# data[].attributes.headline
This sounds very similar to teacher education

# data[].attributes.subject
This sounds very similar to teacher education

# data[].attributes.body
I think it is different because it isn't just about teacher education. But how do we do a better job communicating and distinguishing that?

# data[].attributes.body
teacher education for what? for whom? with whom?

# data[].attributes.body
I don't feel this reflects some of the critical issues we've been discussing in our college- I feel like even- "teaching for social justice" would get us a bit closer to that ... but even still- what exactly are we teaching?

# data[].attributes.body
Does out whole dept not do teacher education?

# data[].attributes.body
The program description is bland. I see now why this really isn't going to communicate the critical issues we wrestle with in our program and courses.

# data[].attributes.body
The ambiguity of the working definition of the word "we" makes it a bit difficult to think about how to comment on the titles; though we can do so individually, it's tough to think about us as a collective because we haven't quite established that

# data[].attributes.body
I think this is a very vague title. It reads like a 'catch all' for whatever couldn't be in the others

# data[].attributes.body
I don't see that as my research focus.

# data[].attributes.headline
We are concerned that the "in public life" is going to be confusing to possible audience. Education and Society? 

# data[].attributes.subject
We are concerned that the "in public life" is going to be confusing to possible audience. Education and Society? 

# data[].attributes.headline
How does this differ from Learning and teaching? 

# data[].attributes.subject
How does this differ from Learning and teaching? 

# data[].attributes.headline
Struggling to distinguish between area one and two

# data[].attributes.subject
Struggling to distinguish between area one and two

# data[].attributes.body
We like the "teaching and learning" part and feel as if that is a collective investment

# data[].attributes.body
It reads as very Deweyian - the "in public life" part.

# data[].attributes.headline
How about Teaching and Learning Across Disciplines? We worry that people looking for disciplinary study won't see themselves. 

# data[].attributes.subject
How about Teaching and Learning Across Disciplines? We worry that people looking for disciplinary study won't see themselves. 

# data[].attributes.body
Looking for a metaphor to frame the relationship between the three emphasis areas as that is still unclear

# data[].attributes.body
Yeah, we had that title in the mix for a while. Why did we drop it? Is it because there are people who want to be in this group who aren't part of a "discipline"?

# data[].attributes.body
we universally do this and care about this, though we have varying commitments to this as far as research interests go; all of our 'day jobs' are teacher ed, though this isn't all of our research focus

# data[].attributes.headline
If this is a catch-all title, what may be an alternative?

# data[].attributes.subject
If this is a catch-all title, what may be an alternative?

# data[].attributes.headline
Adding the word "studies" certainly signals a recognizable field. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Adding the word "studies" certainly signals a recognizable field. 

# data[].attributes.body
if we don't offer classes in the disciplines, they shouldn't be specializations or tracks.

# data[].attributes.headline
Are we offering enough classes to align with these titles? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Are we offering enough classes to align with these titles? 

# data[].attributes.body
We want a description/title that draws people in but doesn't constrain us in the future as language changes. Simple is better?

# data[].attributes.body
This is valid and something I'm concerned about. I think our disciplinary specialties need to be communicated but it is hard to justify as a "track".

# data[].attributes.body
An idea is to have a tagline that emphasizes who we currently are. So simple titles with a powerful tag line and rich descriptions. Tag lines and descriptions are easy to change. Titles are not.

The AI titles sound like tag lines.

# data[].attributes.body
can we just have one program and let people make their own emphasis?

# data[].attributes.body
This argh is just thinking about how this would cause the curriculum process to collapse (not the valid points). Emphasis areas help us manage all the scheduling and curriculum issues.... (but maybe we can come up with new organizational systems).

# data[].attributes.headline
Living, Struggling, Being and Striving to be in Community

# data[].attributes.subject
Living, Struggling, Being and Striving to be in Community

# data[].attributes.body
These feel missing to me

# data[].attributes.body
is the emphasis here on learners?

# data[].attributes.headline
leaning more and more toward not having the emphasis areas--there's so much overlap across them

# data[].attributes.subject
leaning more and more toward not having the emphasis areas--there's so much overlap across them

# data[].attributes.headline
Research methods are missing here. We know that they are in the bins, but there is nothing to foreground our strength in research. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Research methods are missing here. We know that they are in the bins, but there is nothing to foreground our strength in research. 

# data[].attributes.headline
Teaching for Healthy and Just Communities

# data[].attributes.subject
Teaching for Healthy and Just Communities

# data[].attributes.body
Considering the keyword of community, it seems like our focus might be more on faculty community, but what about grad student community. Specifically, would these titles and descriptions communicate a culture that grad students would want to join?

# data[].attributes.headline
There is so much overlap among the three emphasis areas...

# data[].attributes.subject
There is so much overlap among the three emphasis areas...

# data[].attributes.headline
I think we might consider "benchmarking" what are the other graduate schools of education who are doing work we admire and discourse do they use in their programs? Here are two who have interesting ways of presenting criticality and social justice in their program areas. 

# data[].attributes.subject
I think we might consider "benchmarking" what are the other graduate schools of education who are doing work we admire and discourse do they use in their programs? Here are two who have interesting ways of presenting criticality and social justice in their program areas. 

# data[].attributes.body
https://ed.stanford.edu/academics/doctoral

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
During the first two years of study, the Berkeley PhD in Education introduces you to research on current issues in education, theories of learning, human development, and inequality, educational policy, and research methods. Students proceed through the program during the first two years in a cohort, taking core courses together.

# data[].attributes.body
Focus on human learning, thinking, and being; as well as the role of learning environments (both designed and spontaneous) for what is learned. There are clear implications for teaching and schooling-- so completely avoiding those is challenging. Maybe "Learning and Learning Environments" is a candidate alternative but I don't love it because people may think schooling doesn't matter in this area (AVF)

# data[].attributes.body
This is the one I'd probably relate to the most

# data[].attributes.headline
If we put culture and society in the overall title, we can make this just Curriculum Studies. 

# data[].attributes.subject
If we put culture and society in the overall title, we can make this just Curriculum Studies. 

# data[].attributes.body
still not sure what to do with/make of the 'in public life' part...

# data[].attributes.headline
One reason I don't like within the disciplines is that it ignores the recent progress toward a more heterogenous understanding of knowledge, and who's knowledge counts as "disciplinary" -- this is related to epistemic diversity and who holds power "in the disciplines" 

# data[].attributes.subject
One reason I don't like within the disciplines is that it ignores the recent progress toward a more heterogenous understanding of knowledge, and who's knowledge counts as "disciplinary" -- this is related to epistemic diversity and who holds power "in the disciplines" 

# data[].attributes.headline
Don't understand this area and how it is different from teacher education. I'm not saying it is not different - I just don't see it in the titles. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Don't understand this area and how it is different from teacher education. I'm not saying it is not different - I just don't see it in the titles. 

# data[].attributes.body
It does seem like it would be good to create subgroups of similar size, if possible (when it comes to # of faculty, # of courses offered, # of courses responsible for staffing, etc.) Not sure if this is realistic or not.

# data[].attributes.headline
Alignment with Culture of Professional Societies 

# data[].attributes.subject
Alignment with Culture of Professional Societies 

# data[].attributes.body
Are there ways we are/should be considering the culture of professional organizations in how we organize our own graduate department (for example, looking at the language of relevant AERA Divisions and SIGS... like Division G and Division K, for example).

# data[].attributes.body
Emphasis areas sound like three department names

# data[].attributes.body
Critical Inquiry

# data[].attributes.headline
Can we be the Department of Teaching and Learning (not C&I)? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Can we be the Department of Teaching and Learning (not C&I)? 

# data[].attributes.body
that opens up the space that so many of these names, emphases, etc are trying to build--- "curriculum and instruction" sounds school focused and container-modeled.