He's so close to getting the point, isn't he?

Just saw a great ad on here for my linguistics courses. Apparently "she landed on the ground" is passive voice but "she was thrown to the ground by federal agents" is not. Yes, it's lousy writing but the first is active and the second clause is actually psssive.

I'm not a lawyer, just a writer whose work was stolen and an educator trying to do my job, but I wish they'd actually brought down Anthropic. We don't need "AI." We do need creators. www.nytimes.com/2025/09/29/o...

You mean it's not inevitable? Gasp.

I appreciate universities who tell me so clearly where not to send my son's tuition dollars. First major school to announce its education is 100% human will clean up. Come on, Delaware. After 250 years, it's time to be the first state again

I needed a good laugh. It is not indicative of a "restrictive worldview" to describe this column as a steaming pile of narrow minded, linguistically flawed, old man shouting at the wind bullshit www.nytimes.com/2025/09/14/o...

Happy hysterical ed reporting day, to all who celebrate. A few reminders about NAEP: it tests a sample of students, not all of them. Each student takes a part of the test, not the whole thing. The test is inconsequential to the student, teacher, and school. And it's not based on any curriculum.

Good. This deal is good for Big Tech and lawyers. As a member of the class, I say no deal. Run these "AI" vultures into the ground.

This is a well balanced piece, but I think we can actually find consensus (well, Haidt can't b/c its not in his self interest): we need to divest from most ed-tech because many reasons while still teaching digital and media literacy. Just doing it more on paper. www.tes.com/magazine/tea...

Trinity understands the assignment

Funny how the tech hypists are so close to understanding: yes, if every "AI" company followed the law in collecting training data, they would be unable to develop their products and make $$$ (exactly, they shouldn't); if every author sued, they would destroy these predators (we should)

Friends don't let friends accept bad deals. Authors, including academic authors, register for the class action and demand that the case go to trial and bring down Anthropic and these other predatory corporations. authorsguild.org/news/anthrop...

I don't understand why the Authors' Guild would give these corporations a lifeline. They broke the law. They are harming people. They are wrong. We are right. Take them down. Reject the deal.

Yes, this. As a wonderful Professor of medieval French literature used to tells, we need to beware of the modern tendency to patronize the middle ages. www.nytimes.com/2025/08/26/o...

Come for the cultural criticism. Stay for the ethno nationalism.

I'm glad WaPo is drawing attention to the hypocrisy and racism at the heart of the administration's chaotic approach to multilingual learners, but yet again I am begging them to talk to an actual expert so they can frame language acquisition as an asset not a deficit. wapo.st/4nfNKcX

See my previous post. Shot and chaser! Well said

Very funny but next time perhaps they could ask a linguist to write this rather than just speed reading The Prodigal Tongue and declaring themselves experts? The methodology is, um, well

For anyone who thinks my adopted state of Delaware is boring, this article has it all. Including a magnificent Spinal Tap description: it's not his best piece of art, but it is his biggest www.nytimes.com/2025/08/21/a...

I know my colleague just said "who's running this ship?" but I definitely heard "who's running this shit?" and it worked perfectly

The Post's article is mistaken. Rescinding the "dear colleague" letter does not change the requirements for schools and districts. The doc in question was a clear, concise summary of responsibilities under existing law and SCOTUS rules. They have not changed. What has changed is enforcement

This is a pretty good take, a longer version of Tressie McCottom Millan's argument that AI is mid tech. Mostly it's a massive time suck from more important work. Tedious not revolutionary

Funny how the discourse has decided that a synthetic BS generating plagiarism world burning machine has defined this year's senior class and not ... you know everything that's happened in the US since 2020. Come on

So interesting. The only argument in favor of "AI" slop-books is to justify the financial investment of commercial publishers. I hope AFT here is taking notice (unlikely). Turns out teacher unions, parents, students, and legislators don't have to all bow down to the tech corps.

I opened this article, and f!@#$ing Elsevier immediately popped up an intrusive and unwanted offer to use "AI" to summarize it. I somehow don't think commercial academic publishers are on our side.

This is such an important conversation. #GiftLink #GiftArticle

Just found a new way to teach teachers to avoid the phrase non-native speaker

Every day is Yorkshire Day

Where can I get a bumper sticker that says "it's between me and my grammarian"?

<high hat>

Feature not a bug

this is just to say I have released the funding that was in the icebox and which you were probably counting on to fund your vital programming for multilingual learners, their families, and communities

The irony is that it would be a phenomenal business decision that's a gift to your marketing and branding (sorry, comms) unit. But pro-tip: just because Canvas's VC overlords push AI slop doesn't mean unis have to adopt it. They can choose not to deploy new "features". Mine did! But ...

"The Ed. Dept. Wants to Steer Grant Money to AI **CORPORATIONS**. What That Means for **FUNDING OF PUBLIC** Schools" Fixed it for you, @edweek.org

Respectfully, there's a critical 4th point here for those of us who are able, and that's to petition IT departments to resist or refuse the unwanted and unwarranted intrusion of anti-educational "features" and products. I get the "free" incursion strategy, but there's often a choice not to deploy

No, no, and no. Every word uttered/generated by the venture capitalists behind Instructure/Canvas betrays utter ignorance of teaching. Here's why ... www.chronicle.com/article/inst...

So let me get this straight. In 24 hours we have: (1) EO demanding that "AI" products only output regime-sanctioned biases; (2) brand-name university agrees to federal oversight of all decision making; (3) Instructure force-feeds "AI" slop into Canvas. Do you see a through-line here?

This had better be opt in. Directly contravenes everything in the AAUP statement. Petition your IT department. I will

This is actually very good. Hopefully @aaup.org will take this opportunity to distance itself from AFT's sell-out to OpenAI etc. This document needs to be the basis for every CBA renewal from here on. (Forgive me for having zero faith that will happen here.)

In my other life, I'm a crew hand for a community theater production of Little Mermaid. I finally understand. AI is the dinglehopper. It's a shiny new thing someone found. It must have a use. So we're going to do things like brush our hair with it until we work it out. (The dinglehopper is a fork.)

Good. Most people (especially those who haven't bought into the hype) see so-called "AI" for what it is. An anti-productivity and anti-competence tool.

#linguist needed in Aisle 2. Can anyone help me explain why this lyric from the Little Mermaid musical (don't judge, community theater keeps me sane) is a funny syntactic mangle: "It's love that she's in" (the song inevitably is "She's in Love")?

Signed. You should, too, if you care about education. "An open letter from educators who refuse the call to adopt GenAI in education" openletter.earth/an-open-lett...

This is a laundry list of rhetorical strategies to defend the adoption of a given technology for the purposes of advancing an ideology & economic regime: inevitability, unquestioning praise of “innovation,” buy-in from concerned stakeholders, assurances that partnership is not capitulation. 1/n

time to stop paying union dues? seems like AFT/AAUP doesn't need my monthly paycheck if they're I funded by big tech now

Tl;dr: AI is inevitable because big tech told us so, so they made us a course for us to inevitably use their products

But why listen to experts, AFT, when you think you know everything? AAUP needs independence from this dumpster fire. It's going to make it impossible to negotiate for contract protections against slop

AAUP sold out to AFT, who sold out to Microsoft. Do I have that right? So my choice is to leave the union and give up my ability to vote on employment conditions I will be bound by or see my dues go to this slop Great

It is entirely possible to shape how AI is and is not use by *not using it*. This is the worst kind of capitulation.

Education. That's the actual radical agenda this hateful administration is trying to destroy