Comments on: 'Suited for teaching' after all

By: KateC

KateC — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 03:00:40 +0000

Who cares what her classmates thought/felt about her? So what? I think she’ll be far more likely to teach her students than her STEP fellows who only want to be a pal to those they’re supposed to teach.

Or did they all pay $40K a year to sing Kumbayah around a cozy campfire, while unicorns with rainbow manes and tails swayed in harmony?

By: Large O

Large O — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:34:53 +0000

vi?o?lence

1. swift and intense force: the violence of a storm.
2. rough or injurious physical force, action, or treatment: to die by violence.
3. an unjust or unwarranted exertion of force or power, as against rights or laws: to take over a government by violence.
4. a violent act or proceeding.
5. rough or immoderate vehemence, as of feeling or language: the violence of his hatred.

My guess is that Scrooge was using the fifth definition of violence. And I agree wholeheartedly with him.

By: Kirk Parker

Kirk Parker — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:25:59 +0000

Scrooge,

Ah, nice to see that by “violence” you didn’t actually mean “violence”. Do you have any other personal redefinitions of common words you would like to clue us in on?

By: NDC

NDC — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 22:03:00 +0000

Scrooge, I understand now. All I’ve seen to indicate that she was as unpleasant in real life as she was on the internet is the email to her program director and cohort. It’s possible that she wouldn’t be professional in the classroom and that she would act that way to the kids.

By: joycem

joycem — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 20:02:02 +0000

Sadly, I think a lot of this sort of thing does happen in ed school programs. It doesn’t always have to do with politics; in my cohort it was targeted toward the older members of the cohort who’d a.) had parenting and teaching experience and b.) were questioning the stance of a popular behaviorist teacher. One of the drawbacks of the cohort method is that it does scapegoat those who are not completely one with the cohort. I’ve known several other older teacher candidates who have had similar experiences or have been washed out of the process–and some were politically progressive as well.

In this case I have to agree with the other commenters about the unprofessional posting style of the person in question. OTOH, this might well mean that said person will make an excellent teacher working with difficult, challenging kids–or it could well mean that this is yet another burnout case on its way. I suspect that a few years of teaching will either take care of the lack of professionalism in her tone–or the person in question will find something else to do.

And yeah, her cohort needs to get over itself and figure out how to stand up for themselves without the passive-aggressive behaviors. Won’t last, unless they’re headed for elementary school.

By: CA Teacher

CA Teacher — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 16:23:14 +0000

I’d probably agree with much of Ms. Kerr’s educational philosophy. However, I’ve read several of the threads on which she’s commented. Scrooge McDuck’s observation that her style is “contemptuous and abusive” is right on target. I’d also say it’s wildly unprofessional. If Stanford professors and classmates experienced that in the classroom, I’d have to side firmly with the Stanford program. A person who thinks it’s okay to speak to others in that hateful, abusive manner has no business in a classroom, where she could inflict emotional abuse on students. I would certainly not want my child in her classroom. And that opinion is based SOLELY on her manner of speech (or writing in this case), not on her intellect or views.

By: Scrooge McDuck

Scrooge McDuck — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 10:05:57 +0000

Scrooge, I’m not sure that not rushing to work with someone is the same thing as “fearing” for a child and regarding someone as “violent and vicious”. Your claims are still pretty unsubstantiated.

By “violent and vicious” I did not mean physically, but was referring to her contemptuous and abusive style of communicating. By “fearing” for my child, I meant I would not want someone who can be so verbally and mentally abusive teaching my child. I was basing my claims on her written comments which are extremely harsh and also from what I read about her behavior in class. I don’t much care for ed school philosophy either, but there are ways of disagreeing without insulting people–and there is also a time to realize when you aren’t going to change people.

By: Larry Strauss

Larry Strauss — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 04:19:04 +0000

A lot of good comments on both sides.

But one thing I’m curious about is how her fellow students were “intimidated.”

Maybe I’m just a crusty old vet of the innercity classroom, but it seems to me that if those teacher-trainees want to be ready to step up and be teachers, they need to get over being intimidated by pretty much anything.

Could have been a teachable moment for those Ed professors…

By: Dave J

Dave J — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 23:38:56 +0000

“Imagine a discussion group with a dozen people, of whom only one is conservative (or liberal; it’s not content dependent)”

And in social situations, where each person’s views don’t HAVE to be shared unless they choose to, it accentuates the polarization.

I’m a prosecutor: I went to lunch with about a dozen public defenders sometime last week. Many of these people are my friends, but some I know much less well. Somehow the topic of conversation shifted to politics, and not about specific policies, but more of the “Sarah Palin is retarded…all conservatives are retarded…wasn’t Obama such a gifted articulate wonderful genius at his press conference compared to that moron W?” variety. I could’ve chimed in with a differing view, but why the hell would I want to?

And I know for certain there were others at the table who felt similarly and were much less outsiders to that group–not all PD’s are died-in-the-wool kneejerk lefties–but for much the same reasons couldn’t be bothered. Better for an enjoyable lunch to let the conversation take its course away to other things, even if meant letting others believe their views are shared by all reasonable and/or intelligent people, than to provoke a fight.

By: linda seebach

linda seebach — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 14:39:21 +0000

There’s a conversational dynamic that comes into play when one side in a debate is greatly outnumbered. Imagine a discussion group with a dozen people, of whom only one is conservative (or liberal; it’s not content dependent). How do you divide up the speaking turns? If everybody gets five minutes out of an hour, that’s fair in one obvious way, but it means 55 minutes of people presenting their shared liberal views and five minutes of someone presenting a conservative view. That’s unfair in a different way. But if the sides get equal time, then one person talks for half the hour and nobody feels that is right either. Nor does there seem to be any intermediate point where people are comfortable.

I’ve recently had this experience with a current-events discussion group, about that size, in the senior residence where I live. It was so uncomfortable, and eventually quite hostile, that I just quit going. And I never had any trouble getting along with colleagues in the newsroom, although we seldom agreed on political issues.