Author’s Note: I’ve re-posted this article for your reading pleasure as I am on vacation.

Kids who grow up with no television in their homes either (a) make friends quick with a kid whose family worships the ‘mote, or (b) they read a lot. My utter lack of pop culture references from the mid-seventies through the mid-nineties should do all the explaining as to which path I took.

The outcome being, I ended up with a stellar vocabulary, full of words I’d only ever seen in print and therefore usually couldn’t pronounce correctly. Whatever. At least I knew what they meant.

And there were some I knew how to say. (With feeling). When I was eight my 18-year-old babysitter burned the chicken pot pies that were to be our dinner. My mother never bought us crappy processed food, which meant my brother and I were infatuated with all sugary, well-preserved, and insanely processed foodstuffs.

I was understandably pissed when the sitter burned my only shot at packaged food for the month and filled the kitchen with smoke. To vent my anger I hollered, “What are you trying to do, asphyxiate us?!” She had no idea what that meant, and almost sent me to my room because she thought I’d called her something so horrible, not even teenager her had ever heard that particular obscenity before.

There is also the common problem, among adults and too-smart-for-their-own-good children, of only ever hearing a word or a phrase and never figuring out the correct spelling. There are so many words that sound alike but are spelled differently, and each version of the stupidly exact-sounding word means something completely different. I’ve got their, there, and they’re down cold, but it took a while for me to get affect and effect straight. The English language, in my bitchy opinion, has some definite asinine qualities.

Or perhaps I should ask more questions. Until I was in college and saw this phrase written on the board as a common mistake college sophomores made when writing papers for the professor, I had always thought “For all intents and purposes” was “For all intensive purposes.”

According to Paul Brians, author of Common Errors in English Usage, I’m not the only native English-speaker to screw that phrase up. Which made me feel better for about point seven seconds until I saw the bit where he describes the phrase as “Another example of the oral transformation of language by people who don’t read much.” Ouch, Professor Brians. That was totally uncalled for.

I read plenty, thank you. The books I read (fine literature and lots of science-y non-fiction) just haven’t ever contained that exact phrase. I am still very smart and am an excellent reader. And clearly I have nary a hang-up about the whole intents/intensive blunder.

Further Reading:

Common Errors in English Usage
Confusing Words
Grammar and Punctuation Resources

Posted by Alexa Harrington

(image source)

Author’s Note: I’ve re-posted this article for your reading pleasure while I’m on vacation.

The notion most of us have when thinking about the University (read that with a deep and important voice, please) is of a well-architectured limbo-land full of higher thought, in-depth learning, and forward motion steeped nicely in tradition. The University isn’t (or didn’t used to be) as susceptible to the rules of government and society; they’ve managed to create their own little spheres.

These days, when you really stop to ponder the reality of the University bubble, that place of higher thinking seems a lot more watered down in its autonomy. Money, politics and red tape have pulled the rest of the world into the fabric of the University, while the University is forced, more and more it seems, to rely on the non-University world in order to survive.

No less than eight members of my family, between 1932 and the present, have spent their careers at Universities. I’m not an idiot; I know that even in 1932 the University was already pretty susceptible to red tape and politics. But the University was still thought of, from without and within, as a place where academic freedom was considered sacred.

It appears, especially through the eyes of those on the inside, as though the last vestiges of higher learning and new thinking are being chipped away at an increasingly rapid rate, all in the name of popular research and big-name publishing. That all comes down to the ongoing faculty wrestling-match to figure out who will land the biggest chunk of grant money.

You can’t survive without money, and you can’t continue your research (or your job) without funding. Grant money is usually awarded to those trying to answer the newest, biggest, hottest question of the year. It’s difficult to land decent financial support for researching the esoteric topics.

When a dispute regarding academic freedom comes up, it’s usually about the rights of instructors to speak freely (within reason; there’s never any need to go overboard, for crying out loud) about politics and religion and all the Big Bads no one’s supposed to bring up in classroom discussions. Academic freedom is also supposed to include the rights of students and faculty to think, wonder, ask questions, and to perform research in order to find some answers. If money and funding are driving the machine, it seems obvious that the academic freedom to do research is being severely shaped by outside interests.

President Robert Zimmer of the University of Chicago gave a speech recently at Columbia University’s conference entitled “What is Academic Freedom For?” He spoke about academic freedom at institutions of higher learning, what that means and why it’s important to protect and maintain that tradition in the modern-day University.

The greatest contributions universities can make to society over the long run are the ideas and discoveries of faculty and students that emanate from the resulting intellectual ferment and the work of alumni across the scope of human activity―alumni whose capacity for invention has been dramatically enhanced through their education in this environment. Moreover, that universities are almost unique in making this type of contribution only highlights its importance to society.

If this is the purpose of universities, the purpose of academic freedom is precisely to preserve this openness of inquiry and freedom of thought. In other words, academic freedom is designed to protect and preserve for the long run the unique capacity of universities to contribute to society. More…

Further Reading:

Academic Freedom in the 21st Century College and University
Academic Freedom
AAUP: Academic Freedom
What is Academic Freedom For?
Pres. Zimmer’s Address Delivered at Columbia Univ.

Posted by Alexa Harrington

(image source*)

Author’s Note: I’ve re-posted this article for your reading pleasure while I’m on vacation.

I was never concerned as to whether or not today’s school-age kids were going to be considered fully functioning adults someday; anyone who can seemingly mind-meld with a computer (or a cell phone or anything gizmo-ish), understand it, and make it work is probably going to do just fine once they’re let loose on the world.

Despite feeling that kids these days were good to go on the technology front, I was a wee bit worried that the whole writing portion of their lives was headed for much suckage. I was caught in the admittedly old-fashioned (lame!) idea that all forward progress in the land of tech can only lead to less and less well-rounded humans. The telephone, for instance, led to a severe decline in letter-writing. (Of course, the electric light bulb led to everyone staying up later and getting more work done, but let’s ignore that for the moment.)

Clive Thompson’s article in Wired has calmed me down. Thanks to all the e-mail and texting that goes on these days, kids are doing more writing than anyone has since correct cursive and perfect penmanship were qualities to strive for. Now we’ve got technologically savvy kids who can express themselves with the written/typed word like nobody’s business. I’m stoked that society will not be taking one-way trips in any hand baskets.

From the article:

The fact that students today almost always write for an audience (something virtually no one in my generation did) gives them a different sense of what constitutes good writing. In interviews, they defined good prose as something that had an effect on the world. For them, writing is about persuading and organizing and debating, even if it’s over something as quotidian as what movie to go see. The Stanford students were almost always less enthusiastic about their in-class writing because it had no audience but the professor: It didn’t serve any purpose other than to get them a grade. As for those texting short-forms and smileys defiling serious academic writing? Another myth. When Lunsford examined the work of first-year students, she didn’t find a single example of texting speak in an academic paper.

Posted by Alexa Harrington

(image source)

Arjun Muralidharan, aka the Productive Student, has a list of 14 ways college students can strive for greenness on Earth. You’ll want to do them all to slow the destruction of the planet, but you’ll actually do them to save yourself some coinage.

14 Ways to Be a Greener Student (and Save Money Doing It):

-Eat less meat or go vegetarian
-Do more efficient laundry
-Buy groceries with less packaging
-Eat out less
-Buy a greener computer
-Optimize your commute
-Decompose organic waste
-Bring your own bag for shopping
-Recycle paper
-Buy recycled notepads and textbooks
-Put old and unwanted textbooks up for sale
-Use a durable water bottle
-Be conscious about lights everywhere
-Reduce and manage electronic devices

Posted by Alexa Harrington

(recycled notebooks)

I don’t care how high your SAT scores are: if you’re planning to attend any institution of higher education that isn’t blatantly obvious in its accreditation (Stanford, Yale, etc.), and you don’t take the so-easy-a-monkey-could-do-it step of checking your intended school’s official accreditation status, then you’re an idiot.

Go here or here and get it done. You’ll spend hours more time texting today than you will ascertaining that your institution will hand you a valid degree after you’ve given said school your blood, sweat, tears, time, and money. Avoid this woman’s mistake.

Accreditation Resources:

Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA)
U.S. Dept. of Edu. Database of Accredited Postsecondary Institutions and Programs

Posted by Alexa Harrington

(graduation joy)

Oh, it’s coming. Denying it won’t help you. Fall Term is starting up soon whether you’re ready or not. When the first week of classes have been attended and while you’re still focusing on first chapters, small quizzes, tolerable assignments, and the finer points on your professors’ syllabi, at the very least please skim this: How to Study: A Brief Guide. Learning how to learn is, how do you say, crucial, of the essence, invaluable, indispensable and totally effing necessary.

Posted by Alexa Harrington

(take notes)

Watch it, people. Just because information is second only in volume to pollution on this planet, it does not mean all info is available for you to use and then slap your name on to it like you wrote it or something. Plagiarism, for those of you who missed that day in class, is when you take someone else’s work and falsely claim it as your own. It’s very bad, and it makes you look like an ass@$%*.

The NY Times has an article up about plagiarism and the tech-savvy information generation. The lines are blurry for Gen-Y, apparently.

If you’d like to avoid being an uninformed cheating ass@#$%, the following links are helpful.

Purdue Online Writing Lab: Avoiding Plagiarism
Plagiarism.org

I must go. The line above regarding information and the volume of it is freaking me out. Can digital information have volume at all? And is it possible to measure the volume of every printed word on the planet? What about all the still-intact newspapers in old landfills? Do those count as existing information? Crap!

Posted by Alexa Harrington

I’m already certain that I absolutely must read this book: Problem Solving 101—A Simple Book for Smart People. Kyle James at .eduGuru.com reviewed it, bringing it to my attention (I’m grateful).

Japanese school kids have gained a reputation for insane adroitness in their memorization and test-taking skills while lacking a basic working knowledge of problem solving. Being ill-equipped for the solving of the problems turns out to be somewhat of an issue in the real world.

As we’ve all realized by now, s**t happens in life. You don’t even have to try to interface with s**t and it will still happen. Death, taxes, and s**t are the only guarantees we humans are given. So, avoid death, pay taxes, and prepare yourself for the s**tstorm we call life.

The book was originally written by Ken Watanabe for Japanese school kids, but ended up becoming incredibly popular among Japanese adults in the business world. It’s short, it’s simple, it’s meant for smart, less-than-fully-grown humans, and it’s practical. I’m buying it as soon as I post this.

Posted by Alexa Harrington

It’s cringe-y and funny and it just upset me and made me laugh until I snurfed green tea out my nose. I think you should read it too. Chag Holland is Cynical Dad and he is capable of making your day better.

I help out in my daughter’s class. I used to just do simple things like copy papers and cut out shapes and crap, but somewhere along the line, someone got the dumb idea that I could actually work with the kids and teach them things. Big mistake. Last week, I was working with a table of kids and teaching them how to carry ones. One of the little boys at the table spoke up.



Boy #1: I’m the best in the class at math.


Internal Chag: Um, no, or you wouldn’t be sitting here with me.


Girl #1: No you’re not! Hamid is!


Boy #1: That doesn’t count. Of course he’s the best at math.


External Chag: Why is he the best at math?


Boy #1: He’s from another country. All they do is math.


Internal Chag: What the fuck, dude?

More…

Posted by Alexa Harrington

(image source)

Screwed anyone over publicly lately? Virally or plain old socially? Don’t be an ass@#$%. Pay attention to what you’re putting out there. Nikki Massaro Kauffman at .eduGuru wrote an enlightening and educational post about Teaching Privacy: Friends Don’t Let Friends Post to Facebook.

From the post:

I’ve been wanting to do a post about some of the privacy training I’ve been doing for faculty and staff since the last time Facebook updated its privacy policy. It’s hard to keep track of when, where, and how many times Facebook has changed its privacy policy. But this is not a post about quitting Facebook. It’s not a how-to on tweaking your privacy either.

We are constantly learning how to handle our relationships and privacy. Preschoolers eventually learn that they can’t blurt out every observation they make lest they reveal a surprise or offend someone. School aged children eventually learn that keeping a friend’s secret is more important than gossip. Adults wrestle with the ethics of keeping a confidence over revealing a truth. All of our struggles with privacy are hard enough when we’re just talking about the ethical issues of face-to-face communication. But now we’ve supplied an arsenal of communication tools to everyone with a computer and access to the Internet. More…

Posted by Alexa Harrington

(image source)