4 6-ounce 3/4 inch-thick red snapper fillets with skin
1/4 teaspoon red pepper flakes
1 large scallion
2 tablespoons roasted sesame oil
1 tablespoon reduced-sodium soy sauce
Directions
Preheat oven to 450 F. Mince garlic to make 1 tablespoon. Place an 18-by 24-inch sheet of foil on a cookie sheet and spray with cooking spray. Place fillets in a single layer in the center. Evenly sprinkle garlic and pepper flakes on both sides of fish; leave skin side up. Fold foil in half over fish, leaving a little headspace, then fold to seal edges. Bake 10 minutes or until fish just flakes when tested with a fork.
As fish roasts, thinly slice scallion to make 1/3 cup. In a small skillet, heat oil on high until hot but not smoking. Add scallions and cook 30 seconds, or until just wilted. Set aside. Using a splotted spatula, transfer fillets to plates. Evenly distribute scallions and sesame oil over fish and drizzle with soy sauce
From http://teamsugar.com/group/152844/blog/1671699
Search, share, and cook your recipes on Mac OS X with SousChef!
Thoughts of one of my favorite college professors, Howard Bernstein. He was a real outsider-type in the university and ended up leaving Wesleyan the year before I graduated. He was denied tenure, having focused more on his teaching then on his own research. He died about a year ago. Enjoy.
I was curious to see what Gee had to say about video games, having first read him six years ago in the only good course that was part of my masters in education degree – courtesy of the City of New York Teaching Fellows Program at crappy Pace way downtown in the crude anthill purgatory that is the Financial District. In Social Linguistics and Literacies Gee articulates a sociocultural approach to language, learning and literacy. It kind of shocks me in retrospect that my “preparation” to be a high school English teacher of 17- to 21-year olds in the stand-in cinematic ghetto of Bed-Stuy was so spotty, and this in what was considered a model fast-track certification program. <shudder>. I remember finding Gee very compelling when I first read him – thinking the political implications of his work ground-breaking. So it was interesting to read Gee again, post-meat-grinder, from my later vantage point as a grizzled veteran of the inner city hallways.
hangzhou
Trends and buzzwords are the bread and butter of teacher education – one of the things that people were always telling us in our classes was to “activate prior knowledge” in order to get students interested in seemingly arcane topics. A lot of what we were taught – aside from how to use the right *scientific sounding* to prop up the floundering reputations of schools of education (as if they were ever prestigious!), was pretty unobjectionable – like, of course, as a teacher one should be intentional when introducing topics and always new ideas to what students already know. It is not a quirk of inner city students that they resist learning about things they don’t think are relevant to their lives. We all do it, or at least we should.
But anyway, one of Gee’s points is that video games, like books, help us build a more robust mental framework by contributing to the construction of linkages between first-hand experience and the life of the mind. He also says at one point, and then barely touches on it since in all that I’ve read, that access to high quality video games is a plausible social justice agenda. Maybe that’s why I have this vague sense of Social Linguistics and Literacies as a political book – tossing bombshells like sunflower seed shells on my classroom floor…
I’m sure most of us have come across coverage of NYU student Alana Taylor’s post on MediaShift about the lack of new media course offerings at her J school and the paper-bound career-ladder-climbing mentality that prevails among faculty members. She quotes one of her professors, and, as if on cue, the professor responds by banning live-blogging and twittering in a class entitled “Reporting Generation Y.” Taylor has been admonished by officials at NYU who basically accuse her of poor form – personally and journalistically – in not clearing her piece with the professor and fellow students, but NYU authorities and blogosphere pundits recognize that while NYU, as a private university, is technically exempt from the First Amendment concerns that would certainly be in effect in a CUNY classroom, to engage in active censorship in the form of declaring classroom discussions off-the-record is a losing argument and not what anyone really wants.
Taylor’s reportage may sometimes veer into the snarky and sound-bitey, as when she characterizes the journalism department as “exceptionally estrogen-infested,” but I think the volume of controversy surrounding her piece in the blogosphere point to a definitional weakness of the university. Universities are effective transmitters of well-defined bodies of knowledge, but less so of emerging realities and developing social practices. Universities are composed of many individuals with highly specialized knowledge bases and expertise. In many instances, groundbreaking and paradigm-changing work does flow from institutions of higher education, especially insofar as experts are employed as tenured faculty (think of a university-based historian or a research scientist) as opposed to part-time emissaries from the private sector (business school adjuncts, for example). What I’m suggesting is that universities as they are traditionally organized may not be structurally compatible with quickly-developing expertises like social media.
Not earth-shattering, I know, what can you expect? – this is just a blog, folks.
Filed under: Uncategorized — identityvacuum @ 1:05 am
Yesterday we toyed around with the idea of online identity/ies – one or many? consistent or fractured? Dayna invoked YouTubers’ spiralesque discourse and the way some participants in quote unquote online communities seem eager to slip into the crowd, slip out of responsibility for one’s words. Mitch commented that he has frequently been impressed by how online communities are often very diligent self-policers, and the way rational vigilantes almost rise up, sphinx-like. And Rose pointed out that there is a sort of movement under way in which people who want to be taken seriously on the internet, often people whose professional identities are in some way connected to the internet-specific work they do, endeavor to build consistent identities across different kinds of spaces, in the quote unquote real world and on the internet. I’ve seen this, or what I think maybe she was referring to, and Rose correct me if you read this and you meant something else, but you did mention you were building a wiki. This one teacher-lady Vicky Davis aka coolcatteacher is a wikilover (http://coolcatteacher.wikispaces.com/) is an example of someone with a pretty unified identity, and if you go to the about page there is even a black and white posed studio picture of her from like 1990. Anyway, we moved on to a discussion of the internet as a space for communication and interaction versus the internet as a medium that discourages sociality.
This afternoon I was looking through some of the materials from earlier in the semester, more specifically the chapter on panoramic travel in The Railway Journey by Wolfgang Schivelbusch. I found the last five pages or so especially fascinating, when he discusses how reading while traveling became a thing to do. It turns out that among a certain class of people – those who before would have traveled by stage coach with a small group of close friends before in “intense conversation and interaction” (p. 67), it became very a la mode to remark on the insufferable banality of modern travel. But what they really missed was the easy conviviality of their past selves. So they mopped up their disappointment with highbrow travelogues while annihilating space and time. Meanwhile the working folks who traveled third and fourth class with no compartments as in first and second class had nothing to compare rail travel to, and so they loved it and all piled in and had a great time and didn’t read.
Schivelbusch cites a contribution to the so-called medical congress of 1866 that declared “a new form of locomotion has so profoundly altered the traveler’s relations to each other” (p. 69). If you replaced locomotion with communication that sentence could have been written today. In this rich rich country we are made complacent by our objects, devices, and my – as I call it – my “little machine,” and so we all, all classes, absorb the excess capital.
Ingredients
