Friday, November 07, 2003
Women, children, and editorial staffs first!
Money is bad! Or something. The editorial says, effectively, trying to get rid of old teachers to replace with cheaper, newer teachers will harm education too much to justify it. They don't provide an alternative for money-keeping, but that's beside the point. The stupidest thing they say in the article is:
While it might be financially savvy to only try to retain the professors that earn the least, there is a justifiable reason certain professors make more money than others—their contributions to the campus, through both research and experience, make them a valuable investment.
I don't know which classes the editorial staff took, but old teachers are horrible. The longer they teach, the more they suck at it. Really. Old teachers have little routines which seem to be specifically designed to make it harder for students to get anything out of the class, while newer teachers actually know how to teach.
As far as research goes, maybe have the experience, but generally, old people have old ideas, and aren't as willing to accept the changing priorities and issues as newer researchers are. Old people have more experience driving too, you know.
. . .
|
. . .
|
