken umbrage. University professors Glen Loury, John McWhorter, Peter Boghossian, and many, many others that are are considered Liberal/Left leaning have been discussing the issue for years.

For example, though CRT as a class subject is taught almost exclusively in universities, the principles have been embedded in K-12 classroom lesson plans. One only needs to research YouTube to find concrete examples. Kimberle Crenshaw is one the major proponents of CRT. Her concept of Intersectionality has been implemented in exercises such Privilege Walks. Unfortunately, many people take a knee-jerk stance and don't bother to question sources, despite a complete lack of knowledge about CRT.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

That Guy Mick said:


> I don't think false accusations are driving teachers away from schools. More so, teachers who do not want to teach woke ideology are driven out. Some of the accusations are very true and it isn't only far right extremists that have noticed and taken umbrage. University professors Glen Loury, John McWhorter, Peter Boghossian, and many, many others that are are considered Liberal/Left leaning have been discussing the issue for years.
> 
> For example, though CRT as a class subject is taught almost exclusively in universities, the principles have been embedded in K-12 classroom lesson plans. One only needs to research YouTube to find concrete examples. Kimberle Crenshaw is one the major proponents of CRT. Her concept of Intersectionality has been implemented in exercises such Privilege Walks. Unfortunately, many people take a knee-jerk stance and don't bother to question sources, despite a complete lack of knowledge about CRT.


Unfortunately, many people take a knee-jerk stance and don't bother to question sources, despite a complete lack of knowledge about CRT.

I see you are doing your research through Youtube videos, and citing them as "concrete examples".


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

The increase in the number of means of social media communication, and their reach into every corner of society where such things might be discussed has inevitably magnified and sometimes distorted the kinds of ideas that once were the preserve of academics in their ivory tower institutions. When I was at college (1977-1980) it was Deconstruction that was fashionable to demonise, but once out into "the real world", I never came across it again. Now, anyone with half an opinion on anything that can be reduced to a Youtubable acronym can share their views with hundreds, thousands, even millions of other folks roaming the internet hungry for opinions.

The democratisation of media is, like all technological inventions with a social impact, both A Good Thing and A Bad Thing. In my privileged ivory tower, I can half-absorb and half-transmit information and opinion on CRT (which once meant just Cathode Ray Tube) without any consequence. Except that like the butterfly in China (Chaos Theory), I cannot predict what impact my contribution to the noise about CRT might have. Probably none, since I'm only talking to a handful of folks here at TC, but the principle applies nevertheless: the germ of an idea (say, setting up an IT system for the rating of girls at a university campus, Facebook, or designing an activity to explore relative privileges in an undergraduate classroom, Privilege Walks) can spread in wholly unpredictable and not necessarily advantageous ways.

We might all like to be the prophet finally recognised in our own country, but I for one am reluctant to see the end of civilisation as we know it in the propagation of this or that idea shared only via reductive social media. Since you can't even be sure that this performance of Beethoven's 9th is what it says it is - and this is our bread and butter - how can anyone trust shared ideas that are even more contentious?


----------



## FrankE (Jan 13, 2021)

pianozach said:


> You've made some interesting points. I'm in classrooms as a "Music Specialist" most days, and much of what you've written is somewhat true. I've seen a student that couldn't read an analogue clock. I've seen many students that cannot focus on stuff (although the reasons for the lack of focus vary from student to student.
> 
> At the high school level many students seem addicted to their cellphones; it might be games, texting, or social media, but they sneak peaks and honestly think we don't see it.
> 
> ...


Since we're on a classical forum I assume John Cage and not the actor? I've heard his work, was coerced to read _Under Milk Wood_, heard of Ginsberg (Alan?) but no idea what he does and saw the Fonz show (Richard?) but haven't heard of the others and I'm old.
Why _that_ production to children?


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

All these anecdotes about "students" are all very well...I don't doubt their veracity. But I do doubt their worth as evidence on which to base generalisations about what "students" in general can and can't do.

If folk want to make such declarations, they might like to reference the part of the world they are describing. The education system in the USA...inputs and outcomes...are not the same in every state, never mind readily comparable with the UK or Europe or countries on other continents. Mental maths for example, spoken about above, is universally taught in English schools and like everything else that is taught, it is learned by some pupils better than others. Surely twas ever thus?


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

FrankE said:


> Since we're on a classical forum I assume John Cage and not the actor? I've heard his work, was coerced to read _Under Milk Wood_, heard of Ginsberg (Alan?) but no idea what he does and saw the Fonz show (Richard?) but haven't heard of the others and I'm old.
> Why _that_ production to children?


Yes, *John Cage*, but not because this is a Classical music forum - because he was relevant for his avant-garde music.

I'm surprised that you've never heard of *Bob Dylan*; VERY influential for his contributions to the lyrical content of Rock, Pop, and Folk music in the 60s.

*Allen Ginsberg* was an American poet and writer. As a student at Columbia University in the 1940s, he began friendships with William S. Burroughs and Jack Kerouac, forming the core of *the Beat Generation*.

*Lenny Bruce* was an American stand-up comedian, social critic, and satirist. He was renowned for his open, free-wheeling, and critical style of comedy which contained satire, politics, religion, sex, and vulgarity. He died in 1966.

Poet, critic, and editor *J.V. Cunningham* was highly regarded for his concise, witty, epigrammatic _poetry_. Died 1985.

Lastly, *Langston Hughes* was an American poet, social activist, novelist, playwright, and columnist from Joplin, Missouri. One of the earliest innovators of the literary art form called jazz poetry, Hughes is best known as a leader of the *Harlem Renaissance*. 

💥

I've worked regularly with the *Young Artists Ensemble*, most notably with their *Teen Summer Musical*. It's a very big deal, and attracts very talented teens from a rather large regional area. YAE produces an annual Family Theatre Season as well as annual Teen Dramas and the Teen Summer Musicals. Many teens that have auditioned and/or participated in these annual productions have actually gone on to star on Broadway, or have had successful careers in film, TV, stage, radio, and other high profile entertainment careers. Offhand, one is in a high profile symphony orchestra playing oboe, another starred on Broadway as Christine in Phantom of the Opera, another was on Broadway, playing 5 different roles in Cats, was in the original cast for Holiday Inn, and is touring as one of the three leads in Mean Girls (and was a dancer in the new West Side Story film). Yet another ended up on Broadway in Book of Mormon. There are other off-Broadway successes as well; one alumni was producer for Deadliest Catch, another works in Disney's Imagineering. Several have starred or been featured in TV shows. One teaches theatre at NYU. There are plenty of others. 

The *TSM*s are fairly well funded and have excellent production values. The teens expect the best, and we provide the best.

As for the selection of the annual musical, as with any other theatre group, there are a lot of considerations as to the final choice. *This year* we (well, the director for that year) had submitted our choice, and were told it wasn't available (and there can be many reasons as to why it's not available, but the most common reasons are that there will be a professional production of the show happening within a hundred miles, or will be, or one is planned, or that a film version is in production or being released, or that another nearby group already has secured the rights for that time frame).

After that rejection we submitted our second choice, and that too was rejected. So . . . we made our third choice. Rejected.

After these rejections we almost run out of time for pre-production on sets, costumes, promotion, etc., so we submitted a half dozen shows, hoping that one would be availabe. _One_ was; *"Rent, High School Edition"* [for this "Jr." edition, one song had been cut, and some of the dialog referencing overt sex, drugs, and cigarette smoking had been thoughtfully excised].

Why *Rent* though? It's a Broadway classic: After its Broadway premiere in 1996 Rent quickly became on of the most beloved rock musicals of all time, winning a Pulitzer Prize for drama, as well as four Tony Awards.









'Rent' Moved American Culture Forward. 'Rent: Live' Is Proof of That.


A musical that was once shocking and groundbreaking is now tame enough for a live television production.




www.esquire.com





The storyline prominently features a group of young people living through a pandemic, and touches on themes of relationships, death, love, ethics, LGBTQ issues, civil disobedience, etc, Hell, *Rent* *"moved American culture forward"*, possibly so far that it'll be easy to forget the recent era in which it was something so completely shocking.

In general we try to mix it up at YAE, changing the 'type' of show from year to year. One year it might be a traditional Broadway show (like *Oklahoma*), the next year a show with a dance emphasis (*42nd Street*), then a rock musical (*Jesus Christ, Superstar*), then a legit voice show (like next year's planned production of *Phantom of the Opera*). We'll also often toggle from 'heavy' shows to lighter shows. We also take into account what the teens themselves think are suitable shows, with themes that resonate with _THEM_.

Here's their recent history, in reverse chronological order:

*RENT School Edition
Les Misérables School Edition 2021
The Pirates of Penzance
Young Frankenstein
In the Heights
Grease
Carrie the Musical
Legally Blonde
Jesus Christ Superstar 2014
42nd Street 
Cabaret
Chicago: A Musical Vaudeville 
Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street 2010
West Side Story 2009
Little Shop of Horrors 2008*

And the list continues back to 1981. The titles above with years after them indicate shows YAE had already presented, usually at least 10 years previously. Of the above shows, I was Musical Director on all but one.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

pianozach said:


> However, for things such as using a rotary phone, using a fold-out map, driving a manual transmission automobile, or posting a letter, you are showing your age. For the most part *these are obsolete skills for obsolete technology*.


Manual transmissions may be obsolete, but they are a lot more fun than a boring automatic.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Bulldog said:


> Manual transmissions may be obsolete, but they are a lot more fun than a boring automatic.


I'm fairly certain I could get in a car with a manual transmission and be back up to speed in less than 30 seconds.

And they are more fun.

But it's so difficult to eat a taco while driving a manual tranny.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Manual may be obsolete in the US, but not here in the UK. I wouldn't dream of buying an automatic


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

The point I was trying to make was that there are now obsolete skills, and skills I think young people should have. But in our ever more complex world it's hard to know what's important. Maybe mental math skills aren't essential anymore because everyone now has a mobile phone with a calculator. I don't know. 

And some years back, educators insisted that students know cutting-edge technology for the world of the future. Yet, when I was listening to this I couldn't help but think that I had no computer training as a young student, and only in my last year of high school did we get computers - the most basic computer where you could only write code in BASIC. 

Yet, despite this lack of training, I manage in my current job because I learned my fundamental skills - critical thinking, some logical thinking, and mathematical skills. My mother is a more extreme example, growing up in the 40s and 50s she ended her working life doing everything on a computer. She had those fundamental skills. 

And I am worried that young people today are lacking in some of those fundamental skills, which I think will never go out of fashion. Transferable, basic, and timeless skills.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

And there are many excellent students who can do all of these things I keep complaining about. 

But with grade inflation, these students now get 95% and above. Everyone passes, and the most common grade I give is probably an 'A' It's not uncommon to have several students in each class with 100%. 

However, I never really challenge students anymore because if I were to give more complex tests, and homework with time limits, my failure rate would go up, and we can't have that.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

pianozach said:


> Unfortunately, many people take a knee-jerk stance and don't bother to question sources, despite a complete lack of knowledge about CRT.
> 
> I see you are doing your research through Youtube videos, and citing them as "concrete examples".


Yes, Youtube is an excellent tool to obtain information about Woke ideology, and many other things! Its the 21st century the last time I checked. It is a bit antiquated to rely on the local news channel and newspaper for much of anything. I mean, only stubborn 90 year olds living in the bible belt get weather info from the local news, right? LOL!!! Mainstream, corporate media talk... Forget about it. So flagrantly biased and bereft of depth. There are professionals and subject matter experts who would never be heard, if it were not for YT channels. Deep insights and years of experience to be shared in this venue.

Of course, you made my case for the knee jerk reaction by summarily dismissing three prominent professors, teaching at Brown, Columbia, and Portland State, who have written and spoken on the topic for many years now. They have all published books, debated, and appeared on mainstream media, such as NPR and Fox news. But you scoffingly implied that they should be ignored because they provide info via YT. I mean Hey! And watch out for that Wikipedia... Its all lies!!! Hahaha.

Other good sources of information are teacher hosted YT channels "Chalk and Talk" and "The Reason We Learn," and Karlyn Borysenko. There a many more, but these three have first hand professional experience that allows them to provide good insight. Many others who have spoken on the topic simply parrot the words and opinions of political allies. And then there are the very popular junk channels. But regardless, feel free to ignore them all. ;^)


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

That Guy Mick said:


> Yes, Youtube is an excellent tool to obtain information about Woke ideology,


So says "That Guy Mick", random stranger on the internet. I think we probably know the value of YTB as a source of information. It has its limitations, just as any website does and any individual professor's publications. Whatever "woke ideology" is, I doubt I'd be satisfied with understanding it just by watching YTB clips.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

That Guy Mick said:


> Yes, Youtube is an excellent tool to obtain information about Woke ideology, and many other things! Its the 21st century the last time I checked. It is a bit antiquated to rely on the local news channel and newspaper for much of anything. I mean, only stubborn 90 year olds living in the bible belt get weather info from the local news, right? LOL!!! Mainstream, corporate media talk... Forget about it. So flagrantly biased and bereft of depth. There are professionals and subject matter experts who would never be heard, if it were not for YT channels. Deep insights and years of experience to be shared in this venue.
> 
> Of course, you made my case for the knee jerk reaction by summarily dismissing three prominent professors, teaching at Brown, Columbia, and Portland State, who have written and spoken on the topic for many years now. They have all published books, debated, and appeared on mainstream media, such as NPR and Fox news. But you scoffingly implied that they should be ignored because they provide info via YT. I mean Hey! And watch out for that Wikipedia... Its all lies!!! Hahaha.
> 
> Other good sources of information are teacher hosted YT channels "Chalk and Talk" and "The Reason We Learn," and Karlyn Borysenko. There a many more, but these three have first hand professional experience that allows them to provide good insight. Many others who have spoken on the topic simply parrot the words and opinions of political allies. And then there are the very popular junk channels. But regardless, feel free to ignore them all. ;^)


I work in public schools. I'm in classrooms daily. There is no CRT, no indoctrinations, no litterboxes for cat-identifying students, no "woke". Just teachers doing the best they can. Sometimes they're lucky if they can get students to stop looking at their cellphones, or stay awake, or show up. 

Citing Fox News as a reliable source of accurate and unbiased news is like claiming that eating chocolate bars satisfies your nutritional need for vegetables.

And citing Karlyn Borysenko, or any _other_ Youtube celebrity as an "expert" is equally suspect these days. There have been actual doctors with Youtube channels spreading easily verifiably false information. 

I point out that Youtube isn't necessarily the best source of information, and you, in return claim you watch "good" Youtubers. Uh huh.

But I see you attempting to change the nature of the discussion from the original subject to whether or not Youtube is a great source of information. 

I was only pointing out that it was you that was making kneejerk reactions by blaming others for having kneejerk reactions, to which you accuse ME of having a kneejerk reaction and "proving" your point. You actually didn't, but changed the subject to avoid the original one.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

pianozach said:


> I work in public schools. I'm in classrooms daily. There is no CRT, no indoctrinations, no litterboxes for cat-identifying students, no "woke". Just teachers doing the best they can. Sometimes they're lucky if they can get students to stop looking at their cellphones, or stay awake, or show up.
> 
> Citing Fox News as a reliable source of accurate and unbiased news is like claiming that eating chocolate bars satisfies your nutritional need for vegetables.
> 
> ...


Woke ideology in K-12 has come underfire in Tredyffrin/Easttown School District, the State of Iowa, Oregon Department of Education, Buffalo Schools, and the list goes on and on and on.... 

Asserting an opinion on a Classical Music forum that woke teaching doesn't exist based upon your personal experience with public schools in comparison to that of notables who work in the public school system and higher ed, some of who are published on the topic, and speak on Youtube with highly detailed claims, is most ridiculous and quite laughable.

I did not cite Fox News or NPR as reliable news sources news, though it is noticeable that you ignored the latter in your watery critique. In fact, I criticized the reliability of corporate media, but referenced those sources to lend gravitas to the opinions of which yours clearly pales in significance. Both venues can be relied upon to an extent, and their guests certainly offer more reliable opinions that someone who's counter-argument is "Uh huh." 
In summation, your credentials lack noteworthiness, and your counter-argument is even less.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

So, what exactly are the examples of 



That Guy Mick said:


> Woke ideology in K-12


?


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Forster said:


> So says "That Guy Mick", random stranger on the internet. I think we probably know the value of YTB as a source of information. It has its limitations, just as any website does and any individual professor's publications. Whatever "woke ideology" is, I doubt I'd be satisfied with understanding it just by watching YTB clips.


So I also say, your doubts based upon its limitations is a nothing-burger without cheese. Perhaps you can explain why John McWhorter's opinions and facts are all wet. Perhaps not. Who knows....


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

That Guy Mick said:


> So I also say, your doubts based upon its limitations is a nothing-burger without cheese. Perhaps you can explain why John McWhorter's opinions and facts are all wet. Perhaps not. Who knows....


"burger without cheese"? "all wet"? You might speak in plainer English, unless the issue is the Atlantic between your English and mine. One area in which there is a difference in the nuances surrounding the word 'woke' which have been discussed here before. However, it's difficult to do this without straying into politics - which we know is mostly prohibited.

As for John McWhorter's opinions and facts, I've not read any, nor need I read any. My point was not about the truth/falsehood of facts, but about the general problem of accessing information only through social media (and in this case, YTB in particular). I may just belong to the fuddy-duddy generation that regards the interwebz with a higher degree of scepticism than the less fuddy-duddy, but I wouldn't dream of relying on YTB alone for facts and opinions on any subject you'd care to name.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Forster said:


> "burger without cheese"? "all wet"? You might speak in plainer English, unless the issue is the Atlantic between your English and mine. One area in which there is a difference in the nuances surrounding the word 'woke' which have been discussed here before. However, it's difficult to do this without straying into politics - which we know is mostly prohibited.
> 
> As for John McWhorter's opinions and facts, I've not read any, nor need I read any. My point was not about the truth/falsehood of facts, but about the general problem of accessing information only through social media (and in this case, YTB in particular). I may just belong to the fuddy-duddy generation that regards the interwebz with a higher degree of scepticism than the less fuddy-duddy, but I wouldn't dream of relying on YTB alone for facts and opinions on any subject you'd care to name.


Hello Forster,
The colloquials were meant to convey the meaning that your opinion that evidence provided on Youtube can be dismissed because you consider Youtube to be a form of social media is (very much) without merit when the evidence is provided by people who have strong credentials. For example, Neil deGrasse Tyson is a renowned astrophysicist. To dismiss his opinions on astrophysics solely because they were shared with Joe Rogan on Rogan's Youtube channel isn't logically coherent. Nor is it logically coherent to write-off John McWhorter's opinions on "woke" when expressed in a conversation with Glenn Loury on Youtube simply because it was presented on Youtube. 

It was never suggested that Youtube should be the sole source of information on this particular topic. Whatever gave you that idea? Though, indeed Youtube contains much information that is a treasure. Certainly you can delve deeper into the subject through other sources. For example, New Hampshire's "Divisive Concepts" HB 544 (now a law), regarding employment and eduational practices can be accessed online. Borsenko discussed the Bill on her Youtube channel. The validity of her opinions can be weighed against the actual bill. 

While your concern for the TC politics rule is appreciated, I see no reason why a discussion concerning the existence of "woke schooling" need delve into politics. Though it is tempting to reveal political group affiliations, the merit of an opinion doesn't require it. 

Happy Holidays!


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

That Guy Mick said:


> Hello Forster,
> The colloquials were meant to convey the meaning that your opinion that evidence provided on Youtube can be dismissed because you consider Youtube to be a form of social media is (very much) without merit when the evidence is provided by people who have strong credentials. For example, Neil deGrasse Tyson is a renowned astrophysicist. To dismiss his opinions on astrophysics solely because they were shared with Joe Rogan on Rogan's Youtube channel isn't logically coherent. Nor is it logically coherent to write-off John McWhorter's opinions on "woke" when expressed in a conversation with Glenn Loury on Youtube simply because it was presented on Youtube.
> 
> It was never suggested that Youtube should be the sole source of information on this particular topic. Whatever gave you that idea? Though, indeed Youtube contains much information that is a treasure. Certainly you can delve deeper into the subject through other sources. For example, New Hampshire's "Divisive Concepts" HB 544 (now a law), regarding employment and eduational practices can be accessed online. Borsenko discussed the Bill on her Youtube channel. The validity of her opinions can be weighed against the actual bill.
> ...


First, no-one was "dismissing" opinions on YTB. You misread my objection if that's what you thought I'd written.
Second, the word "woke" is a politically loaded term, with slightly differing nuanced uses in the UK and US. It's not possible to use it in a non-political way.

The year woke broke: a brief history of a contested word - New Statesman [Warning - this article contains politics, but shows how 'woke' originated in music]



> The term, ironically enough, came from one of Badu’s songs, “Master Teacher”, released in 2008, the year before she live-tweeted her labour. It was co-written by the soul singer Georgia Anne Muldrow, who had heard a fellow music student use it to mean literally stay awake, found it funny, and realised how well it would work as a refrain in a song she was writing: one that imagined an idyllic future for African Americans, but where it was vital to be on your guard.


Happy Christmas!


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Forster said:


> First, no-one was "dismissing" opinions on YTB. You misread my objection if that's what you thought I'd written.
> Second, the word "woke" is a politically loaded term, with slightly differing nuanced uses in the UK and US. It's not possible to use it in a non-political way.
> 
> The year woke broke: a brief history of a contested word - New Statesman [Warning - this article contains politics, but shows how 'woke' originated in music]
> ...


Well hello there again Forster. 
Are you numbering your statements in the hopes that they will seem more convincing? Or making sure that you didn't miss any key points? Lol!!!

I certainly didn't misread or misunderstand. You very clearly stated that the opinions of the persons that I previously cited are dubious because their opinions were presented on Youtube. There was no discussion of the individuals, the information they presented on Youtube, or their opinions. Nor did I invite any discussion. You explained that you weren't aware of McWhorter, the professor, but dismissed him for no other apparent reason than social media presence. Perhaps you would like to elaborate more, but feel constrained. Maybe you meant to respond differently. I don't know.

Quite honestly I'm not really much interested in discussing the word Woke or its etymology. I skimmed the article very quickly and it confirmed the general understanding that I have; what once was an embraced term, has become clouded with negativity. Perhaps my understanding is wrong, but, no offense meant, I find it quite boring and not particularly valuable enough to invest the time learning.

If it pains one to hear the word in a negative light, then the US State of New Hampshire's law regarding divisive concepts can be accessed online and provides a nice neat list of prohibited teaching concepts for K-12. You will like it. It is numbered. ;^D

Happy Holidays!


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

That Guy Mick said:


> For example, Neil deGrasse Tyson is a renowned astrophysicist. To dismiss his opinions on astrophysics solely because they were shared with Joe Rogan on Rogan's Youtube channel isn't logically coherent. Nor is it logically coherent to write-off John McWhorter's opinions on "woke" when expressed in a conversation with Glenn Loury on Youtube simply because it was presented on Youtube.


Hmmm...I'm not sure about that comparison. There seems to be two things grouped together. Neil deGrasse Tyson is already 'proven' so even if he turned up on Sesame Street talking astrophysics it would be justified to take his word. Yet if Jordan Peterson turned up on Sesame Street I'd think they'd gone downmarket intellectually.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Chat Noir said:


> Hmmm...I'm not sure about that comparison. There seems to be two things grouped together. Neil deGrasse Tyson is already 'proven' so even if he turned up on Sesame Street talking astrophysics it would be justified to take his word. Yet if Jordan Peterson turned up on Sesame Street I'd think they'd gone downmarket intellectually.


One might think that, if ignoring the fact that Forster admitted that he knows nothing about McWhorter or Loury. Forster has also backed away from his stance on Youtube. It would seem that he was more concerned with adopting an adversarial stance against anyone who states that "woke" concepts are taught in K-12 in the U.S. 

On another note, Jordan Peterson is a highly intelligent individual.I can understand the emotional need to be critical of Peterson, but picking on his lack of intellect says more about the intellect of the person doing the picking on. Wouldn't you think?


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

That Guy Mick said:


> You very clearly stated that the opinions of the persons that I previously cited are dubious because their opinions were presented on Youtube.


No, I didn't. Why not cite the exact words I used? I thought I'd made clear what my objection was to YTB, but of course, every word we all use is open to interpretation and if you think I've not been clear, okay. Let me reiterate, and note the critical word in these posts.



Forster said:


> I think we probably know the value of YTB as a source of information. It has its limitations, just as any website does and any individual professor's publications. Whatever "woke ideology" is, I doubt I'd be satisfied with understanding it *just *by watching YTB clips.





Forster said:


> My point was not about the truth/falsehood of facts, but about the general problem of accessing information *only *through social media (and in this case, YTB in particular)





That Guy Mick said:


> You explained that you weren't aware of McWhorter, the professor, but dismissed him for no other apparent reason than social media presence.


Again, I didn't 'dismiss' him or his arguments - I don't even get to them. I am (in my opinion 'clearly') pointing out the limitations of the internet when trying to assess the validity of _anyone's _opinions. I even equate it to trying to assess the validity of opinions (even facts) when reading only one book on the subject. Without comparing one view with a countervailing view, one's own judgements are compromised, whatever the topic, though more particularly wrt the more controversial topics.



That Guy Mick said:


> Quite honestly I'm not really much interested in discussing the word Woke or its etymology. I skimmed the article very quickly and it confirmed the general understanding that I have; what once was an embraced term, has become clouded with negativity. Perhaps my understanding is wrong, but, no offense meant, I find it quite boring and not particularly valuable enough to invest the time learning.


Well you picked up some of what the article elaborated, but you seem also to have merely had confirmed what you already believe to be the case before you bothered to skim.



That Guy Mick said:


> If it pains one to hear the word in a negative light, then the US State of New Hampshire's law regarding divisive concepts can be accessed online and provides a nice neat list of prohibited teaching concepts for K-12. You will like it. It is numbered. ;^D


Ho-ho

I'm not about to challenge the "facts" about what's going on in New Hampshire, never mind the States as a whole. I can't see where I expressed an opinion about K-12 in any of my posts, only that I asked a question and you've sourced a place to find a partial reply.



That Guy Mick said:


> One might think that, if ignoring the fact that Forster admitted that he knows nothing about McWhorter or Loury. *Forster has also backed away from his stance on Youtube*. It would seem that *he was more concerned with adopting an adversarial stance against anyone who states that "woke" concepts are taught in K-12 in the U.S.*


Where did I "back away"? And see my answer re K-12 above.

Of course, whether what is being taught constitutes "woke ideology" depends on one's definition of that term, or, more particularly, who is doing the defining, as the article in the New Statesman illustrates.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

That Guy Mick said:


> On another note, Jordan Peterson is a highly intelligent individual.I can understand the emotional need to be critical of Peterson, but picking on his lack of intellect says more about the intellect of the person doing the picking on. Wouldn't you think?


Actually I wouldn't think that. I like the gambit of using "emotional need" to make it seem like it is a non-analytical or non-reasoned rejection of Peterson's shallow approach. Fair enough I didn't outline why, but it's best not to do that here. Safe to say that fellow has long ago been unmasked for what he is.

People who think 'woke concepts' are especially _taught in schools_ tend to be those who have fantasies about 'the youth' being corrupted (usually by the ideas they personally dislike). The history of all schooling is one where some questionable things from the wider culture filter into the curriculum. Such as teaching 'empire greatness' or lies about the economy. However a certain group perpetually homes-in on 'woke' and then, like yourself, wheels out this idea that it's now an out-of-control runaway train actually deprecated by everyone except the minority promoting it.

Nah.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Forster said:


> No, I didn't. Why not cite the exact words I used? I thought I'd made clear what my objection was to YTB, but of course, every word we all use is open to interpretation and if you think I've not been clear, okay. Let me reiterate, and note the critical word in these posts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My my Forster, you're really taking this too seriously. No need for long-winded copies and pastes to make a point. Clearly you were dismissive of Youtube as a source of information about the topic at hand, and so with it the channels and people that I previously mentioned. Now you are pivoting away from the stance that Youtube is a mere social media channel, "pshaw" and all of that.

No need to explain why you provided the lengthy "woke" article. Isn't that all too obvious. Its a convenient term. We all generally understand what is meant by the term and the HB 544 Law that I mentioned provides a concise list of objectionable woke teaching practices, if there is doubt and confusion. 









New Hampshire HB544 | 2021 | Regular Session


Bill Text (2021-04-08) Relative to the propagation of divisive concepts. [Lay on Table (Rep. Osborne): Motion Adopted DV 347-18 04/08/2021 House Journal 6 P. 72]




legiscan.com





So yes, some teachers are leaving K-12 schools because of their objection to new woke content, and there are parents and teachers who are against the existence of very real curriculum changes in recent years.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Chat Noir said:


> Actually I wouldn't think that. I like the gambit of using "emotional need" to make it seem like it is a non-analytical or non-reasoned rejection of Peterson's shallow approach. Fair enough I didn't outline why, but it's best not to do that here. Safe to say that fellow has long ago been unmasked for what he is.
> 
> People who think 'woke concepts' are especially _taught in schools_ tend to be those who have fantasies about 'the youth' being corrupted (usually by the ideas they personally dislike). The history of all schooling is one where some questionable things from the wider culture filter into the curriculum. Such as teaching 'empire greatness' or lies about the economy. However a certain group perpetually homes-in on 'woke' and then, like yourself, wheels out this idea that it's now an out-of-control runaway train actually deprecated by everyone except the minority promoting it.
> 
> Nah.


So you are going to double down on the "Jordan Peterson is unintelligent" stance. You must really dislike his politics. Lol!!! 

If you look at the HB 544 list that I linked in the previous comment, then you will definitely get a better understanding of the reasons for the teaching curriculum objections. If those concepts are taught in just public school, then it is a problem, but some of these things are taught in entire districts and sometimes they are part of the State curriculum. That is a pretty large magnitude. Therefore the existence isn't the delusional nightmare of the mouth foaming idealists that you are suggesting.

Happy Holidays!


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

That Guy Mick said:


> So yes, some teachers are leaving K-12 schools because of their objection to new woke content, and there are parents and teachers who are against the existence of very real curriculum changes in recent years.


There are also some teachers leaving K-12 because they are being told that teaching historical or scientific details is forbidden. 

There are also plenty of teachers and parents who are wholeheartedly supportive of updated inclusive curriculum.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

That Guy Mick said:


> So you are going to double down on the "Jordan Peterson is unintelligent" stance. You must really dislike his politics. Lol!!!
> 
> If you look at the HB 544 list that I linked in the previous comment, then you will definitely get a better understanding of the reasons for the teaching curriculum objections. If those concepts are taught in just public school, then it is a problem, but some of these things are taught in entire districts and sometimes they are part of the State curriculum. That is a pretty large magnitude. Therefore the existence isn't the delusional nightmare of the mouth foaming idealists that you are suggesting.
> 
> Happy Holidays!


You have an interesting approach. Critique of things you clearly admire (Peterson) is deemed 'emotional' or 'doubling down', despite very wide-ranging demolitions of his pseudo-philosophy - or 'opinions' masquerading as it. Whereas your pet peeve of 'wokeness' being apparently disseminated in schools is very very serious. 

Rather than building a conspiracy theory, consider that this is something happening in separate places to varying degrees and not some master plan.

Don't 'happy holidays' me, with the intent of trying to seem like you're all relaxed and in charge.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

That Guy Mick said:


> My my Forster, you're really taking this too seriously.


Yep.


----------



## PeterKC (Dec 30, 2016)

Anyone remember the BMG "outing the Classics series back in the 90's. That seems to have been an early "woke" marketing salvo that missed the target.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

pianozach said:


> There are also some teachers leaving K-12 because they are being told that teaching historical or scientific details is forbidden.
> 
> There are also plenty of teachers and parents who are wholeheartedly supportive of updated inclusive curriculum.


Thank you for sharing, but I think that it is very likely that the teachers are forbidden from teaching teaching an activist inspired version of history and science that is relatively inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate for children. Also, I have seen examples of those who opposed the New Hampshire Bill against divisive concepts, but didn't accurately address the content of the Bill. For example, some of the opposition indicated that the Bill would not allow Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion and CRT coursework. Fact. These are not expressly prohibited by the Bill.

I seriously doubt that many parents or teachers want children taught they are inherently racist simply because of their race, or that they are members of an identity group that currently oppresses other identity groups; both of which are prohibited by the Anti-divisive Law. These are part and parcel to the ideology of the woke endeavor, and included in the woke curriculum.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Chat Noir said:


> You have an interesting approach. Critique of things you clearly admire (Peterson) is deemed 'emotional' or 'doubling down', despite very wide-ranging demolitions of his pseudo-philosophy - or 'opinions' masquerading as it. Whereas your pet peeve of 'wokeness' being apparently disseminated in schools is very very serious.
> 
> Rather than building a conspiracy theory, consider that this is something happening in separate places to varying degrees and not some master plan.
> 
> Don't 'happy holidays' me, with the intent of trying to seem like you're all relaxed and in charge.


My admiration of or dislike of or general disinterest in Jordan Peterson is inconsequential. It has nothing to do with the existence of woke teaching in K-12 schools (the point of contention). Have you forgotten that I have already explained, woke curriculum has been incorporated in some local schools, school districts, and statewide? Do you not remember the specific citations that I provided: "Tredyffrin/Easttown School District, the State of Iowa, Oregon Department of Education, Buffalo Schools?" Are you forgetful of the people that I actually cited as sources of information; Boghossian, Loury, McWhorter, Paisley, etc...?

The attempt to couch evidence that you don't like with references to a percieved relationship to an allegedly "unintelligent Jordan Peterson" and alleged "conspiracy theories" is well beneath intellectual laziness. 

Don't be bothered by my calm confidence and sound reasoning, but consider that it could possibly benefit you one day. ;^D


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

PeterKC said:


> Anyone remember the BMG "outing the Classics series back in the 90's. That seems to have been an early "woke" marketing salvo that missed the target.


I'm not familiar. However, the presence in workplaces is akin to that in school. Woka-Cola is a prime example. A whiste-blower employer provided screenshots of the "be less white" list that was presented in the corporate mandated DEI training, and it went viral. All responsibility for the training scattered.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

...meanwhile, back at the OP about a specific teacher in a specific institution sacked for a specific issue that has nothing to do with critical theory...


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

That Guy Mick said:


> My admiration of or dislike of or general disinterest in Jordan Peterson is inconsequential. It has nothing to do with the existence of woke teaching in K-12 schools (the point of contention). Have you forgotten that I have already explained, woke curriculum has been incorporated in some local schools, school districts, and statewide? Do you not remember the specific citations that I provided: "Tredyffrin/Easttown School District, the State of Iowa, Oregon Department of Education, Buffalo Schools?" Are you forgetful of the people that I actually cited as sources of information; Boghossian, Loury, McWhorter, Paisley, etc...?
> 
> The attempt to couch evidence that you don't like with references to a percieved relationship to an allegedly "unintelligent Jordan Peterson" and alleged "conspiracy theories" is well beneath intellectual laziness.
> 
> Don't be bothered by my calm confidence and sound reasoning, but consider that it could possibly benefit you one day. ;^D


Oh sir, it has much to do with it. Since that (confused) point-of-view (mis)informs your approach. I did not forget what you merely stated, but you having stated it does not make _it_ - that is to say, what you want to portray - the case. Since what you have done is cite cases where people are teaching things you, and all the quacks you mentioned, have decided is _the_ (your) negative conception of "woke". Which is generally code for: a litany of the usual: gender awareness, political discussion considered not 'correct', etc.

None of your quackery is calm, sound or anything remotely resembling reason. It is mere ideology and opinion.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Woke is African American slang from atleast back as far as the 1930s I think. The grammar that is heard (or this case misheard) is what persists in a group.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

duplicate post

I wasn't trying to pound home a point. lol


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Chat Noir said:


> Oh sir, it has much to do with it. Since that (confused) point-of-view (mis)informs your approach. I did not forget what you merely stated, but you having stated it does not make _it_ - that is to say, what you want to portray - the case. Since what you have done is cite cases where people are teaching things you, and all the quacks you mentioned, have decided is _the_ (your) negative conception of "woke". Which is generally code for: a litany of the usual: gender awareness, political discussion considered not 'correct', etc.
> 
> None of your quackery is calm, sound or anything remotely resembling reason. It is mere ideology and opinion.


It is ironic that you clearly have a negative perception of "woke" schooling since the only reference to "woke" thus far has been to describe its existence supplemented with documented examples and citations. IOW no one, but you inserted the negative valuation. Lol!

Clearly you don't like its current manifestation, since you vainfully try to dismiss its existence with only a pitiful attempt at character assassination by assocociation to a supposed unintelligent and immoral Jordan Peterson, and by laboring over the use of the term "woke." These are vapid assertions arrived at by a purely emotional connection to the matter that are excited by the presentation of aversive facts. Sadly, this lack of proper reasoning is an all too common phenomenon.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> Woke is African American slang from atleast back as far as the 1930s I think. The grammar that is heard (or this case misheard) is what persists in a group.


Hi there Luchesi,

This conversation is similar to the terrorism discussions that I encountered online many years ago. Most people wanted to politicize the issue despite citations from the prominent researchers of the time, such as Sagemen, Scheuer, Pape, etc... The Left AND the Right each had their wrong minded perspectives. Though I offered no moral stance when providing facts, I received responses such as "I know which side my bread is buttered."

Emotion. Its a beast that is hard to tame!


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Luchesi said:


> Woke is African American slang from at least back as far as the 1930s I think.


You didn't read the article I posted a link to? It explains how an Old English word (the past tense of 'wake'..."emerge or cause to emerge from sleep; stop sleeping") acquired the political connotations discussed here.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

That Guy Mick said:


> It is ironic that you clearly have a negative perception of "woke" schooling since the only reference to "woke" thus far has been to describe its existence supplemented with documented examples and citations. IOW no one, but you inserted the negative valuation. Lol!


Is it ironic? Are you sure? I have neither positive nor negative perceptions of my own, though I know like everything it will have those qualities. It is after all something expressed by people. Its also something I don't think about a great deal. It only arises when some raging conservative fearmonger starts frothing at the mouth about it.



That Guy Mick said:


> Clearly you don't like its current manifestation, since you vainfully try to dismiss its existence with only a pitiful attempt at character assassination by assocociation to a supposed unintelligent and immoral Jordan Peterson, and by laboring over the use of the term "woke." These are vapid assertions arrived at by a purely emotional connection to the matter that are excited by the presentation of aversive facts. Sadly, this lack of proper reasoning is an all too common phenomenon.


'Vainfully' is not a real word, however... Immoral? I don't recall saying that or implying it, I just find him a simple quack who appeals to those who favour quackery. He feels to them like: 'finally! An intellectual justification for all my prejudices!' It failed though as he was easily picked-apart and exposed as a charlatan. I don't care about 'woke', he does and you do. You are the emotional ones, as always with people who express tired ideas about decline and dress it up as 'reason'.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Forster said:


> You didn't read the article I posted a link to? It explains how an Old English word (the past tense of 'wake'..."emerge or cause to emerge from sleep; stop sleeping") acquired the political connotations discussed here.


When the supporters use it as a power word are they thinking of uses of the word from Old English? We know so many emphatic uses for slang. It's very effective within groups and 'against' outsiders. 

I've come to agree that "ain't" is highly effective for communication, and also double negatives.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

That Guy Mick said:


> Hi there Luchesi,
> 
> This conversation is similar to the terrorism discussions that I encountered online many years ago. Most people wanted to politicize the issue despite citations from the prominent researchers of the time, such as Sagemen, Scheuer, Pape, etc... The Left AND the Right each had their wrong minded perspectives. Though I offered no moral stance when providing facts, I received responses such as "I know which side my bread is buttered."
> 
> Emotion. Its a beast that is hard to tame!


Hi there Mick. Are you the same Mick who used to 'agree' with me in Amazon discussions? That's always appreciated (and quite rare online).

Yes, it's all very political, and it's exhausting for me to keep up with the latest trends. It doesn't help that my interests lie elsewhere.

What are you warning us about? ...And you write very well, imo.


----------



## Chat Noir (4 mo ago)

Luchesi said:


> And you write very well, imo.


I thought otherwise.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Chat Noir said:


> I thought otherwise.


I don't I think write as well as Mick, but that's faint praise..

One of the main reasons I post is because I feel it helps my brain. If I'm submitting a Technical Report (TR) (meteorology) to the government we all use the same jargon and phrases for brevity and clarity. It's not 'creative'.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Luchesi said:


> When the supporters use it as a power word are they thinking of uses of the word from Old English?


I don't know what you mean. You said:

"Woke is African American slang from atleast back as far as the 1930s I think"

I was pointing out that the word has a much much older history than that - centuries older - that's all.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Forster said:


> I don't know what you mean. You said:
> 
> "Woke is African American slang from atleast back as far as the 1930s I think"
> 
> I was pointing out that the word has a much much older history than that - centuries older - that's all.


I know very little about this. Only what I've caught on the news. So I assumed it came from Black culture. Lead Belly composed a protest song with stay woke in it. Quite famous, about a travesty of justice in the 1930s.
I assumed that stay awake or stay awoke, became poorly heard as stay woke (which sounds more sharp and quick-witted when spoken out loud). 
"Are you woke up yet, man?" I've heard it from African Americans. Is that grammatically correct? Maybe it is now.

Yes, the word woke alone probably has a long history.
Old English (recorded only in the past tense _wōc_ ), also partly from the weak verb _wacian_ ‘remain awake, hold a vigil’, of Germanic origin; related to Dutch _waken_ and German _wachen_ ; compare with watch.

My assumptions could be all wrong-headed. When I worked in European countries I often heard an old-fashioned but 'proper' British English, especially in Greece and Italy. They were using shan't and a few others. It perked up our ears, and our admiration. You don't hear it in general populations here in the States. What happened to us? Well, we know about the early settlers and their class status. I assume they were mostly ne'er-do-wells.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> Hi there Mick. Are you the same Mick who used to 'agree' with me in Amazon discussions? That's always appreciated (and quite rare online).
> 
> Yes, it's all very political, and it's exhausting for me to keep up with the latest trends. It doesn't help that my interests lie elsewhere.
> 
> What are you warning us about? ...And you write very well, imo.


Thank you, Luchesi. Yes, I enjoyed routinely chatting with you and several others at the Amazon website for a few years. 

My message. I pointed out the presence of woke ideologies in public schools and the ill effect on some of the teachers. The widespread presence of the new identity group curriculum is very obvious. The deleterious facts on faculty is less known, though the disdain is also widespread. I doubt teachers are leaving their profession enmasse, but that is just my opinion. 

Apparently some of those posting don't want to believe. I'm judging by the clumsy responses coming from people who probably possess above average intelligence, such as dismissing information from credible sources because the information is presented on Youtube (YT). With embarrassingly shallow reasoning it was explained that Youtube is "social media", and "social media" is unreliable. :^)

The other strong refutation relies on the Jordan Peterson litmus test. Not familiar? It goes "Do you like Jordan Peterson?" If yes, then any evidence that you offer can be ignored and dismissed on those grounds, alone. :^D

Therefore, never mind the opinions of highly accomplished University professors who have been a part of the discussion for many years. Veteran public school teachers, who analyze the most recent developments in Education in their YT channels, can also be criticized and ignored. Why bother with the merit of new information, when instead it easier to devote writing time to regurgitate negative political associations that have already been ingrained?


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

That Guy Mick said:


> Thank you, Luchesi. Yes, I enjoyed routinely chatting with you and several others at the Amazon website for a few years.
> 
> My message. I pointed out the presence of woke ideologies in public schools and the ill effect on some of the teachers. The widespread presence of the new identity group curriculum is very obvious. The deleterious facts on faculty is less known, though the disdain is also widespread. I doubt teachers are leaving their profession enmasse, but that is just my opinion.
> 
> ...


Yes, I agree with that, and I think most folks do.
People who have lived years of their life before woke ideologies are somewhat afraid of what the future will bring. And it's the same nebulous fear with Jordan Peterson on the other side of the spectrum. It's all very human.

If you want to worry about something on YouTube look at the way the warming of the planet is a political football. Video presenters and commenters don't even seem to know how weather works and more importantly they don't understand AGW climatology is about regional climates. This will have negative consequences as different groups dig in their heels.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Luchesi said:


> Yes, I agree with that, and I think most folks do.


This folks doesn't. In the same way that YTB is social media and should not be relied upon as _sole _source for information (never mind opinions), so Talk Classical and its members are open to misrepresentation, and the facts they post might be misinformation. Just as YTB has legit "channels" to which you can subscribe, and legit professors offer quality presentations, Talk Classical, one can glean over time, has some very knowledgeable people, experts in their branch of CM. Both platforms have their share of noobs, amateurs and charlatans.

For example, some prefer to mount an off-topic soapbox rather than stick to the subject of this thread (Professor Fired Because His Course Was Too Hard - not because there was anything 'woke' going on). Consequently, I'm less inclined to accept what they say at face value. My own research turned up some fascinating articles about education in New Hampshire which echo the problems that occurred in the UK when in the late 1980s, our government tried to interfere in what schools taught - or were alleged to be teaching - about homosexuality. The infamous (notorious) Section 28 lasted on the statute books from 1988 to 2003 (says Wikipedia).

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with the OP.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Forster said:


> This folks doesn't. In the same way that YTB is social media and should not be relied upon as _sole _source for information (never mind opinions), so Talk Classical and its members are open to misrepresentation, and the facts they post might be misinformation. Just as YTB has legit "channels" to which you can subscribe, and legit professors offer quality presentations, Talk Classical, one can glean over time, has some very knowledgeable people, experts in their branch of CM. Both platforms have their share of noobs, amateurs and charlatans.
> 
> For example, some prefer to mount an off-topic soapbox rather than stick to the subject of this thread (Professor Fired Because His Course Was Too Hard - not because there was anything 'woke' going on). Consequently, I'm less inclined to accept what they say at face value. My own research turned up some fascinating articles about education in New Hampshire which echo the problems that occurred in the UK when in the late 1980s, our government tried to interfere in what schools taught - or were alleged to be teaching - about homosexuality. The infamous (notorious) Section 28 lasted on the statute books from 1988 to 2003 (says Wikipedia).
> 
> I'm not sure what any of this has to do with the OP.


Yes, all sources of info should be above suspicion (ideally), depending upon what the info is used for.

Reading that, I just thought of a question for you, in the trenches, teaching the next generation, do you have an example of something being taught (or was taught in the past) which would be harmful to young person? I mean, outsiders seem to fear new fads/philosophies and sex education and sex orientation info, and even Marxism. What's your opinion? No holds barred?, or keep it on the innocent side (like when I was coming up)?


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> Yes, I agree with that, and I think most folks do.
> People who have lived years of their life before woke ideologies are somewhat afraid of what the future will bring. And it's the same nebulous fear with Jordan Peterson on the other side of the spectrum. It's all very human.
> 
> If you want to worry about something on YouTube look at the way the warming of the planet is a political football. Video presenters and commenters don't even seem to know how weather works and more importantly they don't understand AGW climatology is about regional climates. This will have negative consequences as different groups dig in their heels.


You highlighted one of the more important and sometimes difficult aspects of using online sources: credibility. We are all aware that mainstream media is often deeply biased and vaguely reliable, but we expect honesty and reliability in the opinions of scholars. However, that isn't necessarily the case. Particularly when the topic is politically charged. 

Ironically, I was recently listening to a Bart Ehrmann interview on YouTube, a Biblical historian who has been teaching the subject at N Carolina Chapel Hill for several decades. The topic of the interview is Biblical forgeries; referred to as pseudepigrapha. Lesser know biblical writers often published material using more prominent identities when submitting their works hoping to achieve more credibility and reverence for their opinions. Though the forgeries were often discovered and decried, some modern scholars (particularly the fundamental religious) refuse to believe that forgeries were considered an unacceptable practice among scholars in that time despite contrary evidence, and object to the use of the term forgery because it is considered to be too harsh. Of course, Bart expressed his deep discontent that the evidence is simply ignored.

I suppose that the issue of global warming suffers similarly. It is a sad affair when even experts become unreliable.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> Yes, I agree with that, and I think most folks do.
> People who have lived years of their life before woke ideologies are somewhat afraid of what the future will bring. And it's the same nebulous fear with Jordan Peterson on the other side of the spectrum. It's all very human.
> 
> If you want to worry about something on YouTube look at the way the warming of the planet is a political football. Video presenters and commenters don't even seem to know how weather works and more importantly they don't understand AGW climatology is about regional climates. This will have negative consequences as different groups dig in their heels.


Going back to the discussion of terrorist attacks and the wariness of the scholarly opinions by Phd's that I presented, it was clear that a disdain for "liberal" universities was the crux of the problem. The the scholars each approached the topic from their respective academic discipline or otherwise, they unanimously agreed that intervention in Middle Eastern affairs was by and large the motivation for the attacks and not religious fervor.

Of course none of the experts could even remotely be considered "liberal" university professors. Dr. Marc Sageman was CIA during the Soviet-Afghan war and later achieved doctoral degrees in medicine and psychiatry. Dr. Micheal Scheuer was head of the CIA's Bin Laden Tracking Unit during two administrations, an ardent Libertarian, and a harsh critic of both the Clinton and Bush administrations of which he served under. Dr. Robert Pape was formerly a military instructor at West Texas University and relocated to the University of Chicago after he began focusing exclusively on terrorism. 

Hope the lengthy posts were not too tiring.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Luchesi said:


> Yes, all sources of info should be above suspicion (ideally), depending upon what the info is used for.
> 
> Reading that, I just thought of a question for you, in the trenches, teaching the next generation, do you have an example of something being taught (or was taught in the past) which would be harmful to young person? I mean, outsiders seem to fear new fads/philosophies and sex education and sex orientation info, and even Marxism. What's your opinion? No holds barred?, or keep it on the innocent side (like when I was coming up)?


I'm not sure I'm arguing in favour of all sources being 'above suspicion' as you put it. That would be unreasonable, given that everyone has their bias. I'm arguing that every consumer of information should be aware of bias and attempt to draw information from more than one source. I can't think of any individual or organisation whose word I take entirely on trust, swallowing what they 0ffer 100% without question. Having said that, one must take some things on trust. One can't go back to basics and work things out entirely for oneself - or be expert in everything. The pandemic was a good example of this.

To your last question, I can only think of two instances where I was challenged about what I was teaching to my first class of 10 and 11 year olds (back in 1983-4). One was the adviser supervising my probation, who told me to take off my union campaign badge in class. The other was teaching about dinosaurs. One boy belonged to a family who didn't believe in evolution. He cried when we studied it. His parents were sensitive to his problem, and didn't demand that I change the material, only that he had to understand that different opinions and beliefs were allowed.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Forster said:


> I'm not sure I'm arguing in favour of all sources being 'above suspicion' as you put it. That would be unreasonable, given that everyone has their bias. I'm arguing that every consumer of information should be aware of bias and attempt to draw information from more than one source. I can't think of any individual or organisation whose word I take entirely on trust, swallowing what they 0ffer 100% without question. Having said that, one must take some things on trust. One can't go back to basics and work things out entirely for oneself - or be expert in everything. The pandemic was a good example of this.
> 
> To your last question, I can only think of two instances where I was challenged about what I was teaching to my first class of 10 and 11 year olds (back in 1983-4). One was the adviser supervising my probation, who told me to take off my union campaign badge in class. The other was teaching about dinosaurs. One boy belonged to a family who didn't believe in evolution. He cried when we studied it. His parents were sensitive to his problem, and didn't demand that I change the material, only that he had to understand that different opinions and beliefs were allowed.


Yes, we must employ critical thinking, more than we did than when we got information before the internet. And NOW we have to know about psychology and social trends, liberal and conservative thinking and their histories, Dunning-Kruger effect(s), so much more.

I sympathize with you about Creationism in the science classroom. Was there a solution?


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Luchesi said:


> Was there a solution?


What was interesting was that the challenge came from the child, not the parents. It's 40 years ago now, so I don't remember the resolution beyond his becoming satisfied that his beliefs could remain intact while learning about what science had to say about fossils and so on. He was well supported by his parents who understood their beliefs were at odds with what I was teaching the children and in our classroom, that should prevail.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Forster said:


> What was interesting was that the challenge came from the child, not the parents. It's 40 years ago now, so I don't remember the resolution beyond his becoming satisfied that his beliefs could remain intact while learning about what science had to say about fossils and so on. He was well supported by his parents who understood their beliefs were at odds with what I was teaching the children and in our classroom, that should prevail.


That's good and bad. If you tell a kid not to belittle science, that's generally what they'll do at that age. It's a power thing. Children have so little power in their young lives that they'll fixate on any power dynamic they can own. I don't know what the solution is.


----------



## NoCoPilot (Nov 9, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> That's good and bad. If you tell a kid not to belittle science, that's generally what they'll do at that age. It's a power thing. Children have so little power in their young lives that they'll fixate on any power dynamic they can own. I don't know what the solution is.


During the "formative years" (5-15 or so) a child will believe whatever a grownup tells them, and it can be extremely difficult for them to re-orient themselves to reality afterward. Matthew 19:14


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

NoCoPilot said:


> During the "formative years" (5-15 or so) a child will believe whatever a grownup tells them, and it can be extremely difficult for them to re-orient themselves to reality afterward. Matthew 19:14


Did you have a rough time in your formative years?


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Forster said:


> This folks doesn't. In the same way that YTB is social media and should not be relied upon as _sole _source for information (never mind opinions),


Hello Forster,
Is it a diversity of information and opinions that best inform? Though Youtube is only one medium source, does not Youtube offer a wide diversity? 

Should any single expert opinion be shunned because it is only one opinion? For example, would it be prudent to discount the well informed and reasoned opinions given by John McWhorter because they are given on Youtube?


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Luchesi said:


> Reading that, I just thought of a question for you, in the trenches, teaching the next generation, do you have an example of something being taught (or was taught in the past) which would be harmful to young person? I mean, outsiders seem to fear new fads/philosophies and sex education and sex orientation info, and even Marxism. What's your opinion? No holds barred?, or keep it on the innocent side (like when I was coming up)?


Hello Luchesi,
I recall that you dislike history discussions in the past on the basis that history is overly opinionated (unlike science). Do you feel that an examination of the current contentious practices in education are best represented by someone's recollection of the past? Are not the current issues best addressed in the current context? 

For example, prayer in schools was once a hotly debated issue. Does a revisit of school prayer lend any insight into the issue of identity politics taught to public school students?


----------



## JessieJim (24 d ago)

I was a teacher too, I hate the position "learning is fun and easy and we'll play and sing songs and that's it". I also suppose learning is a hard work.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

Luchesi said:


> That's good and bad. If you tell a kid not to belittle science, that's generally what they'll do at that age. It's a power thing. Children have so little power in their young lives that they'll fixate on any power dynamic they can own. I don't know what the solution is.


Why is it good and bad?


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Forster said:


> Why is it good and bad?


It's good that no more feathers were ruffled in this, because you navigated it politely, 'sounds like..

But it's too bad that a child has to be primed like this so young, between parents and the wider world.


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

That Guy Mick said:


> Hello Forster,
> Is it a diversity of information and opinions that best inform? Though Youtube is only one medium source, does not Youtube offer a wide diversity?
> 
> Should any single expert opinion be shunned because it is only one opinion? For example, would it be prudent to discount the well informed and reasoned opinions given by John McWhorter because they are given on Youtube?


It's access to a diversity of sources, certainly. It's not _necessarily _access to a diversity of information or opinions.
YTB offers all kinds of information, but not necessarily a wide diversity on the same issue - nor is it always a source of reliable information
How are we to know whose expert opinions we should accept if we only use a single source for our information? In this particular case, no has "shunned" any expert opinion at all. And no-one has "shunned" the opinions of John McWhorter "just because" they are given on YTB.

You'll note that my first two posts in this thread aimed at offering an alternative view from the one that seemed to be accepted without question. My third post was a generalisation about the problem of the reliability of the internet. It was not aimed at John McWhorter or his ideas.



> I for one am reluctant to see the end of civilisation as we know it in the propagation of this or that idea shared only via reductive social media.


This was aimed at several posts that seemed to accept without question, the idea that students now rule the roost, get teachers sacked for teaching too hard and even kill them, as if this is a widespread and regular occurrence.


----------



## That Guy Mick (May 31, 2020)

Forster said:


> It's access to a diversity of sources, certainly. It's not _necessarily _access to a diversity of information or opinions.
> YTB offers all kinds of information, but not necessarily a wide diversity on the same issue - nor is it always a source of reliable information
> How are we to know whose expert opinions we should accept if we only use a single source for our information? In this particular case, no has "shunned" any expert opinion at all. And no-one has "shunned" the opinions of John McWhorter "just because" they are given on YTB.
> 
> ...


I would say that you need both diversity of sources and diversity of opinion so that ideas can be compared and contrasted. They go hand in hand when watching debates and interviews on Youtube channels; high quality engagements that you are unlikely to see on any other medium. On the topic of woke schooling, Youtube has a treasure trove to offer. There is a reason why you haven't mentioned any other sources. Because they are paltry by comparison, and most of them run Youtube channels, too. 

Of course not everything on YT is reliable. And it isn't the only source that should be used. It would be a strawman argument to suggest that this was ever said. This isn't a fifth grade classroom. We are all a little brighter and more experienced than that. While I would definitely recommend a journey into the "Chalk and Talk" channel with the Buffalo School teacher talking about recent developments in K-12 ed in the U.S., I would never recommend political commentators, like Steve Turley or The Young Turks. 

The biggest problem with the platform is that the algorithms push a person toward like-minded videos. For those who are aware of this and want to hear both sides of an issue, it is easy enough to find names and places from one video, the target of someone's gripe in one video, and search for their content. Google searches can turn up more information about the topics presented in YT. Plenty of "Activist Teaching" stuff out there on the web though, because it is a big thing now. I get that some people prefer to bury their head in the sand, but it is spreading like wildfire.









Learning for Justice | Education Resources


Learning for Justice provides free resources to educators—teachers, administrators, counselors and other practitioners—who work with children from kindergarten through high school. Educators use our materials to supplement the curriculum, to inform their practices, and to create civil and...




www.learningforjustice.org


----------

