• Monday, May 28, 2012

Previous

Next

Think Before You Tweet (or Blog or Update a Status)

February 23, 2011, 8:00 am

Earlier this week, Miriam Posner, Stewart Varner, and Brian Croxall wrote “Creating Your Web Presence: A Primer for Academics.”  They had some terrific recommendations about how to establish an online presence and how to keep that presence active and positive.  Good stuff!

Here at ProfHacker, we’ve written before about the networking wonders and creative collaborations that can happen via online forums.  We meet people from different disciplines in various parts of the world, and we connect because we share interests and goals.  With all the good, though, there are some negative aspects to online presences.  It’s important to recognize that whatever we write online is for public consumption, that we are not simply chatting with friends and family when we post.

Today I want to veer off their post just a bit and write about something that might detract from a positive and professional online presence, a presence that we so meticulously create and maintain, comments made online that publicly disparage students and colleagues.  These comments can be intentional—meant to demean or criticize—or they can be random comments made in jest.

Take, for example, the case of Dr. Gloria Gadsden, an associate professor at East Stroudsburg University.  About a year ago, Dr. Gadsden wrote on Facebook that she had a good day at school, and “didn’t want to kill even one student,” adding “Friday was a different story.”  She wrote this comment—surely in jest—in a space that she believed to be private.  However, it wasn’t.  A third party read her comment and notified university authorities.  Dr. Gadsden was suspended, and ultimately reinstated, after the incident, but the hit to her professional reputation is clear.

A few more cautionary tales:

  • In the U.K., thirteen Virgin Atlantic Airlines crewmembers were fired after they made fun of passengers and jokes about airline safety on Facebook.
  • In June of 2010, a Pittsburgh Pirates’ mascot was fired after posting a negative comment about the contract extension of two team managers.  Andrew Kurtz, 24, was fired within hours of posting the comment, “Coonelly extended the contracts of Russell and Huntington through the 2011 season. That means a 19-straight losing streak. Way to go Pirates,” to his Facebook page.
  • At a Dallas radio station, The Ticket, producer Mike Bacsik was suspended after making some unfortunate Twitter comments after a night drinking with friends.  The station noted that Bacsik “had been ‘a good employee’ . . . and [his] final public communication while a Ticket employee reflected poorly on the station.”
  • Lastly, do you know what it means to be “dooced”?  If you’ve been blogging for any length of time, you’ve heard the word.  It’s now slang for “fired.”  Heather Armstrong, of the blog Dooce.com, was fired from a job she held after she wrote satiric accounts about her bosses and colleagues on her blog.

The kind of vocalizations that caused the above-named individuals to be fired are common in high stress professions, as they can defuse anger or frustration.  Speaking these words can be a way to commiserate with colleagues, or they can become “in jokes” among friends.  These exchanges can be OK when we are face-to-face with others, as we have body language and voice inflections to help us understand the meaning and context behind the statements.  Online is a different situation, however.

If we blog or use Twitter or Facebook under our given names, the words we write are attributed to us, and they can be easily misunderstood.  If we blog or tweet under a pseudonym, the work isn’t directly linked to us as individuals, but it can be linked to our friends and followers.

Recently on Twitter, among those I follow who work in higher education, I’ve seen a significant rise in snarky comments about students and their work.  These comments are usually made anonymously.  The comments bothered me, but initially I thought a Twitter user who was experiencing some on-the-job frustration was making the comments.  However, the comments increased.  The people who were making the comments increased.  Suddenly my Twitter stream was a teacher’s lounge.  (Most educators know to stay out of the teacher’s lounge.)

Because I follow and am followed by several hundred people—most of them in higher education—I’m aware of what I write online.  I write nothing that I wouldn’t say aloud to anyone.  I am also very aware that my students follow me on Twitter, as I use Twitter as a pedagogical tool.  I don’t say or tweet or write anything that I wouldn’t say to them.  Conversely, these students often follow who I follow on Twitter, and I don’t want them to see other professors publicly laughing at student effort or intelligences.  I don’t make malicious comments about students or colleagues, but since I follow or am followed by those that do, I wondered if their attempts at humor affected the way others saw me.  I unfollowed/defriended those individuals.

The point to this is this:  if we have an online presence, we must be responsible in what we say or write.  This seems simple, doesn’t it?  Nevertheless, we forget that we are not in the company of friends when we say or write the things we do.  Almost anyone can read our words, and they might misunderstand our intent.

How about you?  How do you feel about online conversations among professionals? How do you (or do you) limit your involvement in online conversations?  What advice might you offer to someone new to the online world?  Please leave your comments or suggestions below.

[Image by Flickr user boetter and used under the Creative Commons license.]

This entry was posted in Profession and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • http://twitter.com/plcorbett Patrick L. Corbett

    I can’t tell you how much I could have used this advice a week ago, when I very carelessly retweeted an interesting sounding factoid from a scholar whom I respect very much (it wasn’t his either). As of this morning, that retweet has been circulated more than 1,500 times and done so in my name because I stripped out identifying information to add a series of tags for audiences I thought were appropriate. As someone who is technology, but not necessarily Twitter, savvy, I shouldn’t have been surprised at how quickly it circulated in my name, but it did and now I “own it.”

    Though I haven’t been dooced (is that an old Net Trek reference?!), I have fielded literally hundreds of angry messages from ideological pundits, dozens of messages from similarly unwitting supporters, and several media inquiries about “my” “facts.” After a bit of digging, I traced the original language of the tweet back to a blog comment in the Milwaukee Sentinel Journal. I’ve spent a good 30 minutes of each day since trying to pass on correct information about the subject.

    Until last week, my sole use of Twitter was connecting with friends and a narrow band of teachers and scholars who work in my specialty. I was happily anonymous. Now I am being followed by journalists, pundits, and many others who see my most significant contribution to the Twittersphere so far is propagating poorly sourced, incorrect, cause-weakening information, in a VERY public way. It will take a long time for me to feel that I have repaired the damage of this to my profession and to my professional reputation.

    plc

  • acavender

    This kind of reminds me of an experience I had in grad school. Someone had sent me a link to the (in)famous “Manfred Mickleson” letter (I’m not sure where it originally appeared, but it can be found at http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~wcd/manfred.htm). Thinking it really funny, I forwarded it to a few friends.

    Somehow, it got back out to the net attributed to me, in some circles. I had some rather irate emails from people serving on search committees around the country who thought I was mocking the whole process.

  • http://twitter.com/ktgresham Katie Gresham

    I actually had a professor who often posted thoughts while he was grading papers. They were always positive, but I still was uncomfortable and replied to his status saying that maybe he should wait until class to comment. He become very angry and was apparently spoken to by someone at the school who also saw the comments.

    Its always difficult deciding what to say on-line, but I think this is even harder for educators. One smart method practice by most of my professors is that you cannot be friended until the end of your class with them. Its frustrating to feel like you’re freedom of speech is being constrained, but people have to be smart about what they say–online and off–and that’s that.

  • drnels

    Billie, you know I am so on board with you here. I try to remember that I won’t say anything online that I wouldn’t say to the person’s (or group’s, if it’s a class) face. That has kept me out of trouble so far. I am friends on Facebook with well over a hundred current, past, and future students (I have had students who have gotten friends of theirs who are not in my classes to friend me, and they sometimes sign up for classes when they like what they see).

    Though, we do have to admit that just putting ourselves out there honestly still leaves us open for judgment. I have received private emails from ProfHacker readers who have cautioned me about certain photos of myself or other things I’ve posted online, but I am fine with that representation. I know, though, that the me that is online is not a person everyone wants to know. Of course, I am tenured, so I am in a very different position, but if I were a grad student, the me that would be online would be different than the me who is out there now (and I was blogging when I was a grad student but under a pseudonym). If you are sarcastic, some will call you witty, and others will call you an ass. There are many times when I have read things on Twitter, Facebook, or a blog and thought that I’m so glad I do not have to work with that person. And I’m sure the same has happened when others have read my online output.

    We cannot stop ourselves from being judged, but we can recognize our role in what we put out to be judged.

  • http://micahvandegrift.wordpress.com Micah Vandegrift

    I appreciate posts like this as a student about to enter the profession. I’d like to think that I am as careful as you are, and keep my outward-facing presence strictly professional. Most often, if I pause at all before hitting send on a Tweet or status update I will automatically delete it. If I balk at posting it, it probably doesn’t need to be posted.
    That said, I suppose there are instances where a post that offers an opinion or argument one way or another could be twisted out of context by anyone looking to ruin a reputation. Quite the quandary.

    Think before you tweet… words to live by.

  • http://about.me/jbj Jason B. Jones

    I don’t know: I like free speech, where “freedom” includes the ability to make mistakes, even mistakes in public, and also the bravery to stand up for people who’ve made such mistakes, or who have been falsely accused of making such mistakes.

    Professionalism and such are good attributes, but it’s inhuman to expect them all the time. I also think that it does, on balance, more good than harm to show what professors are really like.

    And it’s hard to live always in fear of being misunderstood.

    I *certainly* don’t think that following someone on Twitter or friending someone on Facebook implies an endorsement of everything they say. I friend all colleagues and students who ask on FB, and follow more people than are healthy on Twitter. Many of those people aren’t academics, and lots of ‘em have opinions and sense of humor that are, let’s say, outside the usual professorial norms.

    It’s not even clear that a RT implies endorsement.

    Tenure makes this much easier for me, obviously, but I’d rather live in a world where *everyone* had the freedom to speak their mind–even if ill-advised–than one where everyone has to live like an at-will employee.

  • lexalexander

    I’ve not only been living online for 20+ years, I’ve even been paid to blog/tweet, and in previous jobs the line between work and personal was intentionally blurry at times.

    But these days, working in higher ed, I draw a very clear line between work-related Tweeting, from a college account, and personal tweeting on my personal account. Ditto blogging, although I don’t currently blog for work: My blog is personal, and I geneally don’t blog about my job even when there are times I want to brag about my employer.

    If I may paraphrase that enduring epic, “Fight Club”:

    What’s the first rule of blogging/tweeting about the day job? Don’t blog or tweet about the day job.

    What’s the second rule of blogging/tweeting about the day job? DON’T BLOG OR TWEET ABOUT THE DAY JOB.

    Corollary: What goes online stays online, usually forever.

  • http://twitter.com/staplegun Mr DC

    The first problem is, as social media becomes more and more mainstream there are many people who don’t really understand how it all works. Many don’t realise that Twitter is public, especially if you’ve come from Facebook (where there are some privacy controls, though only just).

    But once you get savvy it then becomes a case of making slipups in judgement, as some commenters have noted. This is really hard because often you’re sitting alone at a PC and it still feels anonymous, even though you know it isn’t.

    I think also we use a wide range of channels with varying levels of privacy (twitter/facebook/email/IM plus personal vs work) but they all occur using the same keyboard and screen so sometimes you forget which persona/voice you are using at the time.

    What has helped me a little is that I keep getting these new unknown Twitter followers from around the world who must have seen some random tweet I made and decided to follow me. This keeps reminding me that the whole world (potentially) is watching.

  • http://twitter.com/ElysaH Elysa Hogg

    My dad taught me something that I’ve followed to this day- never email, post or tweet something that you wouldn’t want printed on the front page of a newspaper!

  • http://twitter.com/readywriting Lee Skallerup

    I agree. One of the things that I use my blog and twitter for is to admit that something isn’t working (usually with my pedagogy) and seek help and support as to how to improve the situation. After an initial venting tweet, I’ll ask for advice. I want people to know that I am human, fallible, and continually learning about my role as a teacher. And I tell my students when they frustrate me, and will usually use past examples to illustrate the issues. Especially when I’m teaching rhetoric and discuss Ethos. You, I tell my students, have an ethos problem. If you want to be taken seriously by your professors, peers, and other people, then you need to give them a reason to and refrain from behavior that causes them to vent on twitter and their blogs. I, also, take my ethos very seriously, and I tightly control every tweet I make, even the ones where I am complaining or venting.

    And this is the first time I’ve commented on Chronicle as myself. Fingers crossed.

  • http://twitter.com/JudyArzt JudyArzt

    I continue to respect your work and am following you on Twitter starting tonight only because I read your post here. I certainly did not see the earlier Tweet you mention.

  • drnels

    Jason, I know we’ve talked about this before, and I think our difference of opinion comes down to how we define “mistake.” I think the Dr. Gadsden case, for example, wasn’t a mistake but was a stupid choice on her part. I really think she should have known better. I agree that it’s good to show what professors are really like, but I think there is a slippery slope before we end up in Rate Your Students territory and some of the horrible things professors said about students there. Billie’s point about the teacher lounge is a good one. There have been times I’ve whispered to the husband that we should leave a party because the complaints about students were just crossing a line for me, and I didn’t want to be a part of it.

    Another difference for some of us I just realized has to do with how much our professional and personal lives intertwine. I consider myself to be very lucky that there is practically no line between the two for me. Oh, it’s there, but it’s thinner than for most people. I talk about pornography on Twitter and FB because I talk about it in my classes. I talk about Glee, Gossip Girl, and America’s Next Top Model online because I talk about them in my classes. I post photos of me with Hello Kitty band-aids on the same day I wore that to a meeting with the Provost. Obviously, the blurry line between personal and professional shapes my perspective because I really think of everything that I post online as both or of interested to both kinds of readers.

    Yes, I thought of this earlier today when I posted a link on Facebook to an article about men’s masturbation clubs in the 1700s, and comments to that post include friends from high school and current students. So, yeah, I admit that my sense of what is appropriate online will differ from other people.

  • arrive2__net

    I think the article gives excellent advice. When I am posting something online I sometimes feel that I am balancing between wanting to be diplomatic and respectful, as the article suggests, and wanting to appear confident and strong…not wanting to appear sheepish, weak, or vacillating. However this same kind of balancing occurs in regular professional life as well. The tricky part can be, as the article suggests, the feeling of anonymity when anonymity really does not exist.

    For me there’s also an issue of being who you really are in a fully integrated sense. I think we have all said things in real life that we latter regretted, and we said or thought “that wasn’t the real me”… it was a momentary lapse. Being cautious about ‘shooting off your mouth’ is not be just a case of worrying about how others will react, but also respecting who you are and how you are likely to feel about it later. Being to free with comments also can overstep what are also our own internalized values.

    As Mark Twain said ‘Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.’

    Bernard Schuster
    Arrive2.net
    Twitter.com/arrive2_net

  • http://brandoncoppernoll.com/ Brandon Coppernoll

    If you comment or post anything on Twitter, the first thing you need to realize is it’s public domain and recorded. Twitter records every single tweet. If you don’t think it’s appropriate to say in a public setting such as a classroom, hallway or other similar settings you probably shouldn’t tweet it at all.

    With regards to Facebook, there are ways you can use the privacy settings to let out more personal information but be mindful who you’ve made friends with. If you’ve made friends with students or their parents then you no longer hold that right. The same goes for your supervisors.

    My rule of thumb is if I wouldn’t say it out loud to someone then I won’t post it, and if you think you might be living on the edge simply ask around.

  • matchett

    This trend was slow in coming, but just shows that online spaces are now as fully real and public as any other. Critics use to bemoan sites like Facebook and Twitter because (it was said) that they would undermine standards of decency. And while they were small and used by only a few, they did. But now folks can’t hide with snarky friends online any more safely than they can hide with them offline (which doesn’t mean it’s impossible to create snarky private communities in either realm, just that it’s harder and riskier).

    Bigger, fully public spaces are better. They keep us more honest, more open-minded, or at least, more careful. We should all be creating them in every realm.

  • http://twitter.com/VintageRescuer Sandra B.

    I am sure we have all heard about this sort of thing happening, but I thought someone might like this article about tweeting…

  • rebhill

    These problems with Facebook come from most people’s aversion to actually confronting people they are in conflict with directly.
    Venting online is not that different from complaining about someone behind his/her back instead of going to him/her to discuss what bothered you. The irony, as many of us have learned from experience, is that in almost every case, complaining about someone to other people usually exacerbates the conflict that you were trying to avoid as the word gets out and circulates in a group of friends or coworkers.
    On Facebook and Twitter the damage is exacerbated because the form of communication removes the sense that another person is actually on the other end and makes you less sensitive to the impact of what you’re saying & because there is a written record of your intemperate comments. Maybe as people get more used to these social media, we will all begin to treat virtual conversation with the same basic rules as we would treat other conversations, or because of the written and instantly public elements (depending on the size of your online circle), with even greater caution.

  • darmfield

    I, too, am increasingly worried about the tweets, FB posts, and blog postings that instructors write about students and colleagues. Because I, too, use Twitter and FB as pedagogical tools, I don’t want my students to see how others respond/react/discuss students and associate that with me. I have, on more than one occasion, stopped following/unfriended those who make egregious statements that not only mar the way I look at that person, but that could be taken as a breach of student/teacher ethics.

    My philosophy is that my classroom, whether online or offline, is a safe environment. That means regarding my students even in the actions that others do in their online discussions.

  • barrydahl

    I’ve been sabotaged professionally by someone who purposely sought to do harm to my chances of getting work. Back in 2009, I tweeted about an article in the WSJ – with a small quote from the article and a (shortened) link to the article. The saboteur used the tweet against me telling others that those words were mine – probably knowing that it wasn’t true – but the others didn’t know anything about Twitter and didn’t bother to look at the link provided (I’m guessing). They decided that I wasn’t the person they wanted in that position based on the erroneous belief that I said the things that were in the WSJ article. Even if you don’t say anything “wrong,” it can come back to bite you in ways you might never imagine or believe.

  • jabberwocky12

    Advice: Before sending that email or tweet or whatever electronic communication, imagine that your boss is standing behind you, looking over shoulder. With that, go ahead.

  • imtbone

    First, thanks for reminding us all again that once expressed, particularly in writing, our “thoughts” become part of the public domain. It is imperative that we recognize no online presence is confidential, and that we furthermore teach this to our students, as well.

    That said, I have one “thought” :) regarding this statement: “[T]he words we write are attributed to us, and they can be easily misunderstood.” I am not sure how often “misunderstood” should not just be replaced with “used against us” …

  • http://twitter.com/plcorbett Patrick L. Corbett

    Thanks for the encouraging words, Judy. The situation has not been all bad. I’ve had some interesting conversations with people I never otherwise would have had occasion to talk to. I also have had a lot of empathy and support from sources who have let me know this is an error that is not mine alone. I also have a new-found wealth of personal cautionary experience to share with students in classes where online writing is part of what we cover. And, I’ve discovered that when so many of my colleagues are faced with aggressively bad policy that is designed to limit their ability to do their jobs and to make a living while doing so, I’m willing to speak out in support of them. These are baby steps and some baby steps involve falling down. Mine involve falling down the stairs.

  • teachfordamasses

    I don’t disagree with any of this cautionary advice…BUT: I also grow tired of colleagues who will not say anything anyone could possibly “not like” via email, even if it is factual and part of the normal information we need to exchange. E.g. administrators who will not discuss by email the performance of a student when the information is completely factual (“this student received a D in the class for the second time”, or “I don’t think the student should study abroad this summer since he needs to study for the MCATs” sort of thing.) We also need to have the courage to speak truth when it is true and stand behind our standards for evaluating facts (facts = stuff in the transcript, for example.) This is not a privacy/confidentiality issue; I’m talking about university email systems that are used for educational records information routinely…except some folks are so fearful and conflict-phobic that they will not make distinctions between facts and…what? It’s hard to tell that they are afraid of. These people insist on f2f contact to say anything about a student, which contributes to a culture of shame, inculcates fear of our roles as educators and grants to students a sense of our “running scared” of their power which is not good for their long-term development. Not conducive to a strong institution or a challenging and collegial educational environment.

    I wonder, too, about the commenters who avoid situations where students are discussed. While personal gossip, hostility and small-mindedness or sheer meanness are unnecessary and not helpful (except as cartharsis perhaps), the opportunity to discuss actual student behavior and the problems it reveals or creates is vital to our engaging in problem-solving as a community. I not only see nothing wrong with sharing those stories; I think it is a very productive thing to do (respecting student identity and sticking to observable facts, of course.)

  • drjeff

    It seems to me your comment may be evaluated in context of the general environment of fear created by the multiple “speech codes” currently used to evaluate communication in University settings. It is exacerbated greatly by the understanding that what you say today will be evaluated by whatever standards are in place at some later time. Anyone who doesn’t have tenure would be stupid to not be afraid, don’t you think?

  • http://twitter.com/Dan_Soschin Dan Soschin

    Thanks for sharing this article. I’ve been working with faculty and staff to help them understand the power and influence a medium like Twitter can have on their professional careers, and how it can impact their institution and students. Great advice!

  • bedegrayne

    I would suggest that someone new to social media websites not become friends with their supervisors. At my last job, I was placed in the position where I had to decide whether or not to accept the friend request from my boss. I did end up accepting it but I had to watch what I said about lots of things going on in my life while I worked there. Also, I had to learn to bite my tongue when he would post things because he was my supervisor. I don’t think I would do that again.

  • drnels

    I would suggest that no one should ever friend anyone who is beneath them on the hierarchy. I don’t friend my adjuncts, but I accept those who friend me. I don’t friend students, but I accept those who friend me. I think whoever has the most power should not put those with less power in such a situation.

  • http://www.facebook.com/willboywonder Will Saunders

    This advice is very important. The things we post online are much more valuable than anything our references may say about us. I know of several people who will say neutral things about the people who use them as a reference trying to avoid any personal liability in the event the employment incumbent doesn’t work out, so the reliability of references is quite low. The things we post online is a permanent etching, and will follow us for the rest of our lives. Even when things are purely innocent, they can be taken out of context, leaving us having to explain ourselves. So, I can only imagine how painful it would be if we had to explain our objectionable behaviors. My advice is this: if you don’t want 100% of the people that you know to see the things you’re about to post or tweet or blog online, then don’t do it.

  • hopkinsdavid

    Excellent post, and one that is close to my heart at the moment as I prepare to deliver my ‘Social Media & Networks: How to survive online (or “your [next] employer is watching you”)’ – http://www.dontwasteyourtime.co.uk/blogging/reflection-on-a-presentation-social-media-and-social-network/ to a group of first year students.

    I hope you don’t mind if I link to your post as part of the re-write?

    All the best, David

  • http://www.facebook.com/joshuarbholden Joshua Brandon Holden

    I have an account on Facebook, where the convention is to use your real name, and I don’t post anything on it I wouldn’t want students, colleagues, or supervisors to see. I have other accounts on other social media sites where the convention is to use a pseudonym, and I deliberately make it difficult to connect those to my real identity. (Although not impossible, I’m sure!) Those are the sites I use when I just have to vent online. (Disclaimer: I’m one of the people with tenure.)

  • http://twitter.com/Inverness Inverness

    The writer seems oddly focused on discrediting protesters, who had clear messages to deliver. There is a nihilistic tone to this piece, which could discuss meaningful reform, which has actually happened in Canada (check out their most recent PISA scores), Finland…But as usual, author takes a provincial approach and bemoans that all federal, state, and local reforms failed. Of course they did!  Bloomberg’s approach runs counter to what has actually worked, and embraces the kinds of reform that continues to sink states like Texas (a very poor performer on national tests). Why not study nations who have actually made progress? Hint: maybe because they have are against privitization, charters, corporate reading programs and merit pay? 

  • bscmath78

    I wonder what Stern, the author, the NAS or the audience thought caused NCLB to be a disappointment. How has it been a disappointment from their perspectives?

    I am also puzzled why NCLB was not thought to be a mess, if not a disaster for the Humanities, in the making, from the very start, given its conceptual similarity to the British Revised Code of 1862 with its “payment by results” in a union-free laissez-faire system. The Revised Code produced results that seem echoed in NCLB, except for the lack of reported gaming, deception and fraud (except for the nefarious Matthew Arnold who failed to dock failing schools in his job as school inspector). NCLB seemed designed from the beginning to require “the Curriculum of Forgetting.”

    “Pupils were subjected once again to a more rote/mechanical means of teaching which drilled them in the techniques of test-taking”

    “This meant that grants could be allocated to schools taught largely by untrained teachers because they would be cheaper than trained teachers and therefore might seem a better business proposition for the managers.”

    “‘If it is not cheap, it shall be efficient; if it is not efficient it shall be cheap.’” – Robert Lowe

    This was the promise of the Revised Code of 1862 (“payment by results”) as stated to the British House of Commons. It was a system that resulted in the elimination of all subjects that weren’t subject to testing and the elimination of anything above the standard of the testing, the lowest common denominator.  With no escape for the clever, since fast advancement would reduce the income of the school.  In fairness to the British, at least it was cheap, NCLB accomplished neither goal and did so at enormous expense.

    http://books.google.ca/books?id=2FiCvLK4ox0C&pg=PR20&dq=%22drilled+them+in+the+techniques+of+test-taking%22&hl=en&ei=f8rGTq-WMuXm0QGPtvj4Dw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22drilled%20them%20in%20the%20techniques%20of%20test-taking%22&f=false

    This was just one part of a long British tradition of expending much time and effort (and sometimes money) on counter-productive educational activities. Rote memorization having a long and hallowed tradition in UK education, exams and perceptions of merit. Helping to produce that lack of imagination that sent junior officers kicking soccer-balls towards the German machine guns, leading thousands to their deaths, on the first day of the Battle of the Somme.

  • marktropolis

    I think it’s always curious that the right wants to trumpet the former leftists-turrned-conservatives like Sol Stern or David Horowitz (especially if there were sufficiently radial to have worked at Ramparts), praising their consciousness. But when someone like Diane Ravitch makes a change in the other direction, she is criticized for being two-faced or a political opportunist.

    Not to mention the dismissive attitude towards the OWS marches – those uninformed rabble-rousers. Obviously, if the NAS gang was having their meeting at a prestigious 5th Avenue address, they *must* know what they are talking about. 

    And then the old trope that unions are by definition evil. But those guys hanging out in an over-priced few-thousand-foot apartment on 5th Ave are assumed to know what they’re talking about. Clearly address doesn’t equal knowledge, seeing as how Bloomberg lives right down the street…

  • peterwwood

    bscmath78 wonders what Sol Stern, I, and the audience at Stern’s talk think was disappointing about No Child Left Behind.  I can speak mostly for myself, though Mr. Stern did say some relevant things.  He pointed out, for example, that the NCLB set impossible goals (e.g. all students to have achieved proficiency in math and reading by 2014); that the law left it to the states to define the standards, creating an incentive to set them low; and that the emphasis on testing was an invitation to abuse that many teachers and even whole school districts responded to with a determination to cheat.

     My own view of NCLB is similar to bscmath78′s at least in regard to the humanities.  A system of rigorous testing in core subjects makes sense up to a point but inevitably puts emphasis on the easily testable and undervalues forms of knowledge and judgment that resist quantification. 

    As to the several individuals who have posted comments to the effect that I am, as one put it, “discrediting protesters,” I disagree.  The OWS movement has chosen its own tactics and messages.  These are indeed discrediting in the eyes of most observers, but I don’t see any need to insist on the point.  People can make up their own minds.

    Peter Wood

  • pianiste

    “The OWS movement has chosen its own tactics and messages.  These are indeed discrediting in the eyes of most observers…”

    Hello?

    1. Mr. Wood pulls “in the eyes of most observers” out of a hat. Exactly who constitutes the pool of “observers” of which Mr. Woods speaks? Observers who are NAS members, sure. Observers who read The Wall Street Journal, probably. Observers who are the general public? Not so fast: http://www.observer.com/2011/10/fox-news-web-poll-on-occupy-wall-street-sentiment-backfires/

    2. Of course the “tactics and messages” of a mass public protest are going to be less decorous than those of somebody giving a lecture in a zillion-dollar apartment on that part of Fifth Avenue near the Metropolitan Museum. And if you want real neat, efficient decorum, try the annual meeting of NewsCorp, at which (Harry Shearer’s “Le Show” had a tape of it) a motion was seconded and the meeting was adjourned before the vote was counted. Maybe they were distracted by all those street ruffians banging on buckets outside.

  • atana09

    Well if as a nation we want to have a condition to remedy ”No matter how important federal support of low- and moderate-income students is, the federal government cannot continue to allow so many taxpayer dollars to flow to this program without carefully examining its design” it might be advisible to check the bleeding off of resources which should have gone to direct student support.
    One definitely needed reform would be to compell the educational lenders to pay back the entirety of the money they diverted/stole during the various forms of the 9.5% scandal. In just the one incident a few years ago which was exposed by M. Oberg enough money was stolen/diverted from the government by that one firm to have paid the first year tuition for the majority of CC students in a state the size of Colorado.
    Another method would be to have much more specifity in how academe is allowed to spend grants from the government. It is not unknown for such monies to be spent on glitz or to cover for diversion of funds into glitz.
    These reforms might not cover all the pell shortfalls but at least these could replace the resources lost to the students and families which had been lost to greed and glitz.

  • fiona

    Wry laughter and groaning. It kinda figures, don’t it, that a thread about apathy has only four postings, three of them mine, and a reply that’s from a spammer. Maybe there will be more postings later, but I’m impressed that I seem to be the only one who cares about apathy, besides dear FrankSchmidt (wanna share a pretzel?) I can’t believe everyone except me and maybe Frank is so thoroughly engaged in what they’re doing that they can’t spare a few seconds to comment on apathy. Truly, we live in a hideous world of anomic dysentery. Har har. (I really need to go grade papers.)

  • greatexpectations

    Open a hootsuite/twitter thread on the projector and ask students to relate a trending topic to class content. 

  • humpty_dumpty

    ‘Cause all relevant advice has been already given. Break the routine, change the expected order of events, any change of the habitual and ordinaly stimulates alertness, it’s a geneically determined survival thing. What change exactly? That depends on who you are, who your students are, and what you’re trying to teach. Too individual for specific what-I-did-in-class-last-week’s to be relevant. 

  • busyslinky

    Caffeine, lots of caffeine.  Both for the instructor and the students. 

  • nico108

    I struggled with this all semester. I also had a class that met in the evenings and once a week. I feel like I lost the entire semester to apathy and if it had been my first semester teaching I would have decided teaching was not for me. (Thankfully, I have had great classes with the same texts in the past…)
    It wasn’t just one class but the entire semester. They didn’t like me and I didn’t like them. I tired various things to bring them back—incorporating more writing (and getting rid of writing), trying to read just with the text St John’s style, trying more lecture, posing a question…nothing seemed to work.
    I really deeply feel like I failed with them.

  • jstuntz

    I have them stand up, turn around a few times, and then they have to keep standing until they ask a good question. If the weather is good, we can go outside. (Yes, they do not retain much from an outside lesson but they weren’t getting much inside, either, in this example.) Sometime we do the hokey-pokey. Anything that is out-of-norm will revive them, especially if it is silly. If I could tell jokes well, I would do that.

  • climate_change

    Here’s 25 years of teaching experience talking…some times a particular group of students is just plain bad (apathetic, rude, uncaring, whatever).  Just forget it.  Don’t sacrifice your teaching aspirations, positive attitude, goals for tricks and games.  It won’t work, and the students will see through it.  Just move on and look forward to next semester.

    And guess what?  Sometimes a student from one of those hopeless classes will approach you years later and tell you what a great class it was.  Go figure.

  • 1hova

    Yep, you and Frank are they only ones who care.

  • neurojoe

    “The Top Ten Reasons I’m Apathetic”
    #1:

  • 11134078

     I once had an evening class that didn’t end until 10:45 PM—and we were all working adults, of course. Interestingly, the idea of a break or breaks was voted down by an overwhelming majority. Almost everyone preferred to soldier on, grimly if necessary, so as to get home and get a decent bit of sleep before having to go work early the following morning.

  • 22040058

    I’ve found that dividing students into groups and giving them a question to answer, a problem to solve, a short essay to evaluate, or almost any short assignment that can be done collaboratively will wake people up and get them focused. (I actually used this strategy successfully in my morning class today!)

  • mbmenard

    I teach critical evaluation of research and research methods–can you say potential snoozefest?

    I like to start class with a moment of mindfulness based stress reduction, to get people settled and ready to focus on the class. I also have people stand up and move around, stretch, or sometimes teach a quick qi gong breathing exercise if the energy in the room is low. I keep a bag of small individually wrapped pieces of dark chocolate to pass around the room. Sugar AND caffeine, for emergency use. 

  • obelix

    I call attention to the lack of energy in the room and ask them what’s up, and what we should all do about it. 

    I change topics. Often to something involving 80s pop tunes or a recent celebrity or political scandal (same thing, really).  Relevance is secondary to scandalousness.

    I ask an intentionally over-the-top provocative question (or pose a similar hypothetical situation related to the class topic).

    And sometimes, I simply *gasp* cancel class and ask them to come back more energized the next week.

    Here’s one I haven’t tried yet, but intend to soon: Ask everyone to report what they’re looking at on their laptop right now.

  • The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • 1255 Twenty-Third St, N.W.
  • Washington, D.C. 20037