The Little Professor responds to an article in the CHE, in “Nightmare on Grading Street”:

…It is unfortunately the case (for us, I mean) that the most incompetent instructors may also be charming, winsome, and personable in all respects, while some of the most brilliant and influential may also be monsters of the first order. By the same token, the monster may be incompetent and the charmer may be brilliant….

She goes on to make a number of very reasonable statements about course evaluations, performance pressure and performance measurement of professors, and some systemic issues the column brought up.

I expect the original column is just messed up, myself.

It’s the sort that makes me wonder whether the CHE wants to be the Fox News of academia, or if they’ve just made a years-long habit of buying columns from straw men. Or, most frighteningly of all, is the whole astounding disconnectedness of CHE’s columnists really a reflection of a real disconnectedness among real professors? Are these outrageous-souding columns, in other words, representative of what professors think? Cause if that’s the case… whoa.

[My guess, from the short list?: Whoa]

If you come across an article in CHE in a few years complaining about how little time there is to blog, even though all professors are of course expected to do it, that might be me. Think back to this, and you’ll get the gag. [Due mainly to the fact that I surely will not be a professor....]