In Case You Missed It...

Monday, March 31, 2014

This is Your Brain on Pen and Paper

Just Say No to the Fetish of Interdisciplinarity?

Jerry Jacobs, a Penn professor, is the kind of smart guy who I find worth listening to even when my first impression of what he is up to is negative. In his new book, In Defense of Disciplines: Interdisciplinarity and Specialization in the Research University (University of Chicago Press), he marshals evidence and analysis to question the contemporary enthusiasm for all things interdisciplinary. He counsels skepticism and questions whether fields that are most open to external ideas are in fact the most intellectually dynamic.

Perhaps most relevant to the small college ecosystem is his argument that erasing disciplinary boundaries is more a organizational strategy than an intellectual one. It often involves ceding control from faculty to administration over budgets, hiring, and curriculum; it is a manifestation of the managerial ideology prevalent in higher education rather simply an idea whose time has come.

From Inside Higher Ed

Continue Reading at Inside Higher Ed

Friday, March 28, 2014

Switch Fonts, Save Ink (and dollars)

In the news over the last few days, reports about a kid whose science fair project was to compute how much the government could save by changing fonts. Long story short: some type faces require considerably less ink than others; the federal government prints lots and lots of documents; it buys a lot of ink and toner for its printers; it could buy less if it changed fonts.

Garamond, a typeface that requires about 25% less than other common fonts (such as Times New Roman), was created by Claude Garamont in the early 16th century. How much could a school like our save? Not millions, a fair guess might be 10-20% of toner/ink costs.

FBOW, A List Colleges Probably Want to Be Ranked Highly On

PayScale.com's Return on Investment listings. The methodology is questionable. The data insufficient and unsystematic. But at least some audiences probably paying attention.

It'd be unethical, of course, to encourage top earning alums to submit their information and, of course, no schools do that.

But cynicism and methodological concerns aside, some kind of conversation about return on investment is important. And while it needs to be more nuanced than just salaries and bonuses, it also needs to rise above the empty platitudes about critical thinking and lifelong learning.

NOTE: if you go to the site, try it with and without financial aid included and be sure to click on the "?" to get explanation of the numbers.

Napolitano Calls Online Courses Just "a tool for the toolbox"

First smart remarks about online higher education that I've heard in a while. Perhaps staring down terrorists and such for a few years gives a person the guts they need to techie hype and politician pressure.

From the LA Times

University of California President Janet Napolitano struck a rare blow for rational education practice this week by pushing back strongly against the craze for online learning courses. Online education isn't a panacea, she said; it's not for everyone, it's not cheap, and if it's done right it may not even save money.

Are you listening, Gov. Brown?

Napolitano, who took over at UC in September, made her remarks Monday during an appearance sponsored by the Public Policy Institute of California. Some 500 spectators were present in person and, ahem, online. Her remarks can be seen on YouTube here.

Asked by PPIC President Mark Baldassare about UC initiatives in the online space, Napolitano moved promptly to separate fact from fantasy. She called the development of online courses merely "a tool for the toolbox."
Continue reading at LA Times

Tuesday, March 25, 2014

NPR Airs "Paying for College" Series

NPR aired a piece by Eric Westervelt on 25 March titled "Decoding College Financial Aid" (8:18) in their "Paying for College" series.

Many high school seniors are hearing from colleges about admissions and financial aid. Scott Juedes, director of Student Financial Services at Wellesley College, gives tips on decoding aid offers.

A companion text piece "Some Common Misconceptions About Paying For College" lays out some useful information the reporter learned while doing the story:

In reporting on students navigating the maze of college costs and financial aid, I kept running into misconceptions about paying for a degree. Here are some of the most common ones:

Low-income students get most of their college financial aid needs met and rich kids don't have to worry, so it's mainly the middle class that gets squeezed.

It's a common misperception and "it's simply not true," says Lauren Asher, president of The Institute for College Access and Success, an independent, nonprofit research and advocacy group. Take Pell Grants, which go to low- and moderate-income families. A majority of Pell recipients are families with incomes under $50,000 a year. Those students "are much more likely to have loans and to owe more when they graduate from a four-year school than all other students," she says.

Single Sex Education, Science, and Belief

One's scientific "spidey sense" should tingle when a report on research talks about "opponents of" and "proponents of," but just the same, with grains and dashes of salt taken as needed, this article brings us some updates on the conversation about research into the advantages of single sex education (mostly, here, in the pre-college context).

Those of us who teach in single sex environments know it makes a difference, but we should admit that our convictions are convictions not knowledge, and we should be open to conver-sations not just about whether it makes a difference but how it might be making a difference.

"Why is there such disagreement over the benefits of single-sex education? Methodology is the key sticking point."

"Last month a meta-analysis of 184 studies covering 1.6 million students from 21 countries indicated that any purported benefits to single-sex education over coeducation, when looking at well-designed, controlled studies, are nonexistent to minimal."

"The methodology is challenging."

FROM

Continue reading at The Atlantic online