I so wanted to have something intelligent to say about this Op-Ed piece in the New York Times that points out with blunt eloquence just how over the highest levels of higher education are, but all I could manage were utterances like, “Damn…that’s fu**ed up.” One is hard-pressed to add any worthwhile bits to a succinctly harsh statement such as this:

Graduate education is the Detroit of higher learning. Most graduate programs in American universities produce a product for which there is no market (candidates for teaching positions that do not exist) and develop skills for which there is diminishing demand (research in subfields within subfields and publication in journals read by no one other than a few like-minded colleagues), all at a rapidly rising cost (sometimes well over $100,000 in student loans).

See? Ruthlessly to the point. And, sadly, it’s true, which means that as much as I’d love to rail against it, all would be in vain (much like spending exorbitant amounts of time and money earning a PhD).

If you’re out to get the big letters after your name for your own personal thrills and feelings of satisfaction, knock yourself out. I’m pro-education; it’s really not possible to learn too much. However, if you’re out to get the biggest degree they’ve got so as to guarantee yourself a tenured professorship, please consider walking away from your library carrel for an afternoon and taking in some fresh air, common sense and reality. Good luck out there, people.

Posted by Alexa Harrington

image credit: alain pilon

I’m addicted (addicted, I tell you!) to learning. I love school; I can’t get enough of it. My retirement plan (if buying a tropical island doesn’t work out due to melting glaciers and disappearing archipelagos) is to start right back up with my college education again. I don’t require more degrees; it’s not a matter of whoever-dies-with-the-most-letters-after-their-name-wins, but the process of absorbing knowledge makes me happy, and isn’t that what all retirees are striving for?

Since the economy blows and, thanks to all the advancements in the medical field, I will be living a really long-ass life, I will probably never be able to afford to retire as extravagantly as I may have once hoped. My grandmother, who is a doctor and was raised a Catholic, possesses an incredibly intelligent, humorous, and awfully acerbic wit. She has always maintained that we can all blame overpopulation on doctors and the Pope. Seeing as how she’s still alive (modern medicine and a bunch of doctors saved her ass) and has still not been struck down by lightning (if she was wrong about the Pope, wouldn’t someone have done something about it by now?), I’m going to have to agree with her.

Fortunately for me, I have found a way to continue my knowledge-absorbing dreams for free. UniversitiesandColleges.org has a compiled the be-all end-all of free higher education courses: The Master List of Free Online College Courses. I’m not a Catholic, but I can still hear the angels singing (maybe they’re Ivory Tower angels).

Posted by Alexa Harrington

image source

That’s the cute and tiny version of this image, which shows graduation rates in America’s 50 largest cities in an awesome coast-to-coast viewing. The data for the image came from the EPE Research Center and their 2009 Report: Cities in Crisis.

The numbers are dismal (only about half of high school students in those cities graduate) but have begun to show some improvement. Included in the findings are the economic consequences of dropping out. Not to ruin the ending, but it turns out that it’s better for the students, their future career- and education-earning potential, and the local economy if they earn their high school diplomas.

Posted by Alexa Harrington

image credit: Nicolas Rapp/Associated Press

I wouldn’t necessarily classify myself as a teetotaler, but I’m fairly certain everyone who knows me wouldn’t hesitate to slap that label across my sober forehead. It’s not that I have anything against the imbibing of drugs or alcohol, I just haven’t ever tended toward any sort of relationship with chemicals. And yet, even freakishly squeaky-clean me has seriously entertained the idea of dipping into the family of oomph-producing drugs.

On two separate occasions I gave at least an hour’s worth of deep thought to obtaining and using something speedier than caffeine. (Dork that I am, I was immediately shaken out of these moments of idiocy when I realized I hadn’t the faintest idea how one goes about acquiring any substance stronger than green tea.) Both of these flirtations with chemical dependency occurred when I was in school and was so buried I felt like I was at the bottom of the cold, dark sea and I would never have the time nor the energy to finish all of my papers, labs, exams and assignments in time to swim to the surface and breathe again.

When the mental image you have of yourself at the daily grind is a fully-clothed you walking along the sea floor, dragging your responsibilities behind you, and everything is cold and dark and devoid of breathable oxygen and the weight of the water above is crushing the life out of you, it’s probably time for some reevaluation. Or, for the modern-day super student, it’s time for some ass-kicking neuroenhancing drugs. Margaret Talbot has an eye-opening article in the New Yorker that makes me feel like I have simultaneously missed out on being a more incredible version of me, and have dodged a big fat, expensive, chemical-laced bullet with crazy numbers of strings attached.

Previous Posts and Further Reading:

Joe Schmoe, B.S.*, M.S.*, M.D.*, Ph.D.*
More Students Turning Illegally To ‘Smart’ Drugs
Brain Enhancers: ‘Professor’s Little Helper’?

Posted by Alexa Harrington


image source

This week’s Teaching Carnival is hosted by AcademHack. The theme is The Future of Education and is worth a thorough perusal. The most intriguing string of thoughts were Jim Moulton’s post about technology in education and what he observed on a recent trip as to India’s attitudes toward education (they are not effing around), and the follow-up comment Rajagopal Yadavalli made as someone who grew up in India, went to the U.S. for university, and is now living back in India. The differences between the two countries vis-á-vis how the students are taught and how they ultimately learn to learn are fascinating.

From Jim Moulton’s post at The Future of Ed Blog:

I did not see technology playing a widespread role in Indian private schools. Any success they have in producing academically strong students must, therefore, come from someplace else. Sure, some of it is simply a game of numbers – with enough people you will have some succeed to high levels. But as I became more aware of “how things worked” in these schools, I came to believe that the following things make a difference:

>>…hard work. Period. Show up, listen, engage, do the work. Including half a day on Saturday.

>>…discipline and organization, as in, “don’t question authority – just do the assignments.” As a result work gets done. By all. And if one does not want to do the work, that 1.2 billion population figure assures someone waiting to take any seat vacated. This discipline was clear in the teacher ranks as well, as they stood when I entered the room, and would stand to answer any question I might put to them during the workshop.

>>…parents’ willingness to sacrifice material comfort to provide the best education they can afford for their children. The vast majority of Indian families do not live beyond their means.

>>…internalization of guilt by the children. Their academic success is a responsibility to their family, and it must be met. Sadly, this guilt was negatively reflected in the several accounts I read of young people taking their lives following release of major exam results.

>>…education as an industry. School, the right school, is heavily marketed as the key to happiness and success. Learning is heavily marketed, and the marketing works. With 1.2 billion people, one is constantly confronted by what it means to not have education. I have to think that a desire to not be part of the endless stream of unskilled citizenry makes it easy for the marketing to stick…

As I return from my trip, I am reminded that there is no digital solution to a fundamentally human challenge, and education is just that. Opportunities to learn must be available, but for the opportunity to translate into accomplishment at any level the individual must want it, the family must want it, and the culture as a whole must want it. The value of the “product” must be clear to all.

From Rajagopal Yadavalli’s Comment:

Interesting analysis presented here on Indian education. As someone who was born and brought up in India, and then studied and lived in USA, and now is back in India.. I completely agree with Jim here.


The importance of education is cultural. The middle class has shown the way over the last 20 years and now more and more believe that success in academics is the key to material success.

… The pressure on the students to do well academically is also all pervasive. As they approach their high school it starts to peak and is at its worst when they attempt the various entrance tests that determine their acceptability into the professional undergraduate programs.


However, what I find missing in the overall process is the application of knowledge. I think today’s education should be more focused on ability to find the information, determine its accuracy and then the ability to apply it to solve everyday problems. I do not find this happening yet in the Indian schools. Most schools are still focused on learning by rote – where discipline can make it happen.


As an graduate student in US University, I was amazed at the knowledge of undergrad students and their ability to solve real life problems with their learning from class. The application of knowledge is not something that is taught at schools in India. This is where the American Universities score big and why they are still the most sought schools of learning.

Posted by Alexa Harrington

image source

Washington State University is rounding out their already-successful business degree program with an Online MBA degree starting Fall 2009. It’ll start out as a part-time program for the first year, but by Fall 2010, it will be available as a part-time or a full-time degree program.

The program is geared toward professionals already working, so WSU has a day-job-friendly system set up for students who work all day and would have inevitable scheduling conflicts:

The Online MBA program consists of 39 semester credit hours and is comparable to WSU’s Accelerated One-Year MBA offered on the Pullman campus. Like all WSU College of Business academic programs, the Online MBA is accredited by The Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business (AACSB). Courses are offered completely online, with no campus visits required.

[Mark] Fuller noted that WSU Online MBA courses are accessible 24/7 in an asynchronous format, allowing maximum flexibility for working professionals. “We use a variety of online tools, which allows significant interaction between faculty and students,” he said. “Those same tools allow students to participate in group projects and team presentations.”

In addition to 24/7 course access and tech support, Online MBA students will have support services, including advising, financial aid and career counseling, registration assistance and help maneuvering the WSU system.

Further Reading and Resources:

WSU Online MBA Degree
Online MBA Programs
Consider a Well-Rounded MBA

Posted by Alexa Harrington

While on the one hand we’ve got a major teacher retirement upheaval about to hit the American school system, during which we’ll be losing a third of the current teaching force, on the other hand we’ve got a sketchy economy that’s sending boatloads of career-types running for the safety (I use the term loosely) of the business end of a classroom. Stock markets can crash, but barring a new world order, there will always be schools full of kids to teach.

For anyone out there who might be considering a career in the educating arts, please read this collection of short pieces in the New York Times written by three teachers, one professor of education, and one economist, about how hard teaching really is and the fact that, just because there’s a shortage coming down the pike, it doesn’t mean landing and keeping a teaching job is going to be a piece of cake.

You might also want to read Teacher Man, by Frank McCourt, the most realistic, unromantic, non-Hollywood memoir about McCourt’s career as an English teacher in the New York public school system. It’s amazing and beautiful, but it would never serve to convince anyone to become a teacher unless the urge to educate was present in their bones prior to reading the book and had managed to stay put through to the last page. Teacher Man does not do for the teaching profession what Top Gun did for naval fighter pilots. It doesn’t make the teaching profession sexy in the slightest; it makes it terrifying and frustrating and also a tad eviscerating. (Is it possible to only be a tad eviscerated?)

Teacher Man is a beautiful story because Frank McCourt is who he is and because he wrote the way he did about how he felt about his students and his teaching of them. No other teacher will have the same relationships or career experiences, so for god’s sake don’t go becoming a teacher so you can be the next Frank McCourt. He writes honestly enough (he’s painfully blunt) that I feel certain reading his book will serve as an excellent chaff separator.

Further Reading:

A ‘Tsunami’ of Boomer Teacher Retirements is on the Horizon
As Economy Falters, Interest in Teaching Surges
Report Envisions Shortage of Teachers as Retirements Escalate
‘Relentless Pursuit’: A Year Teaching in America
Alternate Route to Teaching is Now a Road More Traveled
Education Degree Resources

Posted by Alexa Harrington

image source

Harvard’s science libraries are being mushed under one super-efficient “administrative umbrella,” Harvard College Library (HCL). By July the first four will have been assimilated: the Physics, Statistics, Chemistry and Chemical Biology, and Mathematics departmental libraries, with the remaining science libraries to follow suit later.

The administrative-types have assured everyone that the plans are strictly for the sake of efficiency and have nothing whatsoever to do with the $220-million deficit.

HCL spokeswoman Beth Brainard said the plans for consolidation were “not associated with the budget.”

Even before the financial crisis hit Harvard, library officials had been entertaining the idea of revamping the structure of the science libraries to create greater efficiency, she said.

The consolidation of services and collections across the science library services would facilitate interdisciplinary research and economize the purchasing, licensing, and processing of materials, according to Bloxham’s statement.

But Brainard did not deny the possibility of cost-reduction measures. Given the current fiscal picture, the merging of the science libraries under one administrative umbrella is likely part of a concerted effort to shave costs, according to two library staffers interviewed yesterday.

Library staff, who tend toward decent levels of intelligence, aren’t buying it and are mentally preparing themselves for possible layoffs. Sometimes ignorance, if not altogether blissful, would at least be several degrees less stressful.

Posted by Alexa Harrington

image: widener library

I love it when people find new and exciting ways to use their information-aggregating skills. Virgil Griffith is a busy guy, and he still found time to whip this up. You can read more about him and his brainiac antics in the New York Times Magazine, in Wired, and on this WSJ blog.

His site lists all the cool talks, presentations, etc. he’s given, all of which are smart and interesting. But, honestly, my favorite bits (besides Musicthatmakesyoudumb and Booksthatmakeyoudumb) are his contributions to college students in the CalTech and MIT areas: Freefood at MIT and Freefood at Caltech. Effing genius.

Posted by Alexa Harrington

Sometimes I wonder why the decision-makers are so backward in their thinking, and then I wonder which one of us non-decision-makers was responsible for putting them in charge in the first place. Outdoor recess and unstructured, in-classroom play time have been decreasing so as to make time for the fully structured knowledge-absorption parts of the school day. The yahoos in charge of how much time is spent learning vs. playing in elementary schools need to spend an afternoon finger-painting and remember what it was like to be a kid.

Alternatively, they could read all the research backing up the idea that kids who are given time during the school day for physical activity (the crux of the recess invention) and to play in the classroom during free choice time (they learn while they play indoors, too) are better able to sit down at their desks and absorb more info when it comes time for the focusing.

I’m a big recess fan, so I’ve always been cranky about the slow but sure disappearance of primary school recess times. But there’s also an entire portion of in-classroom free time, also known as child-directed educational play, which is being squeezed out in favor of fully structured, sit-still-and-absorb-the-information learning.

The traditional kindergarten classroom that most adults remember from childhood—with plenty of space and time for unstructured play and discovery, art and music, practicing social skills, and learning to enjoy learning—has largely disappeared. The results of three new studies, supported by the Alliance for Childhood and described in this report, suggest that time for play in most public kindergartens has dwindled to the vanishing point, replaced by lengthy lessons and standardized testing.

The studies were conducted by researchers from U.C.L.A., Long Island University and Sarah Lawrence College in New York. The researchers found that

• On a typical day, kindergartners in Los Angeles and New York City spend four to six times as long being
instructed and tested in literacy and math (two to three hours per day) as in free play or “choice time” (30 minutes or less).

• Standardized testing and preparation for tests are now a daily activity in most of the kindergartens studied, despite the fact that most uses of such tests with children under age eight are of questionable validity and can lead to harmful labeling.

• Classic play materials like blocks, sand and water tables, and props for dramatic play have largely disappeared from the 268 full-day kindergarten classrooms studied.

• In many kindergarten classrooms there is no play- time at all. Teachers say the curriculum does not
incorporate play, there isn’t time for it, and many school administrators do not value it.

Kindergartners are now under great pressure to meet inappropriate expectations, including academic standards
that until recently were reserved for first grade. At the same time, they are being denied the benefits of play—a major stress reliever.

If teachers were in charge, I can guarantee there would be more free time in the classroom for the kids to engage in child-directed, imagination-saturated, problem-solving, cognition-developing play. Anyone who has learned anything about the psychology of kiddos and their brain wiring knows that they are learning even when they are playing, and that they learn better during the in-desk formal learning part of their school day if they’ve have a chance to blow off some steam and decompress a little.

Someone with a conscience and the proverbial balls to use their powers for good needs to get some official documentation of their qualification to tell the powers that be what it is, exactly, that kids require to be happy and healthy. (The answer is: More play, on and off the monkey bars.)

I think educational psychology carries some excellent potential for bureaucratic ass-kicking. Educational psychologists understand the whys and hows of who is learning what, how they’re learning in any given situation, and who is teaching and what makes those educators tick, and why the curriculum is or isn’t working for all parties involved. They’re the ones who grok the whole educational picture of a school and can use torrents of gorgeous vocabulary to explain to the policymakers why recess matters. Someone go to it and save our kids.

Further Reading and Resources:

Physically Fit Kids Do Better In School
Physical Activity May Strengthen Children’s Ability To Pay Attention
Educational Psychology Careers and Degrees
About Educational Psychology
Telling the Stories of Educational Psychology
American Psychological Association

Posted by Alexa Harrington

image sources: classroom and playground