<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: In Other News&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.coreknowledge.org/2008/04/13/in-other-news/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.coreknowledge.org/2008/04/13/in-other-news/</link>
	<description>Closing the Achievement Gap: Teaching Content</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Mar 2010 17:44:17 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Diana</title>
		<link>http://blog.coreknowledge.org/2008/04/13/in-other-news/comment-page-1/#comment-2047</link>
		<dc:creator>Diana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 11:59:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coreknowledge.org/blog/2008/04/13/in-other-news/#comment-2047</guid>
		<description>I meant 5,678 traditional teachers, not 5.678.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I meant 5,678 traditional teachers, not 5.678.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Diana</title>
		<link>http://blog.coreknowledge.org/2008/04/13/in-other-news/comment-page-1/#comment-1620</link>
		<dc:creator>Diana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 14:23:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.coreknowledge.org/blog/2008/04/13/in-other-news/#comment-1620</guid>
		<description>Regarding Teach for America: 

The study, confined to North Carolina, involved only 69 TFA teachers (and 5.678 traditional teachers). For some interesting comments on the study, see eduwonkette&#039;s post:

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/eduwonkette/2008/03/teach_for_america_study_wrapup_1.html

Then the &lt;i&gt;Christian Science Monitor&lt;/i&gt; refers to &quot;the study&quot; without pointing to its limitations. The reader gets the impression that the study has proven something it has not.

Research has shown!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Regarding Teach for America: </p>
<p>The study, confined to North Carolina, involved only 69 TFA teachers (and 5.678 traditional teachers). For some interesting comments on the study, see eduwonkette&#8217;s post:</p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/eduwonkette/2008/03/teach_for_america_study_wrapup_1.html" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/eduwonkette/2008/03/teach_for_america_study_wrapup_1.html</a></p>
<p>Then the <i>Christian Science Monitor</i> refers to &#8220;the study&#8221; without pointing to its limitations. The reader gets the impression that the study has proven something it has not.</p>
<p>Research has shown!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
