Kentucky Offers Free E-Book of Radio Icon’s New Memoir

Good article.

Thanks for pointing out a few of the many lines of elitist and just plain bad reasoning on the relationship between admissions criteria, grades, achievement, and graduation, which extend also to debt load and loan default.

Many who post frequently in CHE believe that the solution to higher education’s ills is to admit only the best and the brightest, leaving the others to . . . well, they don’t specify. We can see why some kinds of personalities would advocate this. Teaching very bright, highly motivated students makes you look good . . . until you realize that it has nothing to do with you and that these students will succeed with or without you and with or without your institution. Still, it is a lot of fun to “teach” the brightest or at least be around while they use you to learn. Real teaching is in play when you convey knowledge and proficiencies, eventually graduating someone who would not otherwise have succeeded were it not for your skills.

And then what? Exactly what do we find out from Obama’s transcript-or any transcript, that propels some action point? We found out only belatedly that Ronnie was having “good days and bad days” under the tutelage of some quack astrologer, and Reagan’s finger was a lot itchier on the “big red button” that Obama’s ever could be. Reagan’s transcript would not have revealed either his superstition, or his incipient dementia, would it?

This argument about one’s schooldays exemplifies the quaint notion that “information is power” taken to a ludicrous degree. Hey, is that a play on words? How did I do in English 101?

Only a dyed in the wool academic would be interested in somebody’s transcript. The World has a way of “grading” us, and that should be sufficient when somebody clears the age of about 30, let’s say. Your accomplishments are your transcript. Gee, there are some people who do not even have transcripts!

Interesting report, Mr. Fant. Thank you. A strategic plan can be quite revealing. We, at usmnews.net, recently ran a series of reports about our strategic plan at the University of Southern Mississippi. They began with the following paragraph: “An intriguing book by Benjamin Ginsberg, The Fall of the Faculty, occasions a review of USM’s most recent ‘Strategic Plan.’ First and foremost, USM’s Strategic Plan is noteworthy for what has been omitted as much for what is included. Part 1 of this series begins with a glaring omission. And, the omission echoes throughout the Plan and signals the status of ethics at USM and of President Saunders and the administrators with whom she surrounds herself. A number of readers and contributors have commented that the omission is stunning. Whether it is an unintentional omission says as much about USM and the status of its ethics as if it was an intentional omission…” http://www.usmnews.net/usmnews%20STRATEGIC%20PLAN%20AT%20USM%20Part1.pdf

BTW: Honesty, integrity, and truth (reliable observations) were missing from USM’s Strategic Plan.

Chauncey M. DePree, Jr., DBA, Professor, School of Accountancy, College of Business, University of Southern Mississippi, m.depree@usm.edu

i think you should use your mind above your heart n think under which category you ‘ll put this chap: not-good, not-bad(keeping in view behavior n professional attitude shown by persons’ whom u talk)  , bad (if he had done any thing really bad to u)
and act accordingly as it really requires a lot to ask for help from a person in a situation like this. at last he is seeing/considering u above all……

Just pre-ordered mine from Amazon. Due to arrive on October 1, which the article didn’t reflect. What a great idea though: kudos to the UK press.

Smart move by Kentucky to take advantage of free advertising like this. It will be interesting to see what kind of print sales follow. I wouldn’t be surprised if Kentucky sells print copies even to people who download the free e-book, especially if Edwards does a lot of book signings. E-books do not offer that perk, after all.—Sandy Thatcher

@cerebellum The Google eBookstore link to download your #FREE copy of @BobEdwardsShow new memoir is now up and running! http://ow.ly/6jVTi

If these incoming athletes can not read and write, what were those in K-12 doing?

As many of the very expensive and very good athletic support programs demonstrate, these students are nor dumb. They have just been denied an education.

Simply publishing the remedial courses that athlete and non-athlete students from various school systems must take would, at least, tell parents and taxpayers something. Actually billing them for this remedial work would be even better.  

Firstly, most universities are changing their admissions policies by evaluating the academic rigor high schools and not looking at ACT or SAT test scores as much for good reason.  These high-stakes tests are merely predictors of success, but do not determine success.  Like any other high-stakes test, it only measures a student’s ability in one exam, greatly reducing the reliability of the test scores.  Additionally, these scores pose multiple validity issues, not with the content, but with the “issues” students bring into the testing environment.  Relying solely on these scores does not paint a clear picture of a student’s academic ability, rather how well they can perform on one test on one day.  Looking at the high school GPA allows a review of academic success over a period of time, including different modalities of learning, which ultimately shows the persistence and success of our diverse learners. Therefore, this system is actually in favor of our students, allowing them to demonstrate varying abilities.  This generally perpetuates success, which is what educators should want.
 
Although the statistics provided hold a negative connotation towards student-athletes, this subgroup generally holds a higher GPA than a “normal” student. However, I do agree that student-athletes need to be held to a high standard and raising the minimum GPA requirements will make them put more efforts into their career path, rather than focusing on sports alone.
 
 
I truly have a problem with this statement:
“The bottom line is, the lower you go in test scores, the worse students are in basic reading skills,” says Gurney. “Is it the role of four-year institutions to teach students how to read?”
 
It is the responsibility of 4-year universities, or any post-secondary institution, to implement reading strategies into content areas.  Sustained-silent reading, or independent reading, is only effective if the student’s are comprehending 99% of the material.  That is, they could answer varying levels of comprehension questions and get 99% correct.  However, professors require students to read large sums of their textbook independently prior to coming into class, don’t necessarily discuss the material, assess the material directly from the textbook, and expect students to understand it.  This is seriously unfair, especially students with learning disabilities.  Good professors incorporate reading strategies, like active reading, into their lectures (even though I strongly disagree with pure lectures as well). They teach vocabulary, active prior knowledge, and differentiate instruction to meet the needs of diverse learners.  Good teachers understand how to teach reading and writing skills in conjunction and understand that good readers have the ability to be good writers and vice versa. So, the real issue is, is that professors should go through education courses to understand how to deliver material and teach it to students because at the end of the day, every teacher is a reading teacher, regardless of the discipline. These strategies MUST be taught because as students progress through education, the material becomes increasingly difficult and the learning gap widens.  We must meet the needs of our diverse populations and that means teaching reading strategies, including study strategies, that will be most beneficial for specific content areas.
 
 “When you’re having to deal face-face with these athletes who have such severe difficulties—they can’t write, they can’t read—yet they have to get eligible, it’s the only thing they care about, that’s their ticket to future,” he says. “They’re so pressured, they have to cheat. Or fail.”
 
Good teaching ,coupled with valid and reliable assessments, prevent cheating and failing. So maybe the problem does not lie within the student-athletes; after all, they are simply using the strategies they know. The larger problems lies within the inability (not all professors of course) to differentiate instruction and incorporate important reading strategies into his/her lessons.  Professional development and effective evaluation systems need to be put into place so that we can encourage student success and properly evaluate student performance.

There is still a market, I suspect, for writers willing to pen such letters for others to send, or even to speak directly on their behalf.  I got the part of Cyrano on stage as a senior in high school in part because I had been known for polishing up the sweet nothings of classmates–the Abe Burows of love notes.   But more than the words themselves, the decline of love letters has probably been a consequence of the decline of penmanship.  These days hardly anyone (myself included) can “write a good hand,” and a typed love letter, even converted to a fancy font, just won’t do.  Even in those old high school days when guys copied my suggestions in their own handwriting for authenticity they were often so struck by the disjuncture between the sentiments and penmanship that they couldn’t go through with sending the note.  I did make sure I got my dollar first.