Higher Education Observer

Thoughtful article by an instructor on the autism spectrum.  I've been saying for years that academia has to start dealing with this condition. https://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/gradhacker/disabled-grad-school-how-do-i-tell-my-students?utm_source=Inside+Higher+Ed&utm_campaign=18a9ccaf02-DNU20180111&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_1fcbc04421-18a9ccaf02-198482621&mc_cid=18a9ccaf02&mc_eid=ab27a3f05f

My husband likes to watch the reruns of the TV show Monk .  In fact, they are on quite frequently at our house. The Randy Newman theme song is deeply imprinted on my soul.  It was clever and they are a good way to waste an hour after a debilitating day at work. However, I have a lot of problems with Mr. Monk (or the writers) and you people are going to hear about them.  (to quote Mr. Costanza on Festivus day). The main issue is the portrayal of his mental illness, which seems to be extreme OCD and anxiety.  First, he is called the "defective detective," which is about as insulting to people with mental illness as you can get. Second, the illness is played for laughs and scorn, not for compassion.  His friends have compassion, most of the time (OCD people can be frustrating) but the audience is given permission to laugh.  Third, his OCD is selective and only shows up when it helps the plot. Fourth, he doesn't take medication, because it changes his persona

Faculty developer types always encourage faculty to get students engaged with a think-pair-share activity.  I'm ok with that; I've done it, it's a good conversation starter. But it's overused and not always effective.  The worst teaching technique is the one you do to the exclusion of all others.  Just like all lecture is bad, throwing in a think-pair-share to pretend to get engagement or to take up time is bad. First, the question/prompt must be good.  Second, there must be a deliverable or accountability. A version I have used is think-pair-share-square-cube. 1.  Students individually write down some ideas that they are processing about the topic of lecture/unit/etc. 2.  Each share with a partner, usually a seat partner (which is not always great because they may be sharing with the same person all the time); 3. That pair shares with another pair to get more input and perhaps with guided questions or an added tweak. 4.  That quartet engages with another qua