Thursday, June 04, 2009

Academic Palaver

Just received this nearly incomprehensible email that, on the positive side, is not one of the 100 "Obama makes qualifying for a loan easy" emails I've received in the last three days:

online education for liberation will focus on the societal, social, political, economic and philosophical perspectives of transformative models how digital learning communities foster critical reflections and perspective change; experience systemic or covert discriminations; and also discuss the liberation topic from a progressive viewpoint. Thus, the proposed publication attempts to build a better understanding on how online educators/designers/tutors/learners can talk about injustice and inequality to a virtual group with an identity of privilege, and revealing about racism and cover racism to diverse people, sexism to men and women, heterosexism to straight people. This is important to scrutinize transformative models how to bring a global and multicultural partnership of faculty, administrators, professionals, teachers, community activists, researchers and parents as well as understand and challenge the injustices digital societies face. In the fields of online education, liberation, models for social equality, etc., there exists a need for an edited collection of chapters in this area.

Jesus.. that's a crapload of cant and as an academic writing professor I'd just like the author to pick one approach (preferably a grammatically correct one, but I'd settle for consistency) on how to approach "how."

The use of "about" is also extra-grammatical.

But mainly.. it's a steaming pile of academic horseshit..

"discuss the liberation topic"

doesn't that mean "discuss liberation?" Or is there a liberation 'atopic?" Entropic? Dystopic? Why write like that?


and revealing about racism and cover racism to diverse people, sexism to men and women,

holy cow... they now have "cover" racists? Is that like bands and cover bands, or just pathetic writing?

Finally, the last sentence of the big quote up above just makes me want to cry:

Redundant "fields" and "area"
"there exists a need for"
the "edited" thing..

Somewhere in Hell, Mencken and Orwell are arguing over who is responsible for this kind of trash writing.

Get a real job you uber-academic troll - someday it will make your theoretical moaning more authentic.


Anonymous said...

I could not even finish reading that! Right now on my Home Rule Charter Commission we are trying to understand what is meant by "binding advisory opinion"

Anonymous said...


wasn't that your Major at Cal?


Anonymous said...

Isn't that what they teach all those admins when they get their EdD's?