You're right, Tom. It is a lot of insider stuff. Just try to imagine a bunch of faculty from church-related colleges and universities gathering to talk about a post-doctoral fellows program that prepares recent Ph.D graduates to teach at these schools. http://www.lillyfellows.org
I think your link to these books on radical academics does not necessarily apply here.
Withdrawn, with apologies. Any program that twice had John Fea as a fellow can't be all bad.
Re Schwehn, I do have reservations about a certain “community-based” approach to the academy, especially in light of O'Sullivan's Law. There is a certain numbing center-left orthodoxy coming out of the “club” that I find pretty creepy, and antithetical to the purpose of a liberal arts education.
This academic Esperanto is somewhat followable but seems intentionally obscurantist to a civilian such as myself, John.
It's almost like they don't want “outsiders” to know what the hell they're up to.
http://www.ditext.com/searle/searle1.html
You're right, Tom. It is a lot of insider stuff. Just try to imagine a bunch of faculty from church-related colleges and universities gathering to talk about a post-doctoral fellows program that prepares recent Ph.D graduates to teach at these schools. http://www.lillyfellows.org
I think your link to these books on radical academics does not necessarily apply here.
Withdrawn, with apologies. Any program that twice had John Fea as a fellow can't be all bad.
Re Schwehn, I do have reservations about a certain “community-based” approach to the academy, especially in light of O'Sullivan's Law. There is a certain numbing center-left orthodoxy coming out of the “club” that I find pretty creepy, and antithetical to the purpose of a liberal arts education.
Tom: You need to read Schaehn's *Exiles from Eden*. I would love to get your take on it. I think you would like it.