[email protected]

In a message dated 1/4/2004 6:15:52 PM Mountain Standard Time,
jrossedd@... writes:
-=- Yes, I understand the view that experts are just as likely as not
to
be stupid and harmful (not an opinion I share) but that's not the part that
bothers me -- adopting the attitude that experts are stupid is no smarter
than
accepting their counsel wholesale.=\=


I really think you're missing the point. Your "yes I understand" did NOT
follow the example I gave.

Some expertise is expertise in doing something which produces more harm than
good. And not all teachers are evil. But some aspects of teaching are evil,
in that they are harmful and non-productive. And for so someone with a
doctoral degree in education (as I'm supposing the "edd" in "jrossedd" stands for)
to keep on and on and on defending degrees in general as though they were all
of one elemental piece ignores the actual objection to "experts."

In a wrestling match if you don't tap out you could get hurt, and if you
intend to defend all trained educators you just need to tap out. This is not the
arena in which you'll succeed in that defense.

Someone I've known for twenty years, since she was a teen, has a master's
degree in early childhood ed. She got in in one year, following a quickie
undergrad degree in elementary ed. NOT following any classrrom experience outside
the one practicum/student teaching, in a daycare center.

She had no expertise in DOING anything. Her first job was supervising other
master's candidates in their student teaching. She was teaching what she had
never herself done. I'd like to think she was the only one, but anyone who
has been around schools knows there are administrators who have never taught,
and administrators who are there because they are crappy teachers, and the other
staff wanted to get them into an office, and away from the kids.

Hers is NOT a master's degree deserving the level of respect of people who
worked hard and discovered something new or provided a new method or idea. It
was the NEA stuffing the early-ed ballot box with a bunch of unemployed
"experts in early childhood education," so they can continue to press for government
funded (and eventually compulsory) school for children younger than the age of
five.

They might not succeed in that press; they might. But the market is flooded
with master's level experts now. Experts in separating babies and toddlers
from their mothers.

Sandra


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[email protected]

In a message dated 01/04/2004 8:56:41 PM Eastern Standard Time,
SandraDodd@... writes:


>
> I really think you're missing the point. Your "yes I understand" did NOT
> follow the example I gave.
>
> Some expertise is expertise in doing something which produces more harm than
>
> good. And not all teachers are evil. But some aspects of teaching are
> evil,
> in that they are harmful and non-productive. And for so someone with a
> doctoral degree in education (as I'm supposing the "edd" in "jrossedd"
> stands for)
> to keep on and on and on defending degrees in general as though they were
> all
> of one elemental piece ignores the actual objection to "experts."
>
> In a wrestling match if you don't tap out you could get hurt, and if you
> intend to defend all trained educators you just need to tap out. This is
> not the
> arena in which you'll succeed in that defense.
>



No, that never was and is not my intent.

But it does seem unlikely you and I are going to come to any better
understanding on this topic, and I have no problem being the one to just stop.
:) JJ


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]