<p>banned: will always? do you also mean it was always - because it wasn’t always. and intuitively if it wasn’t always, it can’t always be.</p>
<p>pwoods: i kept on thinking about adorno for some reason, and could never get danto off my tongue. haha, thanks for helping.</p>
<p>tc is kind of what is wrong with education schools in general, in my opinion, it is very highly respected, but the education itself is kind of middling. many teachers believe it is too theoretical, so it at times is not the most sought after for its teacher training. but what it is is highly influential. the models it has developed are followed throughout the world. and along with peabody, harvard and stanford, a degree from TC is fast track to some kind of well known policy position. but the bigger issue i have found from talking to a friend who went there has to do with the quality of students. TC gets the best of the best, but as she points out, you have students that have difficulty keeping up with the work that she considers high school equivalent. its hard for her to feel invested in her classes when it takes two weeks to read a short book.</p>
<p>this is a bigger critique i have of graduate school period, especially coming from columbia, is that instead of feeling it to be more challenging than college, it is a common complaint i find that it is less challenging, especially in more policy oriented areas. my friends doing public policy degrees agree there, folks doing ed degrees have said the same. about the only folks in grad school that i hear complaining are medical fields and law. in a sense you are paying for a degree, and not an education. you wont learn all that much, you wont struggle all that much. it is not the rigorous intellectual experience you would be used to coming from a top flight undergrad experience.</p>