Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Paul@BYC" wrote in message ... The good news is that exams in my classes are over tomorrow. The bad news is that i'll have too many essay exam papers to read. The good news is that i'm an easy grader, so long as I can see that thought and effort went into the essays. Clever counts. More good news: a month off to recuperate, polish up next semester's lectures and assignments and a week off with the family someplace where the daytime temps are in the 80's! ------ Sounds good Paul! Have a good holiday. |
#12
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Dec 16, 10:25*am, "Paul@BYC" wrote:
The good news is that exams in my classes are over tomorrow. The bad news is that i'll have too many essay exam papers to read. The good news is that i'm an easy grader, so long as I can see that thought and effort went into the essays. Clever counts. More good news: a month off to recuperate, polish up next semester's lectures and assignments and a week off with the family someplace where the daytime temps are in the 80's! And this *off topic* thread is started by one who supposedly only wishes to discuss boating in rec.boats? |
#13
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:12:38 -0500, HarryK
wrote: How do you teach clever? I'm sure Paul can speak for himself on this, but... I wish he would. A good, solid liberal arts education, a wide, catholic reading list, and rigorous Socratic methodology in the classroom will improve the "cleverness" of students who want to learn and learn to think. I understand your point but I've never thought of cleverness as something that could be taught. Some people have it, some think they have it and don't, and others could care less. I remember to this day a number of my graduate level college classes where the professors drove hard to sharpen the wits of his students. How did that work out? |
#14
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 23:42:43 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:12:38 -0500, HarryK wrote: How do you teach clever? I'm sure Paul can speak for himself on this, but... I wish he would. A good, solid liberal arts education, a wide, catholic reading list, and rigorous Socratic methodology in the classroom will improve the "cleverness" of students who want to learn and learn to think. I understand your point but I've never thought of cleverness as something that could be taught. Some people have it, some think they have it and don't, and others could care less. I remember to this day a number of my graduate level college classes where the professors drove hard to sharpen the wits of his students. How did that work out? He probably cut them down pretty easily! |
#15
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/16/2010 11:42 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:12:38 -0500, wrote: How do you teach clever? I'm sure Paul can speak for himself on this, but... I wish he would. A good, solid liberal arts education, a wide, catholic reading list, and rigorous Socratic methodology in the classroom will improve the "cleverness" of students who want to learn and learn to think. I understand your point but I've never thought of cleverness as something that could be taught. Some people have it, some think they have it and don't, and others could care less. I remember to this day a number of my graduate level college classes where the professors drove hard to sharpen the wits of his students. How did that work out? Would it not depend on how "clever" is being defined? Clever, for example, can include terms like "quick-witted." You can help students become more quick-witted. In fact, I think it reasonable to say that teaching via the Socratic method helps students think on their feet, as it were, and become more quick-witted and therefore, clever. Wouldn't you agree? |
#16
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Paul@BYC" wrote in message ...
On 12/16/2010 11:42 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:12:38 -0500, wrote: How do you teach clever? I'm sure Paul can speak for himself on this, but... I wish he would. A good, solid liberal arts education, a wide, catholic reading list, and rigorous Socratic methodology in the classroom will improve the "cleverness" of students who want to learn and learn to think. I understand your point but I've never thought of cleverness as something that could be taught. Some people have it, some think they have it and don't, and others could care less. I remember to this day a number of my graduate level college classes where the professors drove hard to sharpen the wits of his students. How did that work out? Would it not depend on how "clever" is being defined? Clever, for example, can include terms like "quick-witted." You can help students become more quick-witted. In fact, I think it reasonable to say that teaching via the Socratic method helps students think on their feet, as it were, and become more quick-witted and therefore, clever. Wouldn't you agree? That all depends on the definition of "is" and "can", as it were. Why do you refuse to engage Krause in debate? -- Ziggy® |
#17
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/17/2010 1:10 PM, Ziggy® wrote:
wrote in message ... On 12/16/2010 11:42 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:12:38 -0500, wrote: How do you teach clever? I'm sure Paul can speak for himself on this, but... I wish he would. A good, solid liberal arts education, a wide, catholic reading list, and rigorous Socratic methodology in the classroom will improve the "cleverness" of students who want to learn and learn to think. I understand your point but I've never thought of cleverness as something that could be taught. Some people have it, some think they have it and don't, and others could care less. I remember to this day a number of my graduate level college classes where the professors drove hard to sharpen the wits of his students. How did that work out? Would it not depend on how "clever" is being defined? Clever, for example, can include terms like "quick-witted." You can help students become more quick-witted. In fact, I think it reasonable to say that teaching via the Socratic method helps students think on their feet, as it were, and become more quick-witted and therefore, clever. Wouldn't you agree? That all depends on the definition of "is" and "can", as it were. Why do you refuse to engage Krause in debate? You're still here, Ziggy? I thought you had been subsumed by your other personas, Crotch and Harry Spoofer. Well, back into the filter you go. Engage Krause in debate? As we are both moderate to liberal in political beliefs, so far as I can tell, on what subjects do you think we would be in contention serious enough to initiate a debate? Perhaps you ought to email your response, as it isn't likely I'll see it here. |
#18
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/17/10 1:15 PM, Paul@BYC wrote:
On 12/17/2010 1:10 PM, Ziggy® wrote: wrote in message ... On 12/16/2010 11:42 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:12:38 -0500, wrote: How do you teach clever? I'm sure Paul can speak for himself on this, but... I wish he would. A good, solid liberal arts education, a wide, catholic reading list, and rigorous Socratic methodology in the classroom will improve the "cleverness" of students who want to learn and learn to think. I understand your point but I've never thought of cleverness as something that could be taught. Some people have it, some think they have it and don't, and others could care less. I remember to this day a number of my graduate level college classes where the professors drove hard to sharpen the wits of his students. How did that work out? Would it not depend on how "clever" is being defined? Clever, for example, can include terms like "quick-witted." You can help students become more quick-witted. In fact, I think it reasonable to say that teaching via the Socratic method helps students think on their feet, as it were, and become more quick-witted and therefore, clever. Wouldn't you agree? That all depends on the definition of "is" and "can", as it were. Why do you refuse to engage Krause in debate? You're still here, Ziggy? I thought you had been subsumed by your other personas, Crotch and Harry Spoofer. Well, back into the filter you go. Engage Krause in debate? As we are both moderate to liberal in political beliefs, so far as I can tell, on what subjects do you think we would be in contention serious enough to initiate a debate? Perhaps you ought to email your response, as it isn't likely I'll see it here. Well, I wasn't old enough to vote back then, but...would you have supported the nomination of Adlai Stevenson? :) Apparently "Ziggy" doesn't know the definition of...debate. |
#19
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Paul@BYC" wrote in message ...
On 12/17/2010 1:10 PM, Ziggy® wrote: wrote in message ... On 12/16/2010 11:42 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:12:38 -0500, wrote: How do you teach clever? I'm sure Paul can speak for himself on this, but... I wish he would. A good, solid liberal arts education, a wide, catholic reading list, and rigorous Socratic methodology in the classroom will improve the "cleverness" of students who want to learn and learn to think. I understand your point but I've never thought of cleverness as something that could be taught. Some people have it, some think they have it and don't, and others could care less. I remember to this day a number of my graduate level college classes where the professors drove hard to sharpen the wits of his students. How did that work out? Would it not depend on how "clever" is being defined? Clever, for example, can include terms like "quick-witted." You can help students become more quick-witted. In fact, I think it reasonable to say that teaching via the Socratic method helps students think on their feet, as it were, and become more quick-witted and therefore, clever. Wouldn't you agree? That all depends on the definition of "is" and "can", as it were. Why do you refuse to engage Krause in debate? You're still here, Ziggy? I thought you had been subsumed by your other personas, Crotch and Harry Spoofer. Well, back into the filter you go. Engage Krause in debate? As we are both moderate to liberal in political beliefs, so far as I can tell, on what subjects do you think we would be in contention serious enough to initiate a debate? Perhaps you ought to email your response, as it isn't likely I'll see it here. Pass this on to Paul. Pretty simple really. One of you two assholes will have to play Devil's advocate, if you two think so much alike. -- Ziggy® |
#20
![]()
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"HarryK" wrote in message m...
On 12/17/10 1:15 PM, Paul@BYC wrote: On 12/17/2010 1:10 PM, Ziggy® wrote: wrote in message ... On 12/16/2010 11:42 PM, Wayne.B wrote: On Thu, 16 Dec 2010 12:12:38 -0500, wrote: How do you teach clever? I'm sure Paul can speak for himself on this, but... I wish he would. A good, solid liberal arts education, a wide, catholic reading list, and rigorous Socratic methodology in the classroom will improve the "cleverness" of students who want to learn and learn to think. I understand your point but I've never thought of cleverness as something that could be taught. Some people have it, some think they have it and don't, and others could care less. I remember to this day a number of my graduate level college classes where the professors drove hard to sharpen the wits of his students. How did that work out? Would it not depend on how "clever" is being defined? Clever, for example, can include terms like "quick-witted." You can help students become more quick-witted. In fact, I think it reasonable to say that teaching via the Socratic method helps students think on their feet, as it were, and become more quick-witted and therefore, clever. Wouldn't you agree? That all depends on the definition of "is" and "can", as it were. Why do you refuse to engage Krause in debate? You're still here, Ziggy? I thought you had been subsumed by your other personas, Crotch and Harry Spoofer. Well, back into the filter you go. Engage Krause in debate? As we are both moderate to liberal in political beliefs, so far as I can tell, on what subjects do you think we would be in contention serious enough to initiate a debate? Perhaps you ought to email your response, as it isn't likely I'll see it here. Well, I wasn't old enough to vote back then, but...would you have supported the nomination of Adlai Stevenson? :) Apparently "Ziggy" doesn't know the definition of...debate. Debate: Just another one of those things that Krause is skeered of. -- Ziggy® |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
OT bad news for most - good news for Harry | General | |||
Ole Thom; Bad News/Good News | ASA | |||
Good news for America is bad news for the Democrats | ASA | |||
More bad news for Bush, good news for Americans | General | |||
Good news-Bad news | ASA |