A Clarification to a Post Today about a Tutor

10 Comments Post your own or leave a trackback: Trackback URL

1. 2old2teach says:

   March 6, 2015 at 10:21 pm

   Thank you, Diane, for writing this post.

   LikeLike

   Reply
2. Bridget says:

   March 6, 2015 at 10:55 pm

   I was disturbed by the tone of some of the comments on the original post. Mrs. Chen provides a service and others have no right to pass judgement on this service. I found her original comment informative and I appreciate her sharing with us. Thank you, Diane, for clarifying.

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Bridget says:

     March 6, 2015 at 10:56 pm

     Sorry…. Chyn…. Darn autocorrect.

     LikeLike

     Reply
   • Duane Swacker says:

     March 7, 2015 at 8:41 am

     I am not so sure that the picture has been clarified quite yet. See below.

     LikeLike

     Reply
3. Robert Rendo says:

   March 6, 2015 at 11:00 pm

   I stand corrected, and I apologize to Ms. Chyn . . . . .

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • KrazyTA says:

     March 6, 2015 at 11:11 pm

     Robert Rendo: your apology is exactly why I read all your comments on this blog.

     I have taken you to be someone who doesn’t do what the leading rheephormistas do: hold everyone else to unrealistically high standards that are often impossible to achieve whilst holding themselves responsible to, and accountable for, nothing and no one.

     You walk your own talk.

     Keep writing. I’ll keep reading.

     😎

     LikeLike

     Reply
     • Robert Rendo says:

       March 7, 2015 at 1:06 pm

       I’m not so interesting to read, but thank you.

       One tries to always have integrity. I understand Duane’s anger and identify it, but as a critical thinker, one must think about all sides of a story, and sometimes the most validating one is the one that has not yet been told.

       Still, I will always look for Duane’s posts and yours, and Ms. Chyn was gracious enought to respond to me.

       LikeLike

4. Duane Swacker says:

   March 7, 2015 at 8:38 am

   “Some readers made baseless accusations that she was somehow profiting by tutoring students for PARCC.”

   The comment that I made (parenthetical thought below) and Robert’s comment were not “baseless accusations” at the time they were written, see below in this comment, due to the wording used by both Ms. Chyn and Diane.

   I posted the following in response to Diane’s post :

   “Chyn’s words “Having developed relatively rigorous tests at a standardized testing company for over 20 years,” and Diane’s “and now tutors students for the PARCC.

   I have met the enemy and she isn’t us. . . yet.”

   That was my idiosyncratic way of “hoping” to get Ms. Chyn to read about just how nefarious standardized testing is.

   My words again:

   “Susan Chyn, if you are reading this, I challenge you to refute and/or rebutt what Noel Wilson has proven about the many epistemological and ontological errors that render any results COMPLETELY INVALID in these educational malpractices (from which you earn a living) that discriminate against and harm many many innocent children.”

   The parenthetical thought still stands as from Chyn’s own words as noted above one cannot determine if she has quit the testing industry or if she is still is doing test development. If she has quit then I would only modify the statement to make it from the present tense into the preterite (past) tense by adding an “ed” to earn.

   Diane’s words in this post:

   “She has worked in the standardized testing industry. . . ”

   That statement doesn’t mean that Ms. Chyn doesn’t still work in the testing industry. She could still be working in it.

   So allow me to ask for clarification:

   Does Ms. Chyn still work in testing development?

   LikeLike

   Reply
   • Duane Swacker says:

     March 7, 2015 at 8:54 am

     “She has worked. . .”

     The grammarian is coming out in me this morning but as a bit of further explanation I offer the following but not meaning to beat a dead horse:

     In using the past perfect tense “has worked” the implication and recognized meaning is that the action is still ongoing.

     To signify that the action has been completed and is no longer being done one should use the pluperfect which is “HAD worked”.

     Since the past perfect was used instead of the pluperfect one should assume that the action is still ongoing and that Ms. Chyn still works in the testing industry.

     To clear up the issue then what is needed is a definitive statement stating that Ms. Chyn does not work in the testing industry anymore.

     LikeLike

     Reply
   • dianeravitch says:

     March 7, 2015 at 8:59 am

     Duane, leave it alone. It is not illegal to work in the testing industry. Not everyone shares your views or Noel Wilson’s. you are making yourself out to be a zealot. Be wise. Back off.

     LikeLike

     Reply