Coming across "The Awkward Truth of 'Make America Great Again'" was like a mini-epiphany. What exactly are these presidential campaigns referring to when they want to "go back"? As a history teacher, I am more than familiar with the myth that our history is not as tidy and simple as we (or textbook companies) kid ourselves to believe.
For whomever preaches about how good the past was, they are ignoring how bad it was for something else. It would be easy to take a jab here at white American men, but that's unfair as that segment is as divided now as ever. Benefits come with a cost - even if some say white American women "benefitted" from staying at home expecting men to be the breadwinners, it "cost" those same women the benefits of pursing a professional passion, ability to travel, or shape the very political climate that surrounded them.
The harsh fact is that American culture NEVER matched "Father Knows Best" or Reaganism. We have never been a socialist utopia either. All along the game has been winners and losers and forgotten marginalists. So whatever campaign slogans arise, they are simply that: slogans, not a way of life. And whatever candidate finally makes it to the White House will [hopefully] quickly learn that give and take with everyone is how anything is accomplished because each term will create winners and losers.
A truly successful term will lessen the forgotten marginalists and not forget our history.
Saturday, April 30, 2016
Nostalgia of What?
Monday, April 21, 2014
Can't Argue with "Stupid"
A Yahoo article aptly titled "The Stupid War on the Common Core" posted today is also aptly located in the politics section.
Why?
Because education is never about education, it is ALWAYS about politics....
It is a stupid war for a variety of reasons and the most vocal arguers probably don't understand the arguments in the first place. Yes, the US has fallen embarrassingly behind on standardized tests scores compared to other countries. Yes, the US is drowning in standardized test time throughout the school year. Yes, students are ill-equipped to perform in today's economy. Yes, students, teachers, and parents are miserable because of these things.
The most right-wing argument is that a "common" set of standards amounts to a federal "takeover" of schools. One must realize the Takeover Ship sailed long ago - we have standardized tests, minimum numbers of days that "count", regulations on how educators are prepared and licensed, laws upon laws on handling behavior and funding, what constitutes a public school, etc, etc, ETC! Is anyone naive to think that local means much anymore?
But the purpose of standards is to draw a line in the sand pointing out what teachers should teach and what children should know by a certain age in specific subject areas. As a former teacher, this in itself seems silly - how else are you going to teach a subject at all and NOT cover these things? It seems so blatantly obvious to me that I consider "standards" to be an explanation about what teachers do for those who have never taught.
In 2014, are we really arguing over WHO gets to write them officially? Are we really arguing that American children are not ready to do some material because it is "too hard" while, in the same breath, gawk at how advanced foreign students are and complain they are taking our jobs? Are we really arguing that it is better to let fifty states come up with their own verbiage on what to teach rather than to agree and collaborate on something truly strong?
The real argument should be not what or when we teach something (because at the end of the day, I think we can all agree that all these things need to be taught in the K-12 spectrum anyway), but how we assess what is learned. We aren't giving the exact same tests to every student across states. We're testing them into oblivion all school year. We're are flinging money around doing it. Textbook companies and assessment companies and lawyers are the only ones benefiting.
All the arguments about teacher accountability tied to standardized tests based on common standards are also hokum. We're punishing educators for things beyond their control. Humans do not make progress exactly the same and American culture has a serious parenting crisis. Are we really arguing that teachers and schools should be financially and professionally penalized when they are purposely undermined by parents and students themselves? We wouldn't apply this thinking to doctors because patients don't necessarily follow doctors' orders. And many other people are involved in health recovery but no one is screaming accountability for them. So why can't we pay educators according to their specialty and experience?
So instead of acting like selfish children who didn't get to do things their way, let's work together to write solid benchmarks as components an American education (based on things that have already been written years ago). Every student must work their way through this program of study if you will - age and grade level are no longer important; some eight year olds might end up working on the same standards as thirteen year olds. There is no "social promotion" - you simply have to prove your are able to do the requirements of the program in order to receive a diploma (because a high school diploma no longer carries any real significance anymore). And there are no ridiculous multiple choice tests. Either you can apply these standards skills in a real setting or you can not. Can you say growth portfolios?
So it's time to step up our performance and apply our skills in real-world settings. It's time to stop the mind-numbing standardized testing year-round based on "standards" that keep being rewritten under a different name.
God forbid anyone learns anything useful, right?
Leia Mais…
Tuesday, April 8, 2014
Why Aren't All Presentations Like This?
I just love presentations that are visually stimulating....and by god, clear! (There is no doubt that I am a visual learner!) This animated talk by Ken Robison offers some healthy thought and makes one wonder why in the world do we still conform to the factory model for education???
Leia Mais…
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Snow Days?
This season's eastern US winter has been rough for everyone, especially schools that seemed to be closed more often than open. By law those days must be "made up" to the usual equivalent of 180 "days" of about 6 instructional hours. Traditional practice has been to simply tack them on at the end of the school year - or perhaps use up those "built in" days sprinkled like precious gemstones throughout the calendar.
But in favor of the almighty Assessment, staff PD days and built in days have quietly vanished and "balanced calendars" crept in. I, for one, am all for a more logical calendar seeing how American students are rarely needed on the summer farm anymore and brain research shows more frequent mini breaks keep us fresh compared to long breaks.
But "balanced" is a relative term in education - does it seem that the fall semester has more breaks than the painfully long period between the start of the spring semester and spring break? And it just happens to fall during the roughest weather season of all? We still need to work on that concept.
Cue in the Virtual Day! Probably one of the most innovative solutions American K-12 education has ever tried! With more schools going 1:1 and households having internet access nationwide, students can still do learning without being physically present in a brick-n-mortar school. And this can count as an official school day!
Oh the possibilities - less school traffic on the roads, less exhaust fumes, less school overhead costs, more sanitary interaction, flexible hours for students/staff to pursue other beneficial community activities, targeted and independent learning, dynamic and engaging material, time/responsibility learning.....I'm giddy.
I hope this trend continues and grows. Perhaps around-the-clock, around-the-calendar, anywhere-in-the-world schooling will become ubiquitous in American education. We should work smarter, not harder - surely we can't be any less efficient than before. :)
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Who Spiked the Kool-Aid?
This Yahoo article is one of the best non-partisan reviews of the last decade of economic failure. The take-away point is that investors are sheep that will follow whatever cookie crumbs are left hoping to find a pot of gold at the end; the ones leaving the crumbs are corporate gangsters who know the crumbs are the small leftovers of a meal already finished. Intuitively we all know this, but apparently someone spiked the kool-aid because how quickly we forget what we "learned".
Leia Mais…
Saturday, November 19, 2011
It May Hurt But It's The Truth
Roland Martin is defending President Obama because he used the word "lazy" in context of discussing American work and employees. I have no problem because it is the truth even if it is politically incorrect.
For the past 35 years or so, we have been accepting the 800 lb pink elephant in the room because no one wanted to move his fat butt. So if we now find ourselves disgusted with his foul smell, unfortunate waste, and rude stares from others, it's clearly our fault.
Stop promoting unlearned students, stop hiring/keeping people that aren't good at their jobs, stop giving bonuses to executives simply because their employees are good, and stop with the political correctness - use our English language to be perfectly clear!
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Absenteeism
"High Absenteeism plagues IPS' New Intercession Program" - I have to comment on this when I have more time to put coherent thought into it and not just preach from a soapbox. Needless to say, I'm fired up!
Leia Mais…
Saturday, August 6, 2011
American Politics As Usual
The media has spent the last few weeks cringing over the U.S. debt debate and now it seems to be a case of overreacting; it is not a worst-case scenario and (surprise!) other countries have their own issues to worry about, like say Norway and Sudan, with those pesky home terrorists and civil war and all. But Americans are playing politics as usual, thinking everyone....well, cares.
CNN is reporting that world reaction is mixed, because American debt has not been totally downgraded to "junk" status like Greece but simply down to AA. The dollar is still the world currency reserve (although China is complaining about this). But the overarching theme is that EVERYBODY blames American political fighting as usual for the escalation of the debt problem.
For all the enlightenment and democracy, we Americans only have two sides: "right" and "wrong" and we are increasingly unable to see anything in between as this is somehow caving in and selling out our ideals. Maybe it's time to take an objective look at our behavior; perhaps we'll see this childish anti-compromising Congressional process as the rest of the world does.
Monday, July 18, 2011
The Trenches Are Really All The Same
Indiana Senator Tim Skinner and his wife, both teachers, are leaving their profession due to legislative changes. Although the Great Debate is the constitutionality of vouchers for private religious schools, the underlying debate is the professionalism of teaching and the functioning of public education.
No one should deny the fact that "bad" teachers exist; there are "bad" ____ in every field. But no one should also imply that just because some are public educators that they are hard to fire, in fact, it's very simple...rather it's very easy to move them around, encourage resignation/retirement, or hide their incompetencies, just like any other field. (Actually how many principals are fired for being "bad" at their job? Good statistic to try to find ;) Yet, it's blasphemous to compare teaching to "normal" careers, isn't it?
Being an educator has become a circus job: you need stamina to endure the grind, practice year-around to stay agile, and you have to jump a lot of hoops...and hoops...and hoops.
The Skinners point out that older, experienced teachers are in much better positions that the upcoming troops, whose concept of education will definitely take on a different perspective and set of expectations than their ancestors. I'm all for reforming education (it clearly doesn't function properly now), making more schools and teachers available everywhere, competing for students to attend a fitting school for their skills, etc. But we can not keep attacking the people in the trenches or one day we will find those trenches empty.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
The Cycle of Absurdity
How far would you go to get health care? Would you be willing to rob a bank? This man did just so and only for $1. He rationalized that being unarmed for so little an amount would be enough to put him in jail for 3 years - long enough for him to reach Social Security/Medicare eligibility. He says that after losing his job of 17 years and savings, he could not find gainful employment as his health deteriorated. I can't say that I blame him.
Despite numerous laws, age discrimination is still a widely-known secret in the US. Although I'm apt to blame uncaring HR practices, perhaps the real blame here is the unchecked abuse of the legal system. Everyone and their mother brings a lawsuit at the drop of a dime now (hell, it's a recession - there's no dimes dropping anywhere....pennies!) the consequences are definitely a ripple effect: paperwork backs up, legal professionals extort hourly fees, ridiculous claims are made, laws become more and more complicated, health care costs soar, insurance costs soar, then the only way out is through a loophole.
This time the loophole should be a glaring spotlight on the inadequacies of American systems. We demand punishment for crimes and spend billions of dollars on a system to do so. We expect to have access to the best medical professionals and equipment in the world and spend billions of dollars to do so. We demand that no one gets a "free ride" and spend billions of dollars to legislate blocks to do so. We pride ourselves on treating all people humanely and to help those in need, regardless of citizenship, because we're better than "other countries" and spend billions of dollars to do so.
But what happens when punishment is more important than meeting basic needs? What happens when making access to health care harder is more important than sharing cases that could help advance the medical profession? What happens when stopping a "free ride" is more important than charity?
That's when you find a loophole. Maybe we should take a cue from this man to demonstrate the true absurdity that we created. Maybe if we are all criminals, we all won't mind paying taxes to punish ourselves while humanely treating ourselves to health care.
Thursday, May 26, 2011
What Are We Working Towards?
Today people have shared with me some educational things that have got me going. The first is an article that makes the argument comparing the way the US reacts to military failures versus educational failures. In sum, if the military fails, we don't blame the soldiers, we blame the administration and call for more support, tools, different strategy, etc while educational failures are blamed on "bad teachers". God forbid we ever blame the parents...oh *gasps* the students!
The second is from the creators of South Park about carrot sticks, which ties in nicely with a CNN article about graduating with a [useless] degree and realizing there is no place for you in today's economy except probably your parents' house.
It's a good day for reading,folks!
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
To Voucher or Not To Voucher: It All Misses the Point
Yesterday The Indianapolis Star published an article claiming a majority of Hoosiers say schools are failing. Although this should come as no surprise (really, what constituents are truly happy with public education nowadays), the president of the state teachers' association claims their polls do not find this view. Yet no one denies there are serious problems in public education.
This blog is not the place to expound why there are problems; the internet is filled with such rantings. It is far more efficient at this point to start expounding real solutions and it cannot be anything like what has been tried before.
We can't think of education as a factory stamping kids out from ages 5-18 in lock step. We can't think of localities' property tax rates as the sole form of sustaining education institutions. We can't think multiple choice assessments as proof of success or failure.
Vouchers could be a good thing. But I harbor far more fear that politicians will find a way to politicize them into total useless oblivion, as another failed potential to achieve real reform. It shouldn't be about whether or not the voucher money ends up in a private school if that's where a parent sends their child; it should matter what specific school and how the child performs after studying there. If the student did not make any positive progress, then that was a bad investment - even if the outcome might have been the same had the student stayed in the previous school.
If education is indeed a "free public right" (free being a conditionally-operated term), then the money should follow the student immediately - none of this ridiculous 5-year waiting period currently in place in Indiana. School administrations might be more careful in spending and more aggressive in pursuing effective management methods (behavior policies if anything else!) if "income" were more business-oriented. Losing students left and right? What is it about your "practice" that's turning away "customers"? Have a reputation for allowing ridiculous student behavior? How will you rebuild your school's image? Getting massive applications from students and teachers? What are you doing that is so attractive?
The fact is businesses come and go; so do students, teachers, and administrators. Yet the system they all operate in does not...and the results are getting worse. It's high time the foundation itself is totally rebuilt with new thinking.
It's not like we build skyscrapers out of sticks and hides, now is it?
Friday, October 15, 2010
Redeeming Foreclosures
OCTOBER 28 2010 UPDATE: See article about former robo-signer who says industry expected such behavior.
You have to wonder about why individuals choose a certain career, particularly what are they getting from it and do they feel happy about it. It is nice to hear about someone who feels the need to "redeem" themselves from their career...and actually does so.
Thomas Cox, a retired Maine lawyer who was once responsible for foreclosing homes, is now fighting to keep foreclosures from barreling through the system. And he is setting off a chain reaction through an industry who has relied on "robo-signers".
The article also goes on to say how the bank, which has been fighting to foreclosure and evict the homeowner for two years, has now spent more in the process than the home is worth. Here again, one must question the motives of such an action.
Perhaps they still think by foreclosing, they can resell the home at a higher value, which may have been true a few years ago. But this home is located in a depressed area of Maine - who would be willing and able to buy anyway? In today's market that is flooded with foreclosed, empty homes, what use are these empty boxes if a bank owns them? Just ask Detroit, where vacancy leads to decay, which leads to crime, which leads to a host of other community problems (i.e. mass exodus).
Recently, all 50 state attorney generals have halted foreclosures as they examine whether the practices were fair and legal. (This is another example of "redeeming" one's career choice!) Yet, the financial industry is crying foul. Although they certainly made failed investments in home lending (whatever practices aside), what do they truly expect to recoup in a foreclosure market so deeply depressed without enough buyers? Sitting on vacant homes or pursuing expensive legal repossession tactics still equals a losing bet.
It's time to propose a new solution because clearly old tactics are not working (what a novel idea!). Temporary solutions could be:
1. Certainly examine all the paperwork and identify illegal and unfair practices.
2. If found, the homeowners get to stay but must pay a fair percentage of their income regardless of what the "mortgage" or "value" of the home is (remember the bank is losing money anyway but at least they would be recouping something out of it; that has to be accepted).
3. If found, for homeowners that are under/unemployed, they also get to stay but must maintain the appearance of their home and perform community services. This would help lessen the burden of administering these services that have decreasing budgets, keeps citizens engaged in their community in a productive manner, and offsets the chances of becoming a decaying community.
4. If no illegal or unfair practices are found, foreclosures can proceed. But former homeowners stay (paying a percentage of their income, maintaining the home, and community service) until the home is fairly purchased by new owners; at that point they would be fairly evicted with adequate notice.
5. Outlaw these practices that caused the industry mess in the first place. If lending institutions fail to follow legal procedure, they have to refinance at a discounted home value with no fees.
Bottom line is: Be greedy and you do it for free ;)
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Hire Questions
Yesterday Yahoo Financial posted an article reviewing illegal hiring questions. If one were to read the comments, you would think this article was joking.
Let it be known that employers do ask these questions, if not flat out, and they definitely skirt around to get the answers they are looking for: your age can be found from any "government id document" or background check or resume educational information; same goes for your race. If you are one of the throw-caution-to-the-wind people, your Facebook profile is a landmine of information waiting to be tipped. If you should happen to snag an interview while visibly pregnant, well, enough said.
While I consider myself a professional applicant (I estimate I have applied to over 600 jobs in the last five years) and fully aware of what is legal, I have been forced to answer every one of these questions in some fashion. I can not count the times I've stated my graduation year, marital status, citizenship, race, and whether I need disability accommodations to perform on applications. Later in interviews, I have had to carefully avoid discussions about religious influences, family plans, and be willing to submit to drugs tests at any time.
Perhaps the next time one fills out an application, they get creative with their answers. Want to calculate my age? Too bad, I'm only listing my degree and school, not year. I never complete the Mrs, Miss, Ms or Mr category (oh, how many interviews have been waylaid by one assuming my gender in the first place and promptly being disappointed - yet another illegal hiring move for another blog!). All other categories are off limits and frankly unrelated to just about every job.
I will, however, prove my citizenship status because that is the only thing left going for me in today's employment climate.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Irreconcilable Differences
The past year has been pretty much one long heated debate about....well, everything. The US is at a crossroads of the same epic proportions as other historical debates: taxation without representation, separate but equal, minority rights, globalization, and yes, health care reform.
The fact is that our culture is evolving but there are decisively opposing segments of the population; they are in direct conflict with each other. It's time to take a look at the real issues - and it's not health care.
The fundamental issue is how we view access to basic needs and the role of government in relationship to those needs. Rousseau's (Jean-Jacques not the crazy jungle woman from LOST)Social Contract Theory says that humans originally lived freely in nature alone until the population grew enough that old ways of satisfying needs had to change; people began to live in communities where divisions of labor developed which freed up people's time for leisure and of course they began to make comparisons between themselves.
But Rousseau focused on the invention of private property and the development of social classes, an institution that eventually bred greed and inequality. Therefore, he argued, government was invented to protect people's private interests from those who may choose to violate or confiscate, i.e. a social contract, providing equal protection of all. But Rousseau's reasoning pointed to a darker motivation: "the contract, which claims to be in the interests of everyone equally, is really in the interests of the few who have become stronger and richer as a result of the developments of private property. This is the naturalized social contract, which Rousseau views as responsible for the conflict and competition from which modern society suffers" (see Internet Encyclopedia from University of Tennessee).
So in theory government is really an invention of the strong to maintain their power even though they originally gained power by joining a community to satisfy basic needs. In the American "experiment" of government of, for, and by the people, we have embarked on a series of movements to balance the power between the powerful and the weak; Thomas Jefferson warned of the wrathful "power of the majority".
Every major sociopolitical act has been bred through grassroots movement of someone disaffected, someone without, someone in direct conflict with someone else in power. And although the reasons for someone to be disaffected is for another post, the end result is the same: we are all trying to satisfy our hierarchy of needs that Abraham Maslow discussed. And as our society evolves, we will focus on better ways to efficiently, collectively satisfy those needs.
So the fundamental issue is how to satisfy basic needs and the role of government in that process. The current debate really stems from the fact that our society, and increasingly the world, functions with commodities to be exchanged - but the base of exchange sits in the seat of power with the ones who can exchange, not those who can not exchange. Our irreconcilable differences are because there are segments of the population who view health care as a luxury commodity, not as a basic need. Maslow argued that health and safety are second only to food and shelter!
The role of American government has faced the lack of representation and equal rights of citizens, and developed safety nets for disadvantaged in terms of basic needs, such as food stamps, subsidized housing, and safety within our societal borders, yet there is severe riling up over opening access to another basic need.
The issue is not whether government should be equalizing power to access need satisfaction because clearly government was created to protect and balance power among all members of a community when surviving alone was no longer feasible. The issue is whether the community has evolved enough to realize that; only then can we move on.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Slash to the Future
There have been numerous discussions of late about school districts slashing budgets with everything from strings to teachers. And although I can understand the lack of adequate funding (even during non-recession periods), I can't understand how things are determined.
I have yet to hear trully groundbreaking cuts and supportive arguments for line items on the chopping block: yes, teachers aides, a few small extra-curriculars, perhaps some bus drivers and no pay raises for anyone. But teachers should be the very last thing considered to go; they are the key component of the institution.
How infuriating that sports are rarely ever eliminated; a few assistant coaching positions does not cut it (pun intended). If kids really want to play a sport for the enjoyment of it, they can join a local youth league or play with friends. In this budget era, no school can justify paying a head varsity football coach the equivalent of a college semester of tuition (in-state).
Other Suggestions:
One final thought: Try all of the above simultaneously. I know, I know, I'm such a radical. Leia Mais…
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Online Comments
I love reading the comments section of online news stories, particularly from local news sources. Granted I feel slightly dumber after reading them than I did before, but they are entertaining nonetheless. Part of me is proud to see so many individuals taking the time to practice literacy and debate, two cornerstones of a thriving democracy with free press, but there are times when I seriously doubt the level of literacy ability and whether debate is merely a means of soapboxing.
I have come to the conclusion that the "participants" of my state are a mostly embarassing self-selected group. I am still amazed that Indiana swung to the blue side almost a year ago, not that you could ever tell by the comments posted on any given news story. It seems quite often that the comments are spewed hatred of President Obama, illegal immigrants, welfare recipients, Congress, China/India/Iraq/North Korea/Mexico/etc, any multi-million/billion dollar business and other such "destroyers of the American way". Now mind you these topics often have very little to do with the actual story but commentors connect them regardless, usually in some argument contrived on a conspiracy theory to stick it to the little guy. Needless to say, sarcasm abounds....as well as blatant disregard for proper English language usage.
Occasionally I contribute my two cents (but only if I can do so anonymously - I have no patience to be setting up user accounts willy-nilly) in some thoughtful fashion to stir debate but I do realize in the end nothing is throughtfully debated.
But I feel better afterwards, soapbox or not, and perhaps that is the ultimate purpose of such a "section".
Saturday, July 4, 2009
Just Pick a Date
As we celebrate the historical proclamation of being independent with all of the fireworks and hot dogs one can imagine, we are doing so on a seemingly random day chosen from the summer of 1776.
As tensions brewed during the hot summer days when the 2nd Continental Congress convened to write out a list of grievances the crown had imposed on the colonists, the foundations of our American government...well, began to work like our current American government - slow.
On June 7, Richard Henry Lee moved for independence with John Adams seconding the notion formally, although support had been growing for some time by then. But the issue was "deferred" until July 1 while Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Roger Sherman and Robert Livingston drafted a declaration. Although Jefferson claimed that he did not refer to other historical literature, many of the ideas and phrases he chose did make it into the document.
After the declaration was editted, a semi-unanimous vote was taken on July 2 (because New York delegates hadn't been given "official" voting power - though they did finally cast a vote July 9). Later in the month, July 19, the declaration was officially copied to parchment, which is the preserved copy now residing in a temperature-controlled case under guard) but it wasn't until August 2 that the delegate members actually signed that parchment with 3 absent members signing it later.
So the notion of celebrating the essential act of giving Britain the middle finger on the fourth day of July is arbitrary at most; really we should celebrate the entire summer and for most intents and purposes, we do. But everytime you pay taxes, participate in a trial and vote for elected officials, you are celebrating the real intent of the Declaration.
And that, my fellow citizens, should be celebrated all year.
Posts
