My apologies, I thought you did not tell the students that some of the lectures were bullshit.
Joanna
Craven, Jim wrote:
That's fucked. You have all the power and you're using it to humiliate your students. Great.
Joanna
Response: I can see from your previous comments ( So you're punishing your students because most economic text books are biased? If I were your student, I'd be pissed at you. Joanna) that you are obviously not a very deep or critical thinker (biased not the same as objective--to be human is to be biased) so what you call "humiliation" others might call creative pedagogy.
In my textbook citations assignment, it is extra-credit; the operative word is extra as in extra work for me, sometimes necessitated by students not being with the program and then winding up needing extra-credit. Further, if students take the time and effort to find texts like "Anti-Samuelson" by Marc Linder or others written by the likes of Sherman, Bowles, et al they can find cites.
Now on this assignment, just who exactly gets "humiliated"? Remember, the warning is given on the first day of class and the exact number of bullshit lectures is given. So who gets "humiliated"?: Those who do not take the assignment seriously; those who do not regularly attend class; those who do not cross-check but rather uncritically accept what they are told; those who do not connect what they are taught about epistemology, critical thinking ,logical fallacies etc and the content of what they are getting; those who see themselves as passive consumers rather than active participants in their own education; those who are as superficial, lazy and mechanical in their thinking as this person Joanna (Who I hope is not a teacher) appears to be.
I hear, I forget. I see, I remember. I do, I understand.
Lao-tze
