I’d say it has much to do with “education” or however you choose to call it. Peer review is a circlejerk on the publisher’s, the reviewer’s, and reviewee’s part. It’s all an attempt to get published, because positive findings draw more press and are thus more profitable. The reviewee wants to get published, the publisher wants to start printing, and the reviewee gets pressured as a result.

They become tribalists, then flood these institutions because who else can “educate” but the same people giving each other reach arounds? To add to the bs, it’s these institutions who train lower level teachers.

Good news is, if my ideas are correct, it’s largely an organic process, though it can certainly be taken advantage of. It’s also why I think rural areas where education isn’t centralized lean conservative who, in turn, tend to be less inexorable. The problem is, how do you make decentralized schooling palatable to employers?

While I certainly see a natural shift in attitude when it comes to new hires, I think the best option is to allow standardized testing to be done as an equivalency to diplomas. In this way, it emphasizes what you know instead of hinging on the prestige of where you may have learnt it.

I’d say it has much to do with “education” or however you choose to call it. Peer review is a circlejerk on the publisher’s, the reviewer’s, and reviewee’s part. It’s all an attempt to get published, because positive findings draw more press and are thus more profitable. The reviewee wants to get published, the publisher wants to start printing, and the reviewee gets pressured as a result.

They become tribalists, then flood these institutions because who else can “educate” but those who play the game? To add to the bs, it’s these institutions who train lower level teachers.

Good news is, if my ideas are correct, it’s largely an organic process, though it can certainly be taken advantage of. It’s also why I think rural areas where education isn’t centralized lean conservative who, in turn, tend to be less inexorable. The problem is, how do you make decentralized schooling palatable to employers?

While I certainly see a natural shift in attitude when it comes to new hires, I think the best option is to allow standardized testing to be done as an equivalency to diplomas. In this way, it emphasizes what you know instead of hinging on the prestige of where you may have learnt it.

I’d say it has much to do with “education” or however you choose to call it. Peer review is a circlejerk on the publisher’s, the reviewer’s, and reviewee’s part. It’s all an attempt to get published, because positive findings draw more press and are thus more profitable. The reviewee wants to get published, the publisher wants to publish, and the reviewee gets pressured as a result.

They become tribalists, then flood these institutions because who else can “educate” but those who get published? Then, these institutions train lower level teachers.

Good news is, if my ideas are correct, it’s largely an organic process, though it can certainly be taken advantage of. It’s also why I think rural areas where education isn’t centralized lean conservative who, in turn, tend to be less inexorable. The problem is, how do you make decentralized schooling palatable to employers?

While I certainly see a natural shift in attitude when it comes to new hires, I think the best option is to allow standardized testing to be done as an equivalency to diplomas. In this way, it emphasizes what you know instead of hinging on the prestige of where you may have learnt it.