Share this page!

Peter A. Shulman 📚 Profile picture
Twitter logo
10 Jan, 5 tweets, 1 min read
I'd like to read the whole suit but this is weird and I'm skeptical about it.

Regardless, it's preposterous that even if the plaintiffs got their way this would change a penny of rack rate tuition.
Like, reserving a small number of spots for the children of potential large donors may offend your sense of fairness but those future donations aren't affecting tuition rates.
This quote is shocking, as it was designed to be. Be skeptical.
They are including Rice in their lawsuit, which, iirc, has the lowest tuition in the whole AAU.
It's really bad practice to trumpet an allegation in a lawsuit and imply it's factual. But this is going to stick in peoples' minds.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Peter A. Shulman 📚

Peter A. Shulman 📚 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @pashulman

Peter A. Shulman 📚 Profile picture
5 Jan
I think this is a really interesting question and things have clearly changed, but I'm not sure the premise is entirely correct.
For example, were all Americans excited about going to the Moon? No. This poll is from 1967, two years before Apollo 11. Going to the moon is "not worth it" by 20 points.
Nearly a year after the first moon landing (and half a year after the second), the results are nearly the same.
Read 13 tweets
Peter A. Shulman 📚 Profile picture
5 Jan
As someone who’s contributed to my university’s policy on returning, this article misstates, misframes, and misinforms about what we are doing and why. No one thinks this is 3/20 & our brief window of remote instruction is precisely to insure the rest of the semester’s in-person.
Everyone on campus—students, staff, and faculty—overwhelmingly prefer in-person instruction (though we, like others, will probably experiment with more hybrid courses in the future if they work). Prof. Oster is right that the health risks now to most students are very low.
It’s true that not everyone on a campus is 18-24 years old & in otherwise perfect health. Yes, there are staff, faculty, & students who remain at greater risk, either unable to get vaccinated or for whom vaccination is insufficient protection. These will remain risks to manage.
Read 13 tweets
Peter A. Shulman 📚 Profile picture
4 Jan
This handsome fella needs to be better known en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussuri_dh…
Dholes used to live in North America but were among the megafauna that went extinct around the end of the Pleistocene.
Every time I read the latest arguments for the overkill hypothesis I'm like, of course, that makes sense. But then I read the latest objections and I'm like, damn, those sure are fatal.
Read 4 tweets
Peter A. Shulman 📚 Profile picture
2 Jan
Please. I beg of you. Stop using completely inapt historical analogies. Just describe what is happening.

(In 1981 there was one union that held a chokepoint on a major sector of the economy; there is nothing remotely like that for the nearly 14,000 school districts in the US.)
I actually think making K-12 schools go temporarily remote needs to be an absolute last resort. But if you're gonna say it should never happen you should also explain what to do when 10% or 20% of your teachers are home sick.
I don't know what Newark's numbers are but this is the problem over the coming weeks. What are schools supposed to do when a good chunk of teachers are out–and so are subs? This is not an easy problem to solve!
Read 5 tweets
Peter A. Shulman 📚 Profile picture
10 Oct 21
The key thing needed to understand the DLC/Third Way era is that Dems had lost the White House by considerable margins three cycles in a row. The New Deal coalition was over. Clinton came up with a strategy to win again (against an experienced incumbent who just won a war).
Then Gore won a narrow majority but lost the Electoral College. Bush won in 2004 but Obama had strong wins in 2008 and 2012. Clinton again won a good majority in 2016 buy you know what happened. And now Biden.

So Dems don’t really have a problem winning the presidency.. so…
Talking about presidential strategies doesn’t make sense! It never has. Because we are talking about Congress. And Dems have many obstacles to winning seats that can’t usually be transcended by electoral strategy.
Read 4 tweets
Peter A. Shulman 📚 Profile picture
8 Oct 21
Here’s a fun fact: the first modern Gifted and Talented programs were initially created in Georgia and North Carolina in the late 1950s and early 1960s.
They were definitely pushed by educators and psychologists who had sincere reasons for doing so—many believed there was a population of unusually bright children not only under-challenged by standard coursework but actively hurt by it.
The Cold War pressure for math-science education was another influence. The country needed more scientists and engineers!
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @pashulman has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @pashulman!

Read all threads by @pashulman

:(