Is my education somewhat lacking because in the course of my life I have seen only one episode of the Simpsons? In that episode Bart cheated on a test, was consequently identified as gifted, and then found himself in a "new" environment. New relationships emerged with his father, his peers, his teachers…. Expectations changed. Things seemed to get better for Bart in some ways (e.g., his relationship with his father) but deteriorate in other ways (peers and school). Both good and bad effects followed. Irony was prominent! The audience could see a Pygmalion effect, but not the academic benefit that Rosenthal reported. As someone interested in the education of children, I could see using this episode with children and teachers to raise questions and encourage discussion about moral behaviour and moral development. That said, I don't see the Simpsons as an issue for this colloquium, but there are issues raised from the Bybee and Overbeck (2001) article that do belong in a broader academic forum. The Simpsons just happens to provide an interesting context.

After reading the Bybee and Overbeck (2001) article, my sense of the richness of the discussion of the Simpsons deepened. I could see right away that the episode I had watched did raise the two key initial issues of irony and self identity--two issues that Bybee and Overbeck identify as common themes. They then push the discussion of additional important educational and philosophical concepts much further. Some of these concepts and issues may be very important for researchers, theorists, and practitioners who participate in the research community--especially a research community enmeshed with media, or an on-line research colloquium community enmeshed in media. 

I list some of the terms that caught my attention—terms I never imagined linking to a cartoon series. Nor am I sure I want to link these terms to a cartoon context as part of a discussion in a research colloquium, but these philosophical concepts and issues are certainly  worth consideration by an informed academic community. Do any of these listed--or others you read about in the article--strike you as worth a 500-word commentary?