On Hardball’s pregame right now, a crowd of people—most of them, apparently, Hofstra students; almost all of them, judging from their cheers and jeers, Obama supporters—is gathered behind Chris Matthews as he chats with the Chicago Tribune’s Jill Zuckman and The New York Times’s Jeff Zeleny. Behind Matthews’s head, a large sign, its black background and its orange and white lettering standing out among the sea of Obamian Red and Blue, is being propped up by an unknown advocate. The sign advertises Ed in ‘08, an attempt to make education reform a key issue in the presidential campaign. I’ve written about their efforts before, on Campaign Desk, and must sadly acknowledge that, however worthy their cause, and however noble their efforts toward achieving it, that cause has now been completely trumped by the economy. Chalk yet another loss up to the crisis.
The Kicker — October 15, 2008 07:03 PM
Quixotic Signage of the Day: Ed in ‘08
By Megan Garber
Subscribe to the Columbia Journalism Review at our special Web rates.
Blog
The Kicker last updated: Fri 4:43 PM
- Greg Craig and Transparency
- Well, It May Deserve an Award in Something
- Now a Little Bit Less Excluded
- Thoughts on the Gelman/Silver Op-Ed
- The Luxury Store Has No Clothes
Desks
The Audit Business
The Observatory Science
- Saving Corwin’s Creatures MSNBC wades into new territory with environmental documentary 100 Heartbeats
- Trains, Planes, and Carbon Offsets Times keeps a needed eye on green premiums
Campaign Desk Politics & Policy
- Greg Craig and Transparency
- Not For All the News in China, Part I Former NYT Shanghai bureau chief Howard French on the coverage of Obama’s trip to Asia





I would not give up hope for education yet. That higher education is an important subject is proven by the recent responses of professors of economics, who turned out to be surprisingly responsive and "articulate" in this economic crisis. Instead of waiting to publish a few obscure articles months later, they got to work rapidly and distinguished themselves.
If only we could say the same for Linguistics professors, who remain mired in terminal trivia, best exemplified by the fatuous Language Log. As if English were not a huge international factitious business costing the world economy hundreds of billions of dollars a year, and more, if we added in opportunity costs.
The New York Times should establish a powerful international higher education section (The Australian provides something of a beginner's model), with well-organized comment, as at www.reddit.com and www.slashdot.org. Except for the Macquarie U. Schwartz blog, www.vc.mq.edu.au, most academic blogs are pathetic. Something that an international higher education section at NYT could help change. The traditional reporting mechanisms on higher education--Chronicle of etc.--would put you into a terminal bureaucratic sleep.
The mystery of education is that so few in America paid any attention to the stunning collapse of ETS Europe in its UK marking fiasco, so that the conclusions that should have been drawn about ETS and Kaplan in the U.S. did not get drawn.
If the U.S. simply made the COBUILD Intermediate English Grammar and English Grammar, and the Longman Advanced American Dictionary and Language Activator, official for all schools and first-year university English, while teaching texts to support the official books ("Great Expectations" is excellent for conditions called counterfactuals), within two years America would have the most integrated English teaching methods in the world.
Instead, we have pervasive parasitism. Azar "grammars." TOEFL. SAT. The best introduction to our ways in education is "The Art of Being a Parasite," not really about education, but really about education. Try looking at first-year composition courses.
CJR itself (an honest and interesting publication) has just had--search Dion--a blog entry that indicates how slovenly English teaching is in most Journalism schools. CJR should explore the implications of this story.
Posted by Clayton Burns on Wed 15 Oct 2008 at 09:16 PM