Executive Functioning, Philosophy, what Professors waste time arguing about

I recently received an email sent to a group of profs using a particular room on campus reminding us (scolding?) to put chairs and tables back in rows and columns before leaving.  The message was prompted by an angry prof fed up with having to "restore" the room to what he believes is the "standard" of rows and columns.  Another prof quickly responded by saying that she "prefers semi-circles" for her more discussion based class.   The early exchanges would seem funny to an outsider, but the subtext was intense: "What is meant by the "standard?"  Aren't "rows and columns" a throw-back to educational approaches imported from England in the 1850's along with chalk and slate?  Why shouldn't profs using rows and columns "restore" the classroom to semi-circles?  Who decides "the standard" way of teaching?  Blood boils.  Faculty gather in small groups to argue straight rows vs. semi-circles.  Battle lines are drawn. Or.... (most of my responses literally contained this one word: "Or...") Or... Can we appreciate a diversity of approaches to teaching?  There is no one science to how to teach an effective class.  Some Profs lecture (sage on the stage) while some work to engage discussion (guide on the side).  All can be interesting.  All can foster learning.  We all have our own biases. Or... Is this really ...
Source: Asperger's Conversations - Category: Autism Authors: Source Type: blogs