$2-Billion Federal Program Could Be ‘Windfall’ for Open Online Learning

That logo looks like a little dude with a briefcase hanging himself.

The aim of the grant is to generate free access materials that people can use to teach themselves at their own pace, i.e. programmed instruction. Automate the feedback, embed interactivity in the software, cut out the (need to pay) instructors, and call it learner-centered. The weaknesses of this technology were already evident in the 1970s. Let’s recall what we learned about it 30-40 years ago: 1. Programmed instruction can be used to help students with similar needs, interests and abilities. 2. The learning context, objectives, and materials need to be uniform and structured. 3. So it can be useful as a supplement to a course (like math homework assignments). Can it replace inter-personal instruction? In some circumstances, yes – up to a point – but there are a lot of hidden issues. For example, a course with the capacity to deal with human minds (even in limited contexts with structured materials) costs more than most people realize. Why? Because effective higher order learning demands complex approaches such as repetition, varied practice, discussion, individualized feedback and exercises. Consequently, most programmed instruction is only suitable for lower-order learning. Also, instead of teachers intervening and facilitating engagement, students bear the motivational responsibility for learning (including self-management) almost entirely. Thirdly, automated feedback cannot cover the multitude of challenges that humans encounter while learning, such as faulty or incomplete concepts, slips in applying procedures (for example when solving problems), similar problems presented in different ways, and transfer of learning from one problem to other problems or contexts. These diverse human issues multiply exponentially, and only a live instructor can deal with the eventualities. So good courses (contact and online) recognize the need for live instructors and for limiting class size.

In our case, we admittedly have a high turn around for adjuncts. We also do not host our own website. Therefore, the amount of changes needed semester by semester to the web hosts and designers would end up costing us more money than spendable.

I do appreciate you telling us you were thankful of the professional responses, and do take us seriously.

Honestly, none of us are ashamed of our credibility. We do have strict standards that must be met with the accreditation body as to who can teach what.

As I said, I am not about others, but frequently contacting the outsourced web person is not where we want our money spent. We never even considered it an issue.

It should be pointed out that accreditation simply means an institution has met minimal standards, and in and of itself indicates nothing more than a minimal quality level. I don’t consider it to be elitist to compare the relative worth of a Ph.D. from Johns Hopkins and one from one of the lesser lights, for-profit or not for-profit. Odds are the degree from Johns Hopkins is the far greater indicator of quality. Too many for-profits emphasize quick and easy (never mind the expense), which hardly speaks to being seriously concerned about quality of outcomes.

Great questions on this issue. I have no deep understanding of any behind the scenes decision-making but I will offer some suggestions based on my observation.

1) Turnover. As I have mentioned in previous posts, I observed the turnover to be fairly significant, and especially among the most credentialed faculty. Whether it is a matter of too much time/effort/money to dedicate resources on updating a revolving webpage of faculty, or some other motivation I believe that this is a factor.

2) Flexibility. If for-profits use a mixture of academics with great CVs as well as folks who came up through their ranks and did not much else, it would be (how can I say this without coming across as elitist?) hard for the credentialed faculty to interact on a level playing field with these “peers”. (It would be hard for me, and I don’t think I’m all that different from others from the traditional perspective)

3) Priorities. At traditional universities, the faculty ARE the institution. Although current economics, as well as bad behavior from within our ranks has threatened this power seat of late, the faculty are the cornerstone of the traditional community college or university. This is most definitely not the case at most for-profits that I have dealt with (2 different ones). This is not a judgment call here (though I do have a strong opinion, it’s just not for this discussion), but a reality. Faculty at the for-profits are expendable and not looked at as much more than paid staff. They do NOT hold the stature or clout that we do at traditional institutions. Some may say “long overdue” and in many cases, I would agree. I have seen too many cases of pompous, tenured, lazy and useless faculty receiving bloated salaries at traditional institutions while “teaching” 1 or 2 classes and doing zero research while the underpaid non-TT faculty run their butts off. However, this treatment or lack of respect (in the traditional sense) comes at a price. My belief is that some of the best faculty eventually leave the for-profits for employmentopportunities that provide more of what most people interested in acdademia are seeking, which includes some level of deference and respect. I also think that as one of the poster in a previous article noted, there are ample candidates waiting in the wings to teach, so there is no shortage of available warm bodies with the minimum requirements to fill the job.

4) Adjuncts are often not listed at many colleges – traditional or non-traditional.While there are always lists and BIOs and CVs for full-time faculty at the traditional institutions, the droves of adjuncts that are increasing in numbers across this nation in ALL forms of academe are usually not listed.

You state “If for-profits want the same legitimacy as traditional universities, they have to be able to answer those questions.”. Is it possible that many of us are expecting that this is what the for-profits want, when in fact they could care less?

Lastly, your query “If I were a prospective student, I would want to know where my future teachers received their M.A.s, M.S.’s, MBAs, Ph.D.s because that would allow me to assess the rigor of their academic training and to estimate the quality of training I’d likely receive from them”. I doubt that this question is prominent in the minds of the target audiences of the for-profits I have worked with – not meant as a perjorative, just the reality of the population. I believe that students who would ask that question would not be looking at attending a for profit.

Donoghue: And I would hope that those who fail to measure up to accreditation agencies are punished (though I can’t help noting that the GAO report of November 10, 2010 notes that at a for-profit Associate’s program in Florida, an “undercover applicant was falsely told that the college was accredited by the same organization that accredits Harvard and the University of Florida”).

Regionally accredited for-profit colleges operating large online programs train their admissions representatives to drop names of Ivy league institutions like Harvard and Yale when explaining their regional accreditation to students during the psychologically manipulative sales pitch. These lines and accreditation comparisons are a part of the training for the “sales job”.

Donoghue: I would argue that the differences between the two are night and day, and that the former is a far more meaningful credential. It’s a matter of opinion, to be sure, but I cannot imagine a graduate education without face-to-face interaction.

It is appalling that for-profit colleges offer degrees in Health Care and “Crime Scene Investigation” without requiring student ever step foot into a classroom or clinical setting. As a Health Care consumer, would you want to be cared for by someone who has never set foot in a classroom? The saddest part of this is that you probably don’t have to worry too much about this because many of those students are going to be saddled with debt and no job.

Is this supposed to be a defense of the GAO report, that its conclusions didn’t change? Nixon concluded that he was “not a crook”, but the evidence led America to a different conclusion. The GAO report was a political hatchet job. Where is the outrage?

I’ve taught in both environments. I have to support Frank here – there is absolutely zero comparison between a discussion board discussion and an in-class discussion.

There are a vast number of differences between F2F and asynch online discussion forums. In F2F the student has the option to participate or not. I suppose the occasional prod from an instructor can go a long way to getting great participation. In F2F discussions thoughts are formulated very quickly to respond real time to questions posed by instructors or in a group setting, a good thing if you ask me. At times all students participate, at other times conversation is dominated by the noisy few.

In an online forum all students have the opportunity to contribute in a way that allows them to repond quickly (same as F2F), or take time to reflect and respond in a very thoughtful manner (this does nto discredit the quick responses in F2F as thoughtful, it just gives the different styles of learner preferences an additional outlet for contribution to conversation). Based on my experience, there is more classwide contribution in online forums versus F2F.

Both modalities have strengths and weaknesses. It is my belief that a good F2F instructor does not necessarily make a good online instructor. I also believe that a good F2F instructor isn’t any better, more important, more credentialed, etc. than a good online teacher.

It is my belief that a traditional instructor that discredits the online instructor is likely a) threatened by the changing role of the instructor in higher ed in the online forum b) just isn’t good at teaching online. The good news is that the traditional institution will not go away, so traditional instructors will only need to adapt to the degree that ther traditional institutions adapt. There will always be ample opportunity for those that desire a traditional education. Online, or non traditional education will not go away because of the enormous demand from the non-traditional market seeking degrees to which traditional ed can not accomodate.

PR Spin. Might as well have been written by Harris Miller.

My understanding is that, in some for-profits, courses are sometimes designed by one instructor and all other instructors teach the “same course” (same lecture outlines, same class activities, same exams). In this case, one could argue that the credentials of the faculty “designer” are more important than the credentials of the various instructors who happen to teach the course in a particular term. An analogy to “traditional” higher ed might be that the credentials of graduate students teaching sections of freshman comp or algebra probably aren’t on the website either.

The Nov. 10 GAO report you cite is actually a substantial revision to the original report released in August. The revisions are so significant that they call into question the veracity of the entire report. The person at the GAO who led that report was reassigned. Does that tell you anything? The recruiter’s comment is true…some for-profit institutions are regionally accredited, just like elitist Ivy League schools and other traditional institutions.

I think that you are missing the point. Most of the students who come to our intuitions are primarily concerned with a career. More important than the academic credentials of our faculty they are concerned with the potential employers we work with and the applicability of the training that receive to the requirements of the job to which they aspire. If they are interested in network security, they would much rather be instructed by someone with a masters from ABC University who has had 10-20 years of experience as security administrator for Master Card then they would a PHD in information science from Harvard who has never been responsible for network security in a real world environment. We take on the challenge of educating those who need a much higher degree of personal attention by faculty and student support services than those students who are successful at a traditional 4 year public or private not for profit. To reach the President’s goal of a more educated work force there has to be a place for all forms of education to serve their niche. Come and visit most for profit institutions and I think you will be impressed with the quality and dedication of our faculty

The scenario that you describe (same lecture outlines, class activities, exams) is also commonly found at non-profit private and state universities–both for face-to-face and online courses. In fact, having “master” online courses is commonly portrayed by accrediting bodies and professional associations as a “best practice.”

@mathgrace: I think that someone like yourself, obviously educated and capable of evaluating your options and making a choice that best meets your needs is a non-issue. Different institutions meet different needs, and the state college degree may fall short of the ivy league degree for seeking/attaining certain positions just as a for-profit degree may fall short as compared to a non-profit state college degree for other positions and circumstances. These are decisions that we make, each of us, based on what we want. Sometimes we just need the “M”, or the “D” and it matters little WHERE we get it as long as it’s a legitimate (accredited) institution with more good press than bad because our work history is solid and speaks for itself.

I mention good press vs. bad because right or wrong, the perception by a hiring committee that a degree is from a diploma mill-type school will not open any doors for you, whether it is an accurate perception or not. However, this is still a matter for the savvy consumer to weigh and evaluate based on their needs.

The problems in the for-profit sector that creates the “bad press” I mentioned above are those that talk unsavvy, clueless and incapable (illiterate) people into borrowing tens of thousands of dollars to enroll in a program through fast-talking promises of great jobs and good salaries, down-playing the amount of work required and the level of academic abiity needed to be successful.

Someone, somewhere needs to start speaking truth to these victims. Whether this is in public-service announcements that run right after the “college in your pajamas” ads, or curricular supplements distributed to target school districts where the majority of students are going to graduate still functionally illiterate, and vulnerable to these scams schools.

I fully support – without much reservation – the for-profit sector that teaches mechanics, cosmetology, and other vocational skills. They are often better at this than other educational institutions.

I object heartily to the for-profits who promise ill-prepared, illiterate and clueless people a “degree”. The degree – like home onwership – has become a status symbol. It represents making it into the middle class (what’s left of it, anyway) and this is a powerful aphrodesiac to people who have been on the bottom rungs of society for generations. This too often translates into untenable debt, more hopelessness, and no job on the other end of the nightmare.

Until the so-called “good actors” of the for-profit industry close ranks and clean out their own house, this perception, and the stench that follows it, will remain.

Although I agree with a great deal of what you say regarding for-profit schools (I am an adjunct at one), I take issue with a few comments. Many of my graduate school professors were masters at “smoke and mirror” educational practices, and most of the activities to which I was exposed while earning my Master’s degree were better suited to an elementary classroom. I accrued a great deal of financial aid debt…but most of my learning was done outside of the classroom…through reading, research, and collaboration with colleagues (who were not enrolled in the classes). I attended a Cal State for my teaching credentials and Master’s degree.

Referring to the students who enroll in for-profit schools as victims is inaccurate. For the most part, many of these individuals do not read (or cannot) read the contract they sign. Many, however, do expect a 4.0 with very little effort, then are somehow surprised when they are unprepared for the workforce. When I was first hired, I taught composition classes. The number of students who cut and pasted directly from a web site was staggering. I spent most of my time documenting plagiarism, marking zeros, and then defending myself against charges of racism because students had failed composition….because I didn’t “like” this or that ethnic group. When I moved to in class writing assignments, attendance fell..and yes, attendance at a for-profit is the golden rule (yuck). After a few quarters of this academic bile, I was removed from teaching composition classes. For those readers who are thinking, “why didn’t she just teach them to write?” …I did…Countless hours (need I mention uncompensated?) developing lessons, web sites, demonstration lessons, alternative readings, etc.

There were students who clamored for my classes, but they were outnumbered by those who whimpered that the work was too much (150 words?)…and the full time instructor who now teaches all of the sections of composition sends the students on to upper division classes…; having handed out quarterly A’s like running water; while rarely reading submitted assignments. She justifies her actions with comments like “you have to think of yourself.”

As to the “promises”…yes…this is a practice (by recruiters) I detest…and it does happen. But sometimes, the people who have contributed the least to their education are those who complain of broken promises. They brag about the 4.0…until they receive rejection after refjection in the job market because they are unprepared. Most refuse to do any work outside of the classroom (does anyone really believe he/she can become marketable with 3 classes each quarter, that meet for 3 hours each, once a week? Yes, reading and writing skills are horrible (for the most part), but tutoring sessions go unattended, and support web sites untapped. I would like to see some programs go away, because they are peopled with the marginally literate “entitled”. But….let’s face it…it’s a for-profit school. The cash cow moos loudly.

We have some incredible instructors, both full-time and adjunct on our campus, and they drive themselves with every class. But some students sit in class, shielding their cell phones with their backpacks (I am a former middle school teacher..and know all the tricks)…and then when a quiz is failed, blame the instructor. Most of us teach in a fish bowl (the classrooms have windows facing the hallway), so anyone walking by can see what is going on.

In reading the posts last night, someone mentioned that true students do not care what degree you have as long as you know what you are teaching and that students can learn, and this I have found to be true. Those who believe that a PhD in 16th century English Literature or Creative Writing and Poetry qualifies someone to teach expository writing is usually sadly mistaken.

As an advocate of vocational schools, and the trades, I wish we (in the technical for-profits) would do exactly what we are supposed to do…which is to support those students who need business and technical writing, and the skills that support the technical fields in our programs of study. Our students did not enroll so they could “write” about global warming, gay marriage, or abortion. Pretending to be somethng we are not, is sad…and the reputation we have earned is often richly deserved.

Darn…now I’m depressed…I need to review résumés of students who have “earned” 4.0s in their classes…but cannot write a Cover Letter or format a résumé.

The author’s assumption is so flawed:

I would want to know where my future teachers received their M.A.s, M.S.’s, MBAs, Ph.D.s because that would allow me to assess the rigor of their academic training and to estimate the quality of training I’d likely receive from them.

The ability to teach has nothing to do with the degree granting institution. Only if one was interested in working in a narrowly focused pursuit would it matter that the teacher had a great depth of knowledge.

Again, you are overlooking several important points. One being that many defenders of the for-profit colleges who have been lashing out at the GAO report, passing now defeated amendments attempting to block the Gainful Employment rule and alleging short-seller conspiracies have received large campaign contributions from the Career College Association and for-profit colleges:

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11023/1120085-298.stm

http://higheredwatch.newamerica.net/blogposts/2011/breaking_news_house_education_committee_chairman_kline_cashes_in-46247

I actually agree with most of what you have written. My experiences with students was similar if not exact to what you have written, but from the perspective of a different discipline. I have a very thick file full of student emails complaining (in really poor grammar!) about me being the first teacher to give them anything less than an “A”, which was downright scary.

They cheated, blatantly. Most could not read, write or speak in any manner close to what would have allowed them an INTERVIEW for an entry level job in the fields they believed they were studying to enter as professionals. They were lazy and believed that I was being too strict if I made them actually follow the instructions in the lame and rigor-lacking assignments. They had also very often been fed a continual line of crap by instructors who were either just as dumb (see my rants about these places hiring their own) or just plain lazy and had graded their work to that point as stellar (also frightening).

I still think, however, that although they expect a lot in exchange for very little work that they have been exploited and manipulated and sold a bill of goods that reinforces their ridiculous and uninformed beliefs. I take umbrage with a system that allows federal money to be used to trick people into signing on for tens of thousands of dollars that will result in no new career, and a lot of financial heart ache.

I know the students are dreadful, but they are not the villains entirely. They are victims of the neverending welfare state that encourages dependence instead of teaching independence; they are victims of poor K-12 education systems; they are victims of dysfunctional family structures where their parents had few tools to teach them what a lot of us posting on this forum learned around the dining room table; and as adults, they are victims of federally-subsidized scam artists selling them snake oil disguised as a college degree.

…and yes there are also problems in traditional higher ed and K-12. I happen to think that the for-profits have elevated the bad behaviors to a high art form.

I think we’re agreeing here. The “bad-press” for-profits give a bad name to the schools that are accomplishing good things at the for-profit level. However, we never get to hear about the “good” non-profits. But I suppose we can blame this on the sensationalistic quality that news has taken on these days. Who wants to hear about the community service or service derived programs developed by students at my school? They’re much more interested in default rates at schools with television commercials of students in their pjs.

I disagree with your assertion, “students aren’t looking for faculty credentials.” I’d like to know where you got that list of what they do want- some consumer oriented market research? And, even if there is some survey somewhere, is it the mission of higher education to deliver consumer products that are “what students want?” I would tell your daughter, “Get with it, Sis!”

Many of these comments conflate for-profit with online. I believe those are two separate debates. For-profit abuse and misuse of online course delivery, however, is included with all the other abuses, of students, of financial aid policies, of insider trading, and of course the abuse that is the actual topic of Donoghue’s essay, the abuse of faculty.

The question Donoghue is asking here, “why are faculty credentials so difficult to find on for-profit colleges’ websites?” I agree with him in many of his points and think that it likely relates directly to:

Marketing research that shows it as unnecessary to pulling in target market consumers, so why spend money where it won’t show ROI;

De-professionalization of college faculty, reducing them to the level of “workers” or even, “robo-teachers” such that anyone is replaceable, interchangeable, and maybe ultimately, unnecessary;

Economies of scale that can be realized with one person teaching multiple sections of the same course or sections with really large enrollments;

Divide and conquer strategies in the workforce, especially but not only in the online environment, since teachers never meet, do not serve on committees, have no union, no academic senate, no way to join forces to have their views heard or to oppose initiatives that would harm students or weaken rigor or compromise the fundamentals of a subject discipline;

Wage reductions made possible by hiring the teachers who are at the level of bare minimally qualified;

Part time faculty, as contingent workers, provide the ultimate flexibility in quickly changing focus to target what ever programs or courses are most profitable, popular or trendy, allowing quick expansion or contraction of enrollment to maximize profits;

Possibly some benefit in hiring out of state workers for online courses over in state workers- I’m not an expert in employment law, but I do know that state taxes vary considerably for workers, and I’m guessing the same is true for corporations.

Not recognizing faculty clearly indicates their non-professional even non-entity status.

I’m a current student at Walden University (and on the way out at the end of the class I’m in currently). I’ve been searching for the page with the faculty credentials for months, so thank you for linking that so that I could figure out where the faculty credentials for my own program are. You may be right about the environment of the PhD level programs, but as a current undergrad I have to tell you that the rigor and intensity of the program are not at all what I expected. I feel like the time I’ve spent at Walden (and the $20,000 in debt, ouch) was wasted. Many of the classes I’ve taken I could have passed prior to starting high school. I was in the same boat as you, living somewhere that didn’t offer the program I’m looking for, and that’s how I ended up there. But don’t you wonder how it’s going to look to someone when you try to USE the PhD you’re working so hard for?

The academic qualifications of the faculty that teach at my college are not displayed on our website mainly because our students don’t really care about their academic qualifications. Our website is a marketing tool. Our clientele is different than a traditional university. We direct the information that our clientele uses to make a decision to contact us only. That’s the purpose of that website. We do not use our website to inflate our own egos. Nor is it a Commons site for our student body or faculty to socialize.

I wonder why McDonalds doesn’t tout the qualifications of it’s cooks on its website. Or the car dealer does not put the academic standing of its fleet department on its website. It really seems like an irrelevant discussion. We have yet to discuss the differences of the types of colleges and the types of students who attend each type of college. Without that discussion your assumptions are irrelevant. You assume that all students seek the same information that you seek.

I think it is wonderful that you care so deeply about the qualifications of the faculty at the schools that you chose to attend and those you chose to work at. Those are YOUR personal choices. And I would expect a person of your nature would not chose to attend or teach at my college, or even a University of Phoenix. Are you insinuating though that if those colleges do not meet your standards of choice that no other student should chose them either? You did admit a snobbish attitude and I appreciate that you recognize that about yourself. But why do you feel a need to denigrate those who you believe to be beneath your stature? How does it benefit you?

I am not embarrassed by my faculty. I am quite proud of their accomplishments and ability to transfer their knowledge to the next generation of technicians. I have a few with some very impressive academic backgrounds and I have a few who dropped out of high school, obtained a GED, took a few Community College classes, spent 20 years in an industry and are now helping another generation achieve their own start in life. Is that start a dream? I doubt it. I would venture to guess that many of our student’s parents dreamed of them becoming a doctor or lawyer or actor or musician or taxi driver. Most of our students have a dream of someday balancing a family budget and maybe sending their own kids on to a state college.

Reality is there are many different dreams and some complete nightmares who are perfectly happy with a technical education or a PhD from a Kaplan that allows a working adult to further his education without the glamor of a pompous faculty, and qualified him for a promotion that gets him into a new tax category. And none of that makes your dreams any less relevant. But those are your dreams. Don’t fool yourself into thinking that everyone has those same desires.

The post by Lane and Kinser notes that institutions are responsible to assure their own quality.  And that is just what Empire State College does.
Our program in Tirana, which enrolls about 110 students per year, is overseen by a regional coordinator based on Prague and a full-time coordinator on-site in Tirana.  The regional coordinator, formerly a full-time, tenured faculty member and associate dean at a college center in New York, visits the Tirana program once a term with a team of New York based senior faculty, and at other times as needed.  The team meets with students to help them with degree plans, advise on course selection, observe classroom instruction, meet with local faculty and provide faculty development programs.  The team visit also provides an opportunity for the faculty of both institutions to collaborate on course and program development.  The regional coordinator reviews and approves faculty who teach Empire State College courses. 
The international programs office at Empire State College’s administrative headquarters in Saratoga Springs NY provides further academic oversight.  A faculty curriculum committee reviews and, if appropriate, approves all courses and curriculum, for Tirana and any other international program.  Each student – in the Tirana program and any other Empire State College program – prepares a degree plan and a rationale to justify the selected studies.  An assessment committee of faculty reviews these documents for quality and conformity to academic policy.  There is a second review of the student’s academic record in the graduation approval process. 
The students, the faculty in Tirana and the leadership of the partner college are well-known to us.  The program is not something that we pack up in a box and ship overseas; we have full-time staff in daily communication with Tirana students.  None of this is a secret. 
Marjorie W. Lavin, vice provost, Empire State College

This is indeed a long-standing issue for communicating science to the public: how much detail is necessary to be “correct”? And does it matter if details are incorrect?  To the first I answer “not much”.  The level of detail a scientist demands for assurances is way more than necessary to get most points. You don’t need to know calculus to understand that things can’t go faster than light. 

To the second I answer, it does matter, but not for understanding’s sake. Most people don’t understand variation, uncertainty, or even replication, but they do understand “being wrong”. Authors like Lehrer risk general disbelief – of everything – by being called out. If he’s wrong about blue walls, what else in the book, or even the science, is false?  (As a scientist as well as normal person, I think the ‘blue wall’ conclusion is excessive generalization.) Scientists and science are likely to be painted with the same blue brush in many people’s minds. 

Of course, if no one notices until someone like Chabris point out such errors, maybe it won’t matter much.  Perhaps we should just prohibit scientists from reading and reviewing each other’s popular works.

accuracy and completeness keep science out of reach of the layperson, we need writers who can distill the information into broadly digestible fare.  I can see a critic making sure facts are straight, but asking a writer to include every possible permutation should be saved for a dissertation.

But wrong is wrong!  I frequently have to correct students in my classes who think they know everything about a topic because it is in the lay media.   I have to point out that it is not as simple as generally portrayed, only to have a student harrumph and quote a book in popular culture.

 Right.  On Star Trek the writers will throw in the occasional scientific term to explain some phenomenon, and I don’t see how imprecise scientific writing, as engaging as it might be, is any better than an episode where Captain Kirk fights an energy being named Melvar.

 Agreed.  Lehrer should be jealous of Chabris.

Can’t you have good writing and correct information?

 No, it’s not arrogance. He just knows better than everyone else. Clearly.

 Some of this discussion reminds me of Sheila Tobias’ “They’re Not Dumb, They’re Different” about retaining students in the natural sciences who leave for the social sciences or humanities more for “academic cultural” reasons than intellectual. Scientific writing, more than specialized writing in other disciplines, is often inaccessible to lay audiences because of unfamiliar technicalities that only fellow specialists can appreciate. It is possible to be accurate rather than sloppy–but there will always be a cultural gap between journalists (even those who write well about science) and scientists about the need to keep the reader’s interest vs. the need to avoid going beyond the facts…

Instead, it’s a blurb from Gladwell that says Lehrer “knows more about science than a lot of scientists.”

-

This makes my brain hurt and that Gladwell seriously holds this up as a belief causes me to lose a lot of respect for Gladwell.