Loading...

Get an education theories essay academic premium american


Should i buy an essay education theories 15 pages / 4125 words writing from scratch 10 days business

Close As the government begins its crackdown on essay mill websites, it’s easy to see just how much pressure students are under to get top grades for their coursework these days.But writing a high-scoring paper doesn’t need to be complicated.

We spoke to experts to get some simple techniques that will raise your writing game 7 Mar 2017 - We spoke to experts to get some simple techniques that will raise your writing game. Tim Squirrell is a PhD student at the University of Edinburgh, and is teaching for the first time this year. When he was asked to deliver sessions on the art of essay-writing, he decided to publish a comprehensive (and  .We spoke to experts to get some simple techniques that will raise your writing game.

Tim Squirrell is a PhD student at the University of Edinburgh, and is teaching for the first time this year.When he was asked to deliver sessions on the art of essay-writing, he decided to publish a comprehensive (and brilliant) blog on the topic, offering wisdom gleaned from turning out two or three essays a week for his own undergraduate degree 13 May 2013 - Does Wikipedia stop students from engaging with academic texts?   readers not to use the website for academic purposes, American research shows that the majority of students browse its pages when researching essays.   Lancaster Law School academic Dr Richard Austen-Baker illustrates this theory..When he was asked to deliver sessions on the art of essay-writing, he decided to publish a comprehensive (and brilliant) blog on the topic, offering wisdom gleaned from turning out two or three essays a week for his own undergraduate degree.“It took me until my second or third year at Cambridge to work it out.

No one tells you how to put together an argument and push yourself from a 60 to a 70, but once you to get grips with how you’re meant to construct them, it’s simple.” 'I felt guilty when I got my results': your stories of buying essays | Guardian readers and Sarah Marsh Read more Poke holes The goal of writing any essay is to show that you can think critically about the material at hand (whatever it may be) help me with an it management homework double spaced 71 pages / 19525 words MLA.” 'I felt guilty when I got my results': your stories of buying essays | Guardian readers and Sarah Marsh Read more Poke holes The goal of writing any essay is to show that you can think critically about the material at hand (whatever it may be).This means going beyond regurgitating what you’ve read; if you’re just repeating other people’s arguments, you’re never going to trouble the upper end of the marking scale.“You need to be using your higher cognitive abilities,” says Bryan Greetham, author of the bestselling How to Write Better Essays.

“You’re not just showing understanding and recall, but analysing and synthesising ideas from different sources, then critically evaluating them.

” But what does critical evaluation actually look like? According to Squirrell, it’s simple: you need to “poke holes” in the texts you’re exploring and work out the ways in which “the authors aren’t perfect”.“That can be an intimidating idea,” he says.“You’re reading something that someone has probably spent their career studying, so how can you, as an undergraduate, critique it? “The answer is that you’re not going to discover some gaping flaw in Foucault’s History of Sexuality Volume 3, but you are going to be able to say: ‘There are issues with these certain accounts, here is how you might resolve those’.That’s the difference between a 60-something essay and a 70-something essay.

” Critique your own arguments Once you’ve cast a critical eye over the texts, you should turn it back on your own arguments.This may feel like going against the grain of what you’ve learned about writing academic essays, but it’s the key to drawing out developed points.“We’re taught at an early age to present both sides of the argument,” Squirrell continues.“Then you get to university and you’re told to present one side of the argument and sustain it throughout the piece.But that’s not quite it: you need to figure out what the strongest objections to your own argument would be.

Write them and try to respond to them, so you become aware of flaws in your reasoning.Every argument has its limits and if you can try and explore those, the markers will often reward that.” Applying to university? It's time to narrow your choices down to two Read more Fine, use Wikipedia then The use of Wikipedia for research is a controversial topic among academics, with many advising their students to stay away from the site altogether.“I genuinely disagree,” says Squirrell.“Those on the other side say that you can’t know who has written it, what they had in mind, what their biases are.

But if you’re just trying to get a handle on a subject, or you want to find a scattering of secondary sources, it can be quite useful.I would only recommend it as either a primer or a last resort, but it does have its place.” Focus your reading Reading lists can be a hindrance as well as a help.They should be your first port of call for guidance, but they aren’t to-do lists.A book may be listed, but that doesn’t mean you need to absorb the whole thing.

Squirrell advises reading the introduction and conclusion and a relevant chapter but no more.“Otherwise you won’t actually get anything out of it because you’re trying to plough your way through a 300-page monograph,” he says.You also need to store the information you’re gathering in a helpful, systematic way.Bryan Greetham recommends a digital update of his old-school “project box” approach.“I have a box to catch all of those small things – a figure, a quotation, something interesting someone says – I’ll write them down and put them in the box so I don’t lose them.

Then when I come to write, I have all of my material.” There are a plenty of online offerings to help with this, such as the project management app Scrivener and referencing tool Zotero, and, for the procrastinators, there are productivity programmes like Self Control, which allow users to block certain websites from their computers for a set period.Essays for sale: the booming online industry in writing academic work to order Read more Look beyond the reading list “This is comparatively easy to do,” says Squirrell.“Look at the citations used in the text, put them in Google Scholar, read the abstracts and decide whether they’re worth reading.Then you can look on Google Scholar at other papers that have cited the work you’re writing about – some of those will be useful.

” And finally, the introduction The old trick of dealing with your introduction last is common knowledge, but it seems few have really mastered the art of writing an effective opener.“Introductions are the easiest things in the world to get right and nobody does it properly,” Squirrel says.“It should be ‘Here is the argument I am going to make, I am going to substantiate this with three or four strands of argumentation, drawing upon these theorists, who say these things, and I will conclude with some thoughts on this area and how it might clarify our understanding of this phenomenon.’ You should be able to encapsulate it in 100 words or so.

Higher education handbook of theory and research

” Keep up with the latest on Guardian Students: follow us on Twitter at @GdnStudents – and become a member to receive exclusive benefits and our weekly newsletter.Topics Close Most universities and academics distrust the service, my department's "Essential Guide for Students" leaves no room for ambiguity, warning us: "Never cite Wikipedia." But why is the academic world so hostile to this vast information resource? And why do students find it so hard to stay away? The greatest strength of Wikipedia is that its contributors can chose which area they want to write about, which, in theory, means they only produce content where they are most qualified to do so New Essays in Moral Philosophy Page xii Google Books Result." But why is the academic world so hostile to this vast information resource? And why do students find it so hard to stay away? The greatest strength of Wikipedia is that its contributors can chose which area they want to write about, which, in theory, means they only produce content where they are most qualified to do so.

Harvard University's Professor Yochai Benkler says this explains why Wikipedia has succeeded where other more traditional business models like Microsoft Encarta and Encyclopaedia Britannica have failed.

Lancaster Law School academic Dr Richard Austen-Baker illustrates this theory.He registered with Wikipedia to clean up an article on his specialist subject – relational contract theory 20 Jan 2017 - Epistemic forms and faces, by active experimentation ones in her school, most of the perceived or otherwise of supernatural powers or deities writing custom premium essay service in animistic, humanistic, and atheistic traditions. A theory may be formed from a disconnected teaching labor force, but to  .He registered with Wikipedia to clean up an article on his specialist subject – relational contract theory.The original entry was a bit "raggedy around the edges", he says best website to get an information sciences term paper double spaced British Turabian.The original entry was a bit "raggedy around the edges", he says.But of course, the article may well have changed since Dr Austen-Baker made his contributions – and therein lies the danger of open source content nbd-dhofar.com/term-paper/best-website-to-get-an-information-sciences-term-paper-double-spaced-british-turabian-high-quality.But of course, the article may well have changed since Dr Austen-Baker made his contributions – and therein lies the danger of open source content.Academics discredit the website for several reasons: articles can be written by anyone, not necessarily a world expert; editing and regulation are imperfect and a reliance on Wikipedia can discourage students from engaging with genuine academic writing.

There are numerous examples of politicians and public figures amending articles about themselves to erase unfavourable material.Wikipedia's own incomplete list of hoaxes makes interesting and comical reading (I particularly appreciated the fictitious "Township of Asstree, Tennessee").Despite Wikipedia's drawbacks, students will continue to take advantage of the resource – and the default response of academics to simply advise against using the site is unlikely to have much effect.

Lancaster lecturer Dr Catherine Easton says students must develop an ability to analyse the nature of the source material within Wikipedia, adding that the educator should ensure there is "a strong, continuing focus on the need to support academic work with references to acceptable scholarly sources".

Both of the academics questioned for this article agree that it is easy to spot essays that are over-reliant on Wikipedia, and that direct citation of the site was always unacceptable.While following the footnotes in Wikipedia pages is a way to access stronger content, they say a critical mind should be applied to each source individually.Dr Austen-Baker says that some articles on Wikipedia can be "exotically inaccurate", and that undergraduates must familiarise themselves with the equivalent, and often ignored, written encyclopaedias.He adds that over-reliance on free electronic materials makes it increasingly difficult to publish traditional books at all.Dr Easton believes the "consensus-based" approach employed by Wikipedia might actually make the website's most popular articles less subjective than the introductions found elsewhere.

But, she adds, like any information source, it can only be put to good use when it's in the hands of a discerning and critical student.Topics Illustration by BARRY BLITT My first job as a professor was at an Ivy League university.The students were happy to be taught, and we, their teachers, were happy to be teaching them.Whatever portion of their time and energy was being eaten up by social commitments—which may have been huge, but about which I was ignorant—they seemed earnestly and unproblematically engaged with the academic experience.If I was na ve about this, they were gracious enough not to disabuse me.

None of us ever questioned the importance of what we were doing.At a certain appointed hour, the university decided to make its way in the world without me, and we parted company.I was assured that there were no hard feelings.I was fortunate to get a position in a public university system, at a college with an overworked faculty, an army of part-time instructors, and sixteen thousand students.Many of these students were the first in their families to attend college, and any distractions they had were not social.

Many of them worked, and some had complicated family responsibilities.I didn’t regard this as my business any more than I had the social lives of my Ivy League students.I assigned my new students the same readings I had assigned the old ones.I understood that the new students would not be as well prepared, but, out of faith or ego, I thought that I could tell them what they needed to know, and open up the texts for them.Soon after I started teaching there, someone raised his hand and asked, about a text I had assigned, “Why did we have to buy this book?” I got the question in that form only once, but I heard it a number of times in the unmonetized form of “Why did we have to read this book?” I could see that this was not only a perfectly legitimate question; it was a very interesting question.

The students were asking me to justify the return on investment in a college education.I just had never been called upon to think about this before.We took the value of the business we were in for granted.I could have said, “You are reading these books because you’re in college, and these are the kinds of books that people in college read.

” If you hold a certain theory of education, that answer is not as circular as it sounds.The theory goes like this: In any group of people, it’s easy to determine who is the fastest or the strongest or even the best-looking.But picking out the most intelligent person is difficult, because intelligence involves many attributes that can’t be captured in a one-time assessment, like an I.There is no intellectual equivalent of the hundred-yard dash.An intelligent person is open-minded, an outside-the-box thinker, an effective communicator, is prudent, self-critical, consistent, and so on.These are not qualities readily subject to measurement.Society needs a mechanism for sorting out its more intelligent members from its less intelligent ones, just as a track team needs a mechanism (such as a stopwatch) for sorting out the faster athletes from the slower ones.

Get an essay education theories master's 2 days rewriting double spaced

Society wants to identify intelligent people early on so that it can funnel them into careers that maximize their talents.

It wants to get the most out of its human resources.College is a process that is sufficiently multifaceted and fine-grained to do this Need to order custom essay education theories confidentially 3 days Academic ASA Custom writing.College is a process that is sufficiently multifaceted and fine-grained to do this.

College is, essentially, a four-year intelligence test.Students have to demonstrate intellectual ability over time and across a range of subjects.If they’re sloppy or inflexible or obnoxious—no matter how smart they might be in the I Who can do a custom essay education theories Formatting 6 pages / 1650 words single spaced Business.

If they’re sloppy or inflexible or obnoxious—no matter how smart they might be in the I.

sense—those negatives will get picked up in their grades.As an added service, college also sorts people according to aptitude.It separates the math types from the poetry types.At the end of the process, graduates get a score, the G.

, that professional schools and employers can trust as a measure of intellectual capacity and productive potential.It’s important, therefore, that everyone is taking more or less the same test.

I could have answered the question in a different way.

I could have said, “You’re reading these books because they teach you things about the world and yourself that, if you do not learn them in college, you are unlikely to learn anywhere else.” This reflects a different theory of college, a theory that runs like this: In a society that encourages its members to pursue the career paths that promise the greatest personal or financial rewards, people will, given a choice, learn only what they need to know for success.They will have no incentive to acquire the knowledge and skills important for life as an informed citizen, or as a reflective and culturally literate human being.College exposes future citizens to material that enlightens and empowers them, whatever careers they end up choosing.In performing this function, college also socializes.

It takes people with disparate backgrounds and beliefs and brings them into line with mainstream norms of reason and taste.Independence of mind is tolerated in college, and even honored, but students have to master the accepted ways of doing things before they are permitted to deviate.Ideally, we want everyone to go to college, because college gets everyone on the same page.It’s a way of producing a society of like-minded grownups.If you like the first theory, then it doesn’t matter which courses students take, or even what is taught in them, as long as they’re rigorous enough for the sorting mechanism to do its work.

If you prefer the second theory, then you might consider grades a useful instrument of positive or negative reinforcement, but the only thing that matters is what students actually learn.There is stuff that every adult ought to know, and college is the best delivery system for getting that stuff into people’s heads.A lot of confusion is caused by the fact that since 1945 American higher education has been committed to both theories.The system is designed to be both meritocratic (Theory 1) and democratic (Theory 2).

Professional schools and employers depend on colleges to sort out each cohort as it passes into the workforce, and elected officials talk about the importance of college for everyone.We want higher education to be available to all Americans, but we also want people to deserve the grades they receive.Before 1945, lite private colleges like Harvard and Yale were largely in the business of reproducing a privileged social class.Between 1906 and 1932, four hundred and five boys from Groton applied to Harvard.

In 1932, Yale received thirteen hundred and thirty applications, and it admitted nine hundred and fifty-nine—an acceptance rate of seventy-two per cent.Almost a third of those who enrolled were sons of Yale graduates.In 1948, through the exertions of people like James Bryant Conant, the president of Harvard, the Educational Testing Service went into business, and standardized testing (the S.) soon became the virtually universal method for picking out the most intelligent students in the high-school population, regardless of their family background, and getting them into the higher-education system.

Conant regarded higher education as a limited social resource, and he wanted to make more strait the gate.Testing insured that only people who deserved to go to college did.The fact that Daddy went no longer sufficed.In 1940, the acceptance rate at Harvard was eighty-five per cent.Last year, thirty-five thousand students applied to Harvard, and the acceptance rate was six per cent.Almost all the lite colleges saw a jump in applications this year, partly because they now recruit much more aggressively internationally, and acceptance rates were correspondingly lower.Columbia, Yale, and Stanford admitted less than eight per cent of their applicants.To put it in some perspective: the acceptance rate at Cambridge is twenty-one per cent, and at Oxford eighteen per cent.

But, as private colleges became more selective, public colleges became more accommodating.

Best websites to write a essay education theories 66 pages / 18150 words american us letter size bluebook

Proportionally, the growth in higher education since 1945 has been overwhelmingly in the public sector.14 million students in public colleges and universities and about the same number in private ones.Today, public colleges enroll almost fifteen million students, private colleges fewer than six million The reader will find in many of the essays the authors question within their separate essays even the basic branches of philosophy as they have been defined traditionally,   Gert Biesta's essay on educational theory is the lead off essay, as he is questioning the basic way we think about educational theory in North America..

Today, public colleges enroll almost fifteen million students, private colleges fewer than six million.

There is now a seat for virtually anyone with a high-school diploma who wants to attend college.The City University of New York (my old employer) has two hundred and twenty-eight thousand undergraduates—more than four times as many as the entire Ivy League.The big enchilada of public higher education, the State of California, has ten university campuses, twenty-three state-college campuses, a hundred and twelve community-college campuses, and more than 3.Six per cent of the American population is currently enrolled in college or graduate school.

In Great Britain and France, the figure is about three per cent.If you are a Theory 1 person, you worry that, with so many Americans going to college, the bachelor’s degree is losing its meaning, and soon it will no longer operate as a reliable marker of productive potential.Increasing public investment in higher education with the goal of college for everyone—in effect, taxpayer-subsidized social promotion—is thwarting the operation of the sorting mechanism.Education is about selection, not inclusion.If you are friendly toward Theory 2, on the other hand, you worry that the competition for slots in top-tier colleges is warping educational priorities.

You see academic tulip mania: students and their parents are overvaluing a commodity for which there are cheap and plentiful substitutes.The sticker price at Princeton or Stanford, including room and board, is upward of fifty thousand dollars a year.Public colleges are much less expensive—the average tuition is $7,605—and there are also many less selective private colleges where you can get a good education, and a lot more faculty face time, without having to spend every minute of high school sucking up to your teachers and reformatting your r sum .Education is about personal and intellectual growth, not about winning some race to the top.It would be nice to conclude that, despite these anxieties, and given the somewhat contradictory goals that have been set for it, the American higher-education system is doing what Americans want it to do.

College is broadly accessible: sixty-eight per cent of high-school graduates now go on to college (in 1980, only forty-nine per cent did), and employers continue to reward the credential, which means that there is still some selection going on.In 2008, the average income for someone with an advanced degree (master’s, professional, or doctoral) was $83,144; for someone with a bachelor’s degree, it was $58,613; for someone with only a high-school education, it was $31,283.There is also increasing global demand for American-style higher education.Students all over the world want to come here, and some American universities, including N.and Yale, are building campuses overseas.Higher education is widely regarded as the route to a better life.It is sometimes pointed out that Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg were college dropouts.It is unnecessary to point out that most of us are not Bill Gates or Mark Zuckerberg.

It’s possible, though, that the higher education system only looks as if it’s working.The process may be sorting, students may be getting access, and employers may be rewarding, but are people actually learning anything? Two recent books suggest that they are not.“Academically Adrift” (Chicago; $25) was written by two sociologists, Richard Arum (N.) and Josipa Roksa (University of Virginia).Almost a third of it, sixty-eight pages, is a methodological appendix, which should give the general reader a clue to what to expect.“Academically Adrift” is not a diatribe based on anecdote and personal history and supported by some convenient data, which is what books critical of American higher education often are.It’s a social-scientific attempt to determine whether students are learning what colleges claim to be teaching them—specifically, “to think critically, reason analytically, solve problems, and communicate clearly.

” Arum and Roksa consider Theory 1 to be “overly cynical.” They believe that the job of the system is to teach people, not just to get them up the right educational ladders and down the right career chutes.They think that some people just aren’t capable of learning much at the college level.But they think that people who do go to college ought to be able to show something for the time and expense.The authors decided that, despite a lot of rhetoric about accountability in higher education, no one seemed eager to carry out an assessment, so they did their own.

They used a test known as the Collegiate Learning Assessment, or C.The test has three parts, though they use data from just one part, the “performance task.” Students are, for example, assigned to advise “an employer about the desirability of purchasing a type of airplane that has recently crashed,” and are shown documents, such as news articles, an F.

accident report, charts, and so on, and asked to write memos.The memos are graded for “critical thinking, analytical reasoning, problem solving, and writing.” The test was given to a group of more than two thousand freshmen in the fall of 2005, and again, to the same group, in the spring of 2007.

Arum and Roksa say that forty-five per cent of the students showed no significant improvement, and they conclude that “American higher education is characterized by limited or no learning for a large proportion of students.

Get an education theories essay for me premium british academic writing

” The study design raises a lot of questions, from the reasonableness of assessing learning growth after only three full semesters of college to the reliability of the C.The obvious initial inference to make about a test that does not pick up a difference where you expect one is that it is not a very good test.And, even if the test does measure some skills accurately, the results say nothing about whether students have acquired any knowledge, or socially desirable attitudes, that they didn’t have before they entered college Should i buy education theories essay Academic single spaced British University.And, even if the test does measure some skills accurately, the results say nothing about whether students have acquired any knowledge, or socially desirable attitudes, that they didn’t have before they entered college.

It’s generally thought (by their professors, anyway) that students make a developmental leap after sophomore year—although Arum and Roksa, in a follow-up study completed after their book was finished, determined that, after four years, thirty-six per cent of students still did not show significant improvement on the C.Alexander Astin, the dean of modern higher-education research, who is now an emeritus professor at U., published a sharp attack on Arum and Roksa’s methodology in the Chronicle of Higher Education, and, in particular, on the statistical basis for the claim that forty-five per cent of college students do not improve American Essay Premium Custom Essay Writing Service 99 orders nbsp., published a sharp attack on Arum and Roksa’s methodology in the Chronicle of Higher Education, and, in particular, on the statistical basis for the claim that forty-five per cent of college students do not improve.results aside, though, “Academically Adrift” makes a case for concern.Arum and Roksa argue that many students today perceive college as fundamentally a social experience.Students spend less time studying than they used to, for example.In 1961, students reported studying for an average of twenty-five hours a week; the average is now twelve to thirteen hours.More than a third of the students in Arum and Roksa’s study reported that they spent less than five hours a week studying.

In a University of California survey, students reported spending thirteen hours a week on schoolwork and forty-three hours socializing and pursuing various forms of entertainment.Few people are fully reliable reporters of time use.But if students are studying less it may be because the demands on them are fewer.Half the students in the study said that they had not taken a single course in the previous semester requiring more than twenty pages of writing.A third said that they had not taken a course requiring more than forty pages of reading a week.

Arum and Roksa point out that professors have little incentive to make their courses more rigorous.Professors say that the only aspect of their teaching that matters professionally is student course evaluations, since these can figure in tenure and promotion decisions.It’s in professors’ interest, therefore, for their classes to be entertaining and their assignments not too onerous.They are not deluded: a study carried out back in the nineteen-nineties (by Alexander Astin, as it happens) found that faculty commitment to teaching is negatively correlated with compensation.Still, Arum and Roksa believe that some things do make a difference.

First of all, students who are better prepared academically for college not only do better when they get to college; they improve more markedly while they’re there.And students who take courses requiring them to write more than twenty pages a semester and to read more than forty pages a week show greater improvement.The most interesting finding is that students majoring in liberal-arts fields—sciences, social sciences, and arts and humanities—do better on the C., and show greater improvement, than students majoring in non-liberal-arts fields such as business, education and social work, communications, engineering and computer science, and health.Liberal-arts students are more likely to take courses with substantial amounts of reading and writing; they are more likely to attend selective colleges, and institutional selectivity correlates positively with learning; and they are better prepared academically for college, which makes them more likely to improve.The students who score the lowest and improve the least are the business majors.Sixty per cent of American college students are not liberal-arts majors, though.

1 major in America is, in fact, business.Twenty-two per cent of bachelor’s degrees are awarded in that field.Ten per cent are awarded in education, seven per cent in the health professions.More than twice as many degrees are given out every year in parks, recreation, leisure, and fitness studies as in philosophy and religion.

Since 1970, the more higher education has expanded, the more the liberal-arts sector has shrunk in proportion to the whole.Neither Theory 1 nor Theory 2 really explains how the educational system works for these non-liberal-arts students.For them, college is basically a supplier of vocational preparation and a credentialling service.The theory that fits their situation—Theory 3—is that advanced economies demand specialized knowledge and skills, and, since high school is aimed at the general learner, college is where people can be taught what they need in order to enter a vocation.

A college degree in a non-liberal field signifies competence in a specific line of work.

Theory 3 explains the growth of the non-liberal education sector.As work becomes more high-tech, employers demand more people with specialized training.It also explains the explosion in professional master’s programs.There are now well over a hundred master’s degrees available, in fields from Avian Medicine to Web Design and Homeland Security.Close to fourteen times as many master’s degrees are given out every year as doctorates.

When Barack Obama and Arne Duncan talk about how higher education is the key to the future of the American economy, this is the sector they have in mind.They are not talking about the liberal arts.

Learning to improve using writing to increase critical thinking nbsp

Still, students pursuing vocational degrees are almost always required to take some liberal-arts courses.Let’s say that you want a bachelor’s degree in Culinary Arts Management, with a Beverage Management major, from the University of Nevada Las Vegas.I might have taken a wrong turn in my education somewhere Handbook of Educational Theories Page 2 Google Books Result.I might have taken a wrong turn in my education somewhere.

requires you to take two courses in English (Composition and World Literature), one course in philosophy, one course in either history or political science, courses in chemistry, mathematics, and economics, and two electives in the arts and humanities.If your professional goal is, let’s say, running the beverage service at the Bellagio, how much effort are you going to put into that class on World Literature? This is where Professor X enters the picture.Professor X is the nom de guerre of a man who has spent more than ten years working evenings (his day job is with the government) as an adjunct instructor at “Pembrook,” a private four-year institution, and “Huron State,” a community college that is evidently public 13 Nov 2017 - 'The Talented Tenth' is a 1903 essay by W.E.B. Du Bois that popularized the theory that cultivating a class of exceptional leaders through.   that the concept of the talented tenth was born, arguing that approximately one in ten African Americans did have this capacity for classical education and leadership..Professor X is the nom de guerre of a man who has spent more than ten years working evenings (his day job is with the government) as an adjunct instructor at “Pembrook,” a private four-year institution, and “Huron State,” a community college that is evidently public.The academic motivation of the students at these schools is utilitarian.Most of them are trying to get jobs—as registered nurses or state troopers, for example—that require a college degree, and they want one thing and one thing only from Professor X: a passing grade best website to write civil engineering case study Business 5 pages / 1375 words double spaced.

Most of them are trying to get jobs—as registered nurses or state troopers, for example—that require a college degree, and they want one thing and one thing only from Professor X: a passing grade.

Professor X published an article in The Atlantic a few years ago about his experiences.David Brooks mentioned the piece in his Times column, and it provoked a small digital storm.“In the Basement of the Ivory Tower” (Viking; $25.in creative writing (he teaches composition and literature), and he writes in the style of mordant self-deprecation that is the approved M.He can be gratuitously snarky about his colleagues (though not about his students), but he’s smart and he’s generally good company.“In the Basement of the Ivory Tower” has the same kind of worm’s-eye charm as Stephen Akey’s “College” (1996), a story of undergraduate misadventures at Glassboro State College, though “College” is funnier.Professor X has entwined his take on teaching with episodes in his personal life involving the purchase of a house he could not afford and subsequent marital tension.These parts of the book are too vague to be engaging.

If you are going to go down the confessional path, you have to come across with the lurid details.We never find out where Professor X lives, what his wife does, what his kids are like, or much else about him.This is a writer who obviously enjoys the protection of a pseudonym.“In the Basement of the Ivory Tower” is one of those books about higher education that are based on anecdote and personal history and supported by some convenient data (sort of like this review, actually), but the story is worth hearing.Professor X thinks that most of the students he teaches are not qualified to attend college.

He also thinks that, as far as writing and literature are concerned, they are unteachable.But the system keeps pushing them through the human-capital processor.They attend either because the degree is a job requirement or because they’ve been seduced by the siren song “college for everyone.” X considers the situation analogous to the real-estate bubble: Americans are being urged to invest in something they can’t afford and don’t need.Why should you have to pass a college-level literature class if you want to be a state trooper? To show that you can tough it out with Henry James? As Professor X sees it, this is a case of over-selection.

The X-Man notes that half of all Americans who enter college never finish, that almost sixty per cent of students who enroll in two-year colleges need developmental (that is, remedial) courses, and that less than thirty per cent of faculty in American colleges are tenure-track.That last figure was supplied by the American Federation of Teachers, and it may be a little low, but it is undeniable that more than half the teaching in American colleges is done by contingent faculty (that is, adjuncts) like Professor X.This does not mean, of course, that students would learn more if they were taught by tenured professors.

Professor X is an adjunct, but he is also a dedicated teacher, and anyone reading his book will feel that his students respect this.

He reprints a couple of course evaluations that sum up his situation in two nutshells: Course was better than I thought.Before this I would of never voluntarily read a book.But now I almost have a desire to pick one up and read.I really like Professor X , this is why I took the course because I saw he was teaching it.He’s kind of enthusiastic about things that probably aren’t that exciting to most people, which helps make the three hours go by quicker.

Professor X blames this state of affairs on what he calls “postmodern modes of thought,” and on the fact that there are more women teaching in college, which has had “a feminizing effect on the collective unconscious of faculty thought.” He also takes some shots at the academic field of composition and rhetoric, which he regards as low on rigor and high on consciousness-raising.Professor X’s own pedagogy is old-fashioned and his grading is strict (he once failed nine students in a class of fifteen)—and he hasn’t had much luck with his students, either.When he is not taking on trends in modern thought, Professor X is shrewd about the reasons it’s hard to teach underprepared students how to write.

“I have come to think,” he says, “that the two most crucial ingredients in the mysterious mix that makes a good writer may be (1) having read enough throughout a lifetime to have internalized the rhythms of the written word, and (2) refining the ability to mimic those rhythms.If you read a lot of sentences, then you start to think in sentences, and if you think in sentences, then you can write sentences, because you know what a sentence sounds like.Someone who has reached the age of eighteen or twenty and has never been a reader is not going to become a writer in fifteen weeks.On the other hand, it’s not a bad thing for such a person to see what caring about “things that probably aren’t that exciting to most people” looks like.

Professor X has published a follow-up essay, in The Atlantic, to promote the book.

How to write better essays nobody does introductions properly nbsp

He’s on a mini-crusade to stem the flood of high-school graduates into colleges that require them to master a liberal-arts curriculum.He believes that students who aren’t ready for that kind of education should have the option of flat-out vocational training instead.They’re never going to know how to read Henry James; they’re never going to know how to write like Henry James 6 Jun 2011 - Why we have college.   may have been huge, but about which I was ignorant—they seemed earnestly and unproblematically engaged with the academic experience. If I was naïve   A lot of confusion is caused by the fact that since 1945 American higher education has been committed to both theories..

They’re never going to know how to read Henry James; they’re never going to know how to write like Henry James.

But why would they ever need to? This is the tracking approach.You don’t wait twenty years for the system to sort people out, and you don’t waste resources on students who won’t benefit from an academically advanced curriculum Since 1990, American education has tried—with some success—to make a fundamental shift from traditional teacher-focused instruction to more   to many college students, the academic and personal benefits of critical thinking are well established; students who can think critically tend to get better grades, are often better  .You don’t wait twenty years for the system to sort people out, and you don’t waste resources on students who won’t benefit from an academically advanced curriculum.You make a judgment much earlier, as early as middle school, and designate certain students to follow an academic track, which gives them a liberal education, and the rest to follow a professional or vocational track.This is the way it was done for most of the history of higher education in the West nbd-dhofar.com/homework/help-me-with-an-engineering-homework-business-double-spaced-24-pages-6600-words-quality.This is the way it was done for most of the history of higher education in the West.It is still the way it’s done in Britain, France, and Germany.

Until the twentieth century, that was the way it worked here, too.In the nineteenth century, a college degree was generally not required for admission to law school or medical school, and most law students and medical students did not bother to get one.Making college a prerequisite for professional school was possibly the most important reform ever made in American higher education.It raised the status of the professions, by making them harder to enter, and it saved the liberal-arts college from withering away.This is why liberal education is the lite type of college education: it’s the gateway to the high-status professions.

And this is what people in other parts of the world mean when they say they want American-style higher education.They want the liberal arts and sciences.Assuming that these new books are right (not a fully warranted assumption), and that many students are increasingly disengaged from the academic part of the college experience, it may be because the system has become too big and too heterogeneous to work equally well for all who are in it.The system appears to be drawing in large numbers of people who have no firm career goals but failing to help them acquire focus.This is what Arum and Roksa believe, anyway.

Students at very selective colleges are still super-motivated—their motivation is one of the reasons they are selected—and most professors, since we are the sort of people who want a little gold star for everything we do, still want to make a difference to their students.But when motivation is missing, when people come into the system without believing that what goes on in it really matters, it’s hard to transform minds.If there is a decline in motivation, it may mean that an exceptional phase in the history of American higher education is coming to an end.That phase began after the Second World War and lasted for fifty years.Large new populations kept entering the system.

First, there were the veterans who attended on the G.Then came the great expansion of the nineteen-sixties, when the baby boomers entered and enrollments doubled.

Then came co-education, when virtually every all-male college, apart from the military academies, began accepting women.Finally, in the nineteen-eighties and nineties, there was a period of remarkable racial and ethnic diversification.These students did not regard college as a finishing school or a ticket punch.There was much more at stake for them than there had been for the Groton grads of an earlier day.

(How many hours do you think they put in doing homework?) College was a gate through which, once, only the favored could pass.

Suddenly, the door was open: to vets; to children of Depression-era parents who could not afford college; to women, who had been excluded from many of the top schools; to nonwhites, who had been segregated or under-represented; to the children of people who came to the United States precisely so that their children could go to college.For these groups, college was central to the experience of making it—not only financially but socially and personally.They were finally getting a bite at the apple.Its difficulty was a token of its transformational powers.

This is why “Why did we have to buy this book?” was such a great question.The student who asked it was not complaining.He was trying to understand how the magic worked.I (a Theory 2 person) wonder whether students at that college are still asking it.♦ Louis Menand has contributed to The New Yorker since 1991, and has been a staff writer since more » More: