The FBI paid an informant tens of thousands of dollars to infiltrate racial justice movements during the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests in Denver.
To create division, he accused activists of working with the police, and set up others to be arrested.
This framing and premises appear to be less about pedagogy and the advancement of knowledge and more about using student labor to help the professor prepare for public reactions and objections to his own work, which advances his own career.
Third, in this situation, the professor forced students to engage with his (very poor, sloppy) work, and solicited objections. During class, students objected to obvious errors that I also found, including the premises. The final exam required them to accept absurd premises.
To be clear, this is not a practice limited to these professors, or to professors with bad scholarship. Some very good scholars have done this, and I think it's worth re-thinking the practice or at least being aware of the dynamic and attribution issues.
First, these are stressful, mandatory exams. Although not uncommon at Harvard, it has always been a practice that rubs me the wrong way: using student labor **during exams** to generate useful ideas for professors, who then publish writing that doesn't credit the students.
Jokic 2021-2022:
- 97-288 from 3PT
- 33.7%
Embiid 2021-2022:
- 93-251 from 3PT
- 37.1%
Jokic shot 37 more 3’s than Embiid did last season at a lower clip… Why are we doing this? What gives people this thought? How is this a narrative?
THEY HATE THE PROCESS
BUTTERFLY BUTTERFLY has arrived for your listening pleasure, on allll of the platforms. Music Video coming soon.
Add this to a playlist, then throw it on repeat.
https://t.co/J5wgZhKo2M
Oh the Heat are being PETTY PETTY
After being fined by the NBA for "violating league injury reporting rules" - they've now listed EVERY SINGLE PLAYER on the injury report.