<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Conditions of Invention</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.johnhendron.net/digest/2008/04/21/conditions-of-invention/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.johnhendron.net/digest/2008/04/21/conditions-of-invention/</link>
	<description>education technology</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 23:31:51 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.johnhendron.net/digest/2008/04/21/conditions-of-invention/#comment-290</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 02:15:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnhendron.net/digest/?p=257#comment-290</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;MW -&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I hear what you're saying. I think I understand tenure. In today's age, however, we're being told jobs could change what? 8-20 times in your life?&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Teaching may just be the one last job where you can still start at 22, and work for 30 years in the same building.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Despite the flawed system, it's the only one we have now, and I still hold out optimism for the ability to inspire change. I think a modified system, say, of 3-year review spans might be a nice place to move towards. I think 1-year increments are also too short for noted progress in professional development.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MW -</p>
<p>I hear what you&#8217;re saying. I think I understand tenure. In today&#8217;s age, however, we&#8217;re being told jobs could change what? 8-20 times in your life?</p>
<p>Teaching may just be the one last job where you can still start at 22, and work for 30 years in the same building.</p>
<p>Despite the flawed system, it&#8217;s the only one we have now, and I still hold out optimism for the ability to inspire change. I think a modified system, say, of 3-year review spans might be a nice place to move towards. I think 1-year increments are also too short for noted progress in professional development.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: M.W.</title>
		<link>http://www.johnhendron.net/digest/2008/04/21/conditions-of-invention/#comment-289</link>
		<dc:creator>M.W.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 01:10:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.johnhendron.net/digest/?p=257#comment-289</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;John,
That thought process is directly caused by the flawed tenure system. Why should someone be in a permanent position just because they have been there 5 years? Administration should have the will and the means of removing teachers with that stagnant attitude. It's hard to motive anyone to change without the proper carrots and sticks.&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>John,<br />
That thought process is directly caused by the flawed tenure system. Why should someone be in a permanent position just because they have been there 5 years? Administration should have the will and the means of removing teachers with that stagnant attitude. It&#8217;s hard to motive anyone to change without the proper carrots and sticks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.356 seconds -->
