A few years back, I told a student of mine on St. Patrick's Day that I was Irish. This pre-teen girl of Caribbean descent looked me up and down in disbelief.
"If you're Irish, where are your pointed ears?"
Whether she mistook Irish for leprechaun, or elf, or even Vulcan, her sincere naivete was refreshing. I was able to educate her about something in which I was an expert by birth, being Irish American.
One of the joys of teaching in New York is the opportunity to meet people different from me. From Sesame Street to Star Trek, with a course on American Pluralism, in between, I have come to enjoy finding and celebrating the differences in individuals, beginning with some of the broader differences like culture.
One of my greatest heroes, Bruce Lee, was so proud of his heritage that he wanted to share it with the world. He met resistance from Chinese elders, fearing he was divulging something that made the Chinese people special. However, Lee also knew the value in taking from other cultures, weaving principles of martial arts from France, Korea and all destinations into his own Jeet Kune Do
Consequently, there is a line in the movie biopic "Dragon: The Bruce Lee Story" that sums up to me the ideal student. "I will teach anyone who wants to learn," says Bruce Lee.
So for St. Patrick's day, a day I would claim as emblematic of my cultural history, I share this anecdote about identifying with pride my own cultural heritage, while blending in some fact about my hero, who happens to be of another culture. Celebrating heritage should not happen at the expense of another, but rather it should happen as a way to build connections with people form different backgrounds.
So, lend me an ear and I'll tell you a story or two, and I'll reciprocate, pointed ear not withstanding.
Saturday, March 17, 2012
Monday, March 12, 2012
Dream Language
Last night/early this morning, my brain did me the favor of waking me up as my body had to use the bathroom.
I'm a dream aficionado so standard nightmares have fallen by the wayside as I have picked them apart and analyzed them into nothingness much like movie critics do with Adam Sandler movies.
To wake me, my brain has to craft a dream that arouses intrigue and a little confusion. ie Why are Edie Brickell and the New Bohemians fighting dragons?
So what dawned on me, a little before dawn, was how intricate a process dreaming was.
Though there is still discovery and debate, I see the process going like this. The brain constantly records information, images, sounds and smells, even when one is not conscious of it. Proof of this can be seen in those handful of people, like actress Marilu Henner, who can remember every day of their lives. I believe everyone may do this, but not everyone can access the information.
Excess memories, particularly those just collected, pool in the subconscious and wait just under the surface. When sleep occurs, the mind pulls from these images, whether to point out that they are there or to expel them to make room for new ones, and creates dream imagery during all phases of the sleep cycle, but particularly REM.
As I said before, there is some debate over the value of the dreams, but consider this. My mind has intent when it makes the dreams. In the case of last night, it needed me to wake up. Memories are stored along the neural pathways leading to the amygdala, which is the emotional center of the brain. The brain follows the emotional path to collect the images that when put together will stir me to wake.
As I also said before, my brain has abandoned the idea of scaring me and turns to other emotions to wake me. In the past, when I have not responded to the more subtle messages, I will dream of running water, rivers, and, if I ignore that, I will dream of looking for a bathroom and how good it feels after its use. My mind is getting very close to speaking to me and saying "Wake up, you need to use the bathroom."
So, first, Let me promote teh value of dream as a tool for self help. You might not dream answers to problems, but you do get some insight.
Second, I think this makes an interesting case that literacy can happen without written words, or even spoken sounds. The brain selects from a vocabulary, a familiar one, of ideas and connects them to images in order to communicate an emotionally expressive meme demanding a response. It "speaks" to me.
And finally, dream language like all other langauges, is a complex continuum with many parts and levels. For language to be taught, each of these parts must be recognized. For it to be aqcuired, each of these parts require reflection.
So thank you brain for the first lesson of the day and for keeping my sheets dry, too.
I'm a dream aficionado so standard nightmares have fallen by the wayside as I have picked them apart and analyzed them into nothingness much like movie critics do with Adam Sandler movies.
To wake me, my brain has to craft a dream that arouses intrigue and a little confusion. ie Why are Edie Brickell and the New Bohemians fighting dragons?
So what dawned on me, a little before dawn, was how intricate a process dreaming was.
Though there is still discovery and debate, I see the process going like this. The brain constantly records information, images, sounds and smells, even when one is not conscious of it. Proof of this can be seen in those handful of people, like actress Marilu Henner, who can remember every day of their lives. I believe everyone may do this, but not everyone can access the information.
Excess memories, particularly those just collected, pool in the subconscious and wait just under the surface. When sleep occurs, the mind pulls from these images, whether to point out that they are there or to expel them to make room for new ones, and creates dream imagery during all phases of the sleep cycle, but particularly REM.
As I said before, there is some debate over the value of the dreams, but consider this. My mind has intent when it makes the dreams. In the case of last night, it needed me to wake up. Memories are stored along the neural pathways leading to the amygdala, which is the emotional center of the brain. The brain follows the emotional path to collect the images that when put together will stir me to wake.
As I also said before, my brain has abandoned the idea of scaring me and turns to other emotions to wake me. In the past, when I have not responded to the more subtle messages, I will dream of running water, rivers, and, if I ignore that, I will dream of looking for a bathroom and how good it feels after its use. My mind is getting very close to speaking to me and saying "Wake up, you need to use the bathroom."
So, first, Let me promote teh value of dream as a tool for self help. You might not dream answers to problems, but you do get some insight.
Second, I think this makes an interesting case that literacy can happen without written words, or even spoken sounds. The brain selects from a vocabulary, a familiar one, of ideas and connects them to images in order to communicate an emotionally expressive meme demanding a response. It "speaks" to me.
And finally, dream language like all other langauges, is a complex continuum with many parts and levels. For language to be taught, each of these parts must be recognized. For it to be aqcuired, each of these parts require reflection.
So thank you brain for the first lesson of the day and for keeping my sheets dry, too.
Thursday, March 8, 2012
The Smartest One in the Room ...Sort of
Upon receiving the computer, the professor found a technical problem the staff member could not solve and the professor looked to her class for help.
The young, Ivy-league-educated doctor surveyed the classroom of working teachers she had been charged to teach tolerance and understanding. She pivoted on her heel and made an almost complete 360-degree turn, dismissing every one of her students' potential to help her until she stopped at the one man in the room, a young man with a tie and glasses.
"Can you help me?" she asked.
"I'll try," I replied.
When I started the program that would lead to my master's degree, I didn't understand why the professors bothered taking time out of the classroom to teach students, current teachers, lessons like Don't Judge a Book by Its Cover. Hadn't that lesson become irrelevant in a world of Sesame Street and Star Trek, in a pluralistic state like New York, to a profession that introduced teachers to the myriad and unique forms of humanity?
I think even the educators who embrace the idea that children are unique and should never be judged based on skin, color, gender and appearance, forget to apply the lesson to adults.
People assume I'm smart, I think because I wear glasses. People assume I am conservative, because I wear a tie. And the combination has made me a "Math Professor" in the eyes of at least one teacher who did not understand me. While harmless unless empowered by me, the labels are inaccurate, as labels always are, and that is frustrating. It is particularly frustrating when these judgements are made by people you would hope know better.
I understand it is human nature to make judgements based on appearance. It is anthropological, biological and psychological. We are open to people we find attractive. We close up when we fear someone. However, humans also have the capacity for logic and such judgements are, in fact, illogical.
Maybe I was best suited to deal with the computer problem. I don't know. However, what I do know was that the selection process was based on superficial and circumstantial evidence and that I cannot support.
The young, Ivy-league-educated doctor surveyed the classroom of working teachers she had been charged to teach tolerance and understanding. She pivoted on her heel and made an almost complete 360-degree turn, dismissing every one of her students' potential to help her until she stopped at the one man in the room, a young man with a tie and glasses.
"Can you help me?" she asked.
"I'll try," I replied.
When I started the program that would lead to my master's degree, I didn't understand why the professors bothered taking time out of the classroom to teach students, current teachers, lessons like Don't Judge a Book by Its Cover. Hadn't that lesson become irrelevant in a world of Sesame Street and Star Trek, in a pluralistic state like New York, to a profession that introduced teachers to the myriad and unique forms of humanity?
I think even the educators who embrace the idea that children are unique and should never be judged based on skin, color, gender and appearance, forget to apply the lesson to adults.
People assume I'm smart, I think because I wear glasses. People assume I am conservative, because I wear a tie. And the combination has made me a "Math Professor" in the eyes of at least one teacher who did not understand me. While harmless unless empowered by me, the labels are inaccurate, as labels always are, and that is frustrating. It is particularly frustrating when these judgements are made by people you would hope know better.
I understand it is human nature to make judgements based on appearance. It is anthropological, biological and psychological. We are open to people we find attractive. We close up when we fear someone. However, humans also have the capacity for logic and such judgements are, in fact, illogical.
Maybe I was best suited to deal with the computer problem. I don't know. However, what I do know was that the selection process was based on superficial and circumstantial evidence and that I cannot support.
Saturday, March 3, 2012
Hard to Say Goodbye
Once a student came into my office absolutely inconsolable. His mother attempted to say goodbye to him, but he wouldn't let her go until she promised to get rid of the car that she drove that day.
"Just throw it away," he cried. "Just throw it away."
His mother explained to me that the car she normally drove was in the shop and she was forced to drive a beat-up rental.
The mother left and for the next three hours I had a completely defeated 12-year-old on my hands. Diagnosed with Autism, the little boy was normally cheery and playful when I needed him to focus. Now, he slumped over in his seat and completed all his assignments obediently, but without any vitality. A blessing in disguise? No. When you win the World Series you want the other team to at least show up. This was a hollow victory in the name of production and the cost was this little boy's personality.
His mother returned in the rental car and he resumed his complaints and continued in his funk for the next few days.
When the normal car returned, so did the little boy's smile. He hugged his mother goodbye and recited his special farewell for her, the one he did every time he said goodbye, but that he had not uttered during the duration of the rental.
"Bye bye, mom. Bye bye purple car."
I had missed it, thought it was as plain as the nose on my face. Not only had this little boy's routine been disrupted by the change in cars, so had the way to properly say goodbye to his mother. No wonder, he was so upset.
Two lessons. 1) Pay attention to details. What seems little to you may have great significance to someone else. 2 Routine is important to people. You can teach flexibility, you can teach flexibly (sometimes I teach an entire lesson in Lotus position) but there needs to be some reliable structure.
"Just throw it away," he cried. "Just throw it away."
His mother explained to me that the car she normally drove was in the shop and she was forced to drive a beat-up rental.
The mother left and for the next three hours I had a completely defeated 12-year-old on my hands. Diagnosed with Autism, the little boy was normally cheery and playful when I needed him to focus. Now, he slumped over in his seat and completed all his assignments obediently, but without any vitality. A blessing in disguise? No. When you win the World Series you want the other team to at least show up. This was a hollow victory in the name of production and the cost was this little boy's personality.
His mother returned in the rental car and he resumed his complaints and continued in his funk for the next few days.
When the normal car returned, so did the little boy's smile. He hugged his mother goodbye and recited his special farewell for her, the one he did every time he said goodbye, but that he had not uttered during the duration of the rental.
"Bye bye, mom. Bye bye purple car."
I had missed it, thought it was as plain as the nose on my face. Not only had this little boy's routine been disrupted by the change in cars, so had the way to properly say goodbye to his mother. No wonder, he was so upset.
Two lessons. 1) Pay attention to details. What seems little to you may have great significance to someone else. 2 Routine is important to people. You can teach flexibility, you can teach flexibly (sometimes I teach an entire lesson in Lotus position) but there needs to be some reliable structure.
Friday, March 2, 2012
Apparently, I don't know Everything
A little boy was filling me in on what he learned at school. I had never been to his school, didn't know his friends or his teacher, so it was all new to me. This was all well and good until I demonstrated my ignorance on one particular topic.
"Don't you know who Hashem is?" he asked.
"No," I confessed.
"Why Hashem, he created this table. He made that chair you're sitting on...."
As my student went on to list the amazing achievements of Hashem, emphatically extolling the virtues and educating me, I realized he was talking about the entity I would call God. In utter disbelief, this little boy caught me up to speed on what I needed to know to get by. He had to teach his tutor.
My first thought was that I just told this little boy that I didn't know who God was that I was ignorant to the concept of a creator. I might as well have been an alien arriving from another planet, maybe another dimension. Here, I was an authority math and reading, but I didn't really know anything.
Now, he wasn't proselytizing. He wasn't coercing me to convert or selling me on the idea. He was explaining something he understood and sharing something that was important to him and his family. That was what made it special. Education should always be about the sharing of knowledge and experiences, never indoctrination.
What I did witness was a little boy come to life as he found someone in need of learning and he had the information, and the responsibility, as well as the joy of enlightening me. Playing my part as a student when I teach opens up a dialogic discourse (Freire)in which I am ready and willing to learn from my student.
Watching the little boy come to life as he, the relative expert, informed me reminded me of how wonderful it feels to teach as well as the unique relationship between an educator and student.
It started because I was unaware of the name this boy used for the creator of all. In other words I don't know everything.
"Don't you know who Hashem is?" he asked.
"No," I confessed.
"Why Hashem, he created this table. He made that chair you're sitting on...."
As my student went on to list the amazing achievements of Hashem, emphatically extolling the virtues and educating me, I realized he was talking about the entity I would call God. In utter disbelief, this little boy caught me up to speed on what I needed to know to get by. He had to teach his tutor.
My first thought was that I just told this little boy that I didn't know who God was that I was ignorant to the concept of a creator. I might as well have been an alien arriving from another planet, maybe another dimension. Here, I was an authority math and reading, but I didn't really know anything.
Now, he wasn't proselytizing. He wasn't coercing me to convert or selling me on the idea. He was explaining something he understood and sharing something that was important to him and his family. That was what made it special. Education should always be about the sharing of knowledge and experiences, never indoctrination.
What I did witness was a little boy come to life as he found someone in need of learning and he had the information, and the responsibility, as well as the joy of enlightening me. Playing my part as a student when I teach opens up a dialogic discourse (Freire)in which I am ready and willing to learn from my student.
Watching the little boy come to life as he, the relative expert, informed me reminded me of how wonderful it feels to teach as well as the unique relationship between an educator and student.
It started because I was unaware of the name this boy used for the creator of all. In other words I don't know everything.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Deconstructing a Defense
I just read the NY Post's editorial in defense of its publication of the evaluation ratings of New York City School Teachers (link at the bottom).
As well as having an interest in this piece because of its relation to education, I also found it exemplified some of the qualities of written work that sometimes go unnoticed by laymen and laywoman who don't spend all their time writing and editing. I believe breaking it down might shed some light on the choices and possibly punch holes in the intent.
"It's about transparency," starts the editorial which makes me laugh as it is an editorial not attributed to any single author. I'm not so sure I would say that was the paper at its most transparent.
"It's about accountability."
This is the second line of the two-line grabber. The opening is supposed to set the table for the essay to follow as well as intrigue. One of the cheapest ways to intrigue is to write nebulous statements with highly subjective words. Freedom, Justice, Love; all powerful words, all subjective and all definable in myriad ways. You have to read just to see what the writer is talking about.
The editorial goes on to say that doctors face this sort of public scrutiny, as do individual schools, a bit of double dipping in my opinion as we are talking about the teachers in those schools, and restaurants. However, what this indicates to me is that every other profession on Earth is not subject to evaluation through a test followed by published results of the process. So, the case is made that this is a unique effort on the part of the paper focusing on teachers.
"But parents have been kept in the dark for long enough."
Really? That's right, everyone raves about the New York City schools. This is a powerfully dramatic but completely unsubstantiated statement. If you buy the premise, then you get upset and not coincidentally support the point of view of the editorial, but how were parents kept in the dark?
Which brings me back to the issue of accountability. Who was hiding? The test scores are not where people want them. The tests themselves are flawed. I think this was well known. The issue is blame. People want someone to blame. It makes it easier to deal with a situation if there is someone to blame. This is a natural reaction, but it also does nothing to solve the problem.
"The union has fought every effort at genuine education reform — mayoral control, charter schools, closing failed schools, releasing evaluation ratings — because each of those initiatives boiled down to increased transparency and accountability."
This part is particularly problematic. One, it uses the word "every." It is impossible that the union has fought every effort because that would indicate they've exhausted all the possible ideas. I don't believe we have. However, an editorial cannot be wishy-washy.
Furthermore, it claims to know the reason for the union's objections. If not provided by the union, those should be proven, otherwise they are just speculation, which is never concrete.
Look, unions would certainly act to preserve themselves and protect their members, but to say that the teacher's union is doing this at the expense of the children requires hard evidence to back it up. And, solutions do not come from vilifying or alienating one of the key constituencies involved.
"And if some teachers are put on the spot in comparison with other, more effective, teachers — well, too damned bad."
The editorial looks to justify what it did, which makes me wonder if there is some guilt on its collective part. The use of the preceding line tends to make me think that there was. It is such a strong, emotional statement made from a side that claims to have won the battle. It might have been nice, and quite bold, for the paper to say they had mixed feelings about this, but a strong editorial doesn't allow for that.
"Teachers are public employees, paid with tax dollars — and information about them is a matter of public record.
The courts have made that clear."
The extra space is to make it more poetic, more powerful and eat up lines where nothing could be thought to be said. These particular lines also suggest two things. One, because it could be done, it should be done, which is absolute nonsense. Crimes can be committed, but that doesn't mean they should be. And, two, pass the buck. Mentioning the courts is like saying well, Mom said I could. The editorial loses authority deferring to an entity, particularly one that it butts heads with over issues of free speech.
Now how should the editorial end? Something pithy and powerful: Hey, remember how you opened the piece up with two powerful, vague words? Well, let's call back to them now creating symmetry in the prose. But two is a tandem, a series requires at least one more and, just as the punchline follows the joke, the last in the series should be the most powerful statement of all.
So transparency won, accountability won and ...
"So did the kids"
What's more powerful than advocating for children? And who would be against that. But what exactly did the kids win? The newspaper published a list of names accompanied by esoteric statistics, created acrimony in the teachers and hurt a lot of innocent people unnecessarily. So, again, this helps, how?
The editorial requires a lot of work o the reader to fill in the blanks. The content is shaped by the requirements of the editorial form and the content is informed by the actions of the paper already in progress. Editorials always run the risk of being self serving, as do blogs about tutoring, so my problem isn't with their attempt at the defense, but rather what they are defending.
The editorial and my answer are just rhetorical games that I am happy to play but neither solves the problems in the schools.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/see_through_ratings_N1ankCsHn7B9usMwujsCzH#ixzz1nv1dpI8d
As well as having an interest in this piece because of its relation to education, I also found it exemplified some of the qualities of written work that sometimes go unnoticed by laymen and laywoman who don't spend all their time writing and editing. I believe breaking it down might shed some light on the choices and possibly punch holes in the intent.
"It's about transparency," starts the editorial which makes me laugh as it is an editorial not attributed to any single author. I'm not so sure I would say that was the paper at its most transparent.
"It's about accountability."
This is the second line of the two-line grabber. The opening is supposed to set the table for the essay to follow as well as intrigue. One of the cheapest ways to intrigue is to write nebulous statements with highly subjective words. Freedom, Justice, Love; all powerful words, all subjective and all definable in myriad ways. You have to read just to see what the writer is talking about.
The editorial goes on to say that doctors face this sort of public scrutiny, as do individual schools, a bit of double dipping in my opinion as we are talking about the teachers in those schools, and restaurants. However, what this indicates to me is that every other profession on Earth is not subject to evaluation through a test followed by published results of the process. So, the case is made that this is a unique effort on the part of the paper focusing on teachers.
"But parents have been kept in the dark for long enough."
Really? That's right, everyone raves about the New York City schools. This is a powerfully dramatic but completely unsubstantiated statement. If you buy the premise, then you get upset and not coincidentally support the point of view of the editorial, but how were parents kept in the dark?
Which brings me back to the issue of accountability. Who was hiding? The test scores are not where people want them. The tests themselves are flawed. I think this was well known. The issue is blame. People want someone to blame. It makes it easier to deal with a situation if there is someone to blame. This is a natural reaction, but it also does nothing to solve the problem.
"The union has fought every effort at genuine education reform — mayoral control, charter schools, closing failed schools, releasing evaluation ratings — because each of those initiatives boiled down to increased transparency and accountability."
This part is particularly problematic. One, it uses the word "every." It is impossible that the union has fought every effort because that would indicate they've exhausted all the possible ideas. I don't believe we have. However, an editorial cannot be wishy-washy.
Furthermore, it claims to know the reason for the union's objections. If not provided by the union, those should be proven, otherwise they are just speculation, which is never concrete.
Look, unions would certainly act to preserve themselves and protect their members, but to say that the teacher's union is doing this at the expense of the children requires hard evidence to back it up. And, solutions do not come from vilifying or alienating one of the key constituencies involved.
"And if some teachers are put on the spot in comparison with other, more effective, teachers — well, too damned bad."
The editorial looks to justify what it did, which makes me wonder if there is some guilt on its collective part. The use of the preceding line tends to make me think that there was. It is such a strong, emotional statement made from a side that claims to have won the battle. It might have been nice, and quite bold, for the paper to say they had mixed feelings about this, but a strong editorial doesn't allow for that.
"Teachers are public employees, paid with tax dollars — and information about them is a matter of public record.
The courts have made that clear."
The extra space is to make it more poetic, more powerful and eat up lines where nothing could be thought to be said. These particular lines also suggest two things. One, because it could be done, it should be done, which is absolute nonsense. Crimes can be committed, but that doesn't mean they should be. And, two, pass the buck. Mentioning the courts is like saying well, Mom said I could. The editorial loses authority deferring to an entity, particularly one that it butts heads with over issues of free speech.
Now how should the editorial end? Something pithy and powerful: Hey, remember how you opened the piece up with two powerful, vague words? Well, let's call back to them now creating symmetry in the prose. But two is a tandem, a series requires at least one more and, just as the punchline follows the joke, the last in the series should be the most powerful statement of all.
So transparency won, accountability won and ...
"So did the kids"
What's more powerful than advocating for children? And who would be against that. But what exactly did the kids win? The newspaper published a list of names accompanied by esoteric statistics, created acrimony in the teachers and hurt a lot of innocent people unnecessarily. So, again, this helps, how?
The editorial requires a lot of work o the reader to fill in the blanks. The content is shaped by the requirements of the editorial form and the content is informed by the actions of the paper already in progress. Editorials always run the risk of being self serving, as do blogs about tutoring, so my problem isn't with their attempt at the defense, but rather what they are defending.
The editorial and my answer are just rhetorical games that I am happy to play but neither solves the problems in the schools.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/editorials/see_through_ratings_N1ankCsHn7B9usMwujsCzH#ixzz1nv1dpI8d
Questions about the Worst Teacher in New York
The New York Post recently labeled Pascuale Mauclair New York "city's worst teacher."
Such writing is evocative of the snarky style prevalent on the Internet which has bled into the print media. I'm not against snark, but I do think there should be some consideration as to when and where it is applied. Entertainment stories sometimes require a bit of snark to digest. Sports has it's moments, too. Politics is almost always laughable, otherwise you'd cry. However, why use it here?
Such a label creates a character, just as the Internet does, just as reality television does. The incestuous media picks up on the character and uses it for its own needs. Characterization is a concern of writing and serial writing benefits from an established character. There is no need to do work explaining or creating the character. You can jump right into the story. It saves valuable space on the paper. Sometimes the character, or rath the particular characterization catches on. British tabloids called Michael Jackson "Jacko" first, US tabloids followed).
In nay case, sensationalism has always been a part of journalism and also has a long history. Red Scare, Yellow Journalism, these themes sold papers, changed policy and hurt countless innocent people. In this case, the New York Post targeted a single individual.
So, since the Post isn't the only paper doing and, and this isn't the first time, I guess that makes it okay, right? Did the paper do its job?
Here's my question to the authors of the articles as well as the editors and the unseen forces that created this title for this woman: Does the reporting of this story fix the problem?
I assume the problem is low test scores. First, I would argue that the tests are faulty, not indicative of the takers ability let alone the ability of the teacher to teach. We can't ask the world to be experts in everything, so you can't expect the journalists to know that there is a vocal lobby that denounces these tests. So, let's just continue.
My next question is, since higher test scores seems to be the desired result, does the reporting of this story help achieve that goal? Does it improve the teacher's ability or shake her confidence? Does it somehow better prepare the students? Does it fix the fundamental flaws of the test? Does it educate the public about the situation that lead to the result? I see a lot of opportunities for stories, but I don't see a lot of interest in pursuing them.
A reporter might argue that his or her goal to inform. Fine. After, this article who was informed that didn't already know? Do these new people have the power to fix the problem? I know it upset some parents. I saw one parent suggest that the teacher be fired and her salary given back to the school. Okay. If we do that, how does that improve the scores to the tests?
I see a lot of reactions to incomplete information and no solutions to the real problems. And, I do realize that many would argue that the problems have little to do with the tests themselves and more to do with factors out of the control of educators. However, I do believe that educators should continue to find solutions. Humiliating a human being is not a part of the solution.
I don't know this woman I have never been taught by her and I've never observed in her class. I have, in my travels, encountered teachers I did not like personally, teachers who were poor communicators, and combinations of the two, but none of them deserved this treatment. I do not see how the public humiliation of a woman leads to her being a better teacher? I don't see how her removal guarantees a better performance on the test in the future? I don't see how any of this helps the children who took the test achieve better test scores.
And even if somehow the test scores are the most important thing to you, and somehow, you can prove that this woman was the sole reason the goal was not achieved, let me ask you this, after all the teachers you've encountered, all the stories you've read involving teachers: Is this woman really the Worst Teacher in New York? The Worst? Really?
Such writing is evocative of the snarky style prevalent on the Internet which has bled into the print media. I'm not against snark, but I do think there should be some consideration as to when and where it is applied. Entertainment stories sometimes require a bit of snark to digest. Sports has it's moments, too. Politics is almost always laughable, otherwise you'd cry. However, why use it here?
Such a label creates a character, just as the Internet does, just as reality television does. The incestuous media picks up on the character and uses it for its own needs. Characterization is a concern of writing and serial writing benefits from an established character. There is no need to do work explaining or creating the character. You can jump right into the story. It saves valuable space on the paper. Sometimes the character, or rath the particular characterization catches on. British tabloids called Michael Jackson "Jacko" first, US tabloids followed).
In nay case, sensationalism has always been a part of journalism and also has a long history. Red Scare, Yellow Journalism, these themes sold papers, changed policy and hurt countless innocent people. In this case, the New York Post targeted a single individual.
So, since the Post isn't the only paper doing and, and this isn't the first time, I guess that makes it okay, right? Did the paper do its job?
Here's my question to the authors of the articles as well as the editors and the unseen forces that created this title for this woman: Does the reporting of this story fix the problem?
I assume the problem is low test scores. First, I would argue that the tests are faulty, not indicative of the takers ability let alone the ability of the teacher to teach. We can't ask the world to be experts in everything, so you can't expect the journalists to know that there is a vocal lobby that denounces these tests. So, let's just continue.
My next question is, since higher test scores seems to be the desired result, does the reporting of this story help achieve that goal? Does it improve the teacher's ability or shake her confidence? Does it somehow better prepare the students? Does it fix the fundamental flaws of the test? Does it educate the public about the situation that lead to the result? I see a lot of opportunities for stories, but I don't see a lot of interest in pursuing them.
A reporter might argue that his or her goal to inform. Fine. After, this article who was informed that didn't already know? Do these new people have the power to fix the problem? I know it upset some parents. I saw one parent suggest that the teacher be fired and her salary given back to the school. Okay. If we do that, how does that improve the scores to the tests?
I see a lot of reactions to incomplete information and no solutions to the real problems. And, I do realize that many would argue that the problems have little to do with the tests themselves and more to do with factors out of the control of educators. However, I do believe that educators should continue to find solutions. Humiliating a human being is not a part of the solution.
I don't know this woman I have never been taught by her and I've never observed in her class. I have, in my travels, encountered teachers I did not like personally, teachers who were poor communicators, and combinations of the two, but none of them deserved this treatment. I do not see how the public humiliation of a woman leads to her being a better teacher? I don't see how her removal guarantees a better performance on the test in the future? I don't see how any of this helps the children who took the test achieve better test scores.
And even if somehow the test scores are the most important thing to you, and somehow, you can prove that this woman was the sole reason the goal was not achieved, let me ask you this, after all the teachers you've encountered, all the stories you've read involving teachers: Is this woman really the Worst Teacher in New York? The Worst? Really?
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Too Much Faith
A little boy I had been working with for a few months handed me a piece of paper.
"What's this?" I asked.
"It's my math homework."
On the page were written three double digit numbers in a rough triangle formation.
"Okay," I said. "What should we do with these?"
"Math."
I learned three lessons in this instance.
One. Don't assume a student can fill in the blanks. He had numbers, which constituted math in his mind, but what was he suppossed to do with the numbers? List the factors or the multiples? Were they degrees? Were they page numbers from a text or problem numbers from a workbook? So many possibilities all called math. A teacher needs to remind students what they are doing adn why they are doing it. And even when they do, problems occur.
Two. Forgive the well meaning student who makes a mistake. A school should be a safe environment to learn. When I told they boy I wasn't sure what to do, he was hysterical. He was sure that he was going to get in trouble with his teacher. It was terrible to see a little boy devestated by a mistake and fearful of the consequences. I can still see him crying.
Three. It was amazing how much faith this boy had in me, that he could hand me three numbers that made no sense to him and I would be able to translate. These are the times when I have to check myself. I can't do the impossible, even though I wanted to, even though I tried. What I could do is give the teacher a call, which I did at a later date, once I got the nmber and permission.
I didn't tell the teacher the boy cried. Along with some suggestions for making sure the boy understood the homework, I told the teacher how much the boy respected him as well as his desire to do good work. It seemed to strike the right chord and help the relationship a bit.
Then, it was up to them. I couldn't fix all the problems, just help where I could. for the rest, I just had to have faith, not too much, just enough.
"What's this?" I asked.
"It's my math homework."
On the page were written three double digit numbers in a rough triangle formation.
"Okay," I said. "What should we do with these?"
"Math."
I learned three lessons in this instance.
One. Don't assume a student can fill in the blanks. He had numbers, which constituted math in his mind, but what was he suppossed to do with the numbers? List the factors or the multiples? Were they degrees? Were they page numbers from a text or problem numbers from a workbook? So many possibilities all called math. A teacher needs to remind students what they are doing adn why they are doing it. And even when they do, problems occur.
Two. Forgive the well meaning student who makes a mistake. A school should be a safe environment to learn. When I told they boy I wasn't sure what to do, he was hysterical. He was sure that he was going to get in trouble with his teacher. It was terrible to see a little boy devestated by a mistake and fearful of the consequences. I can still see him crying.
Three. It was amazing how much faith this boy had in me, that he could hand me three numbers that made no sense to him and I would be able to translate. These are the times when I have to check myself. I can't do the impossible, even though I wanted to, even though I tried. What I could do is give the teacher a call, which I did at a later date, once I got the nmber and permission.
I didn't tell the teacher the boy cried. Along with some suggestions for making sure the boy understood the homework, I told the teacher how much the boy respected him as well as his desire to do good work. It seemed to strike the right chord and help the relationship a bit.
Then, it was up to them. I couldn't fix all the problems, just help where I could. for the rest, I just had to have faith, not too much, just enough.
Monday, February 27, 2012
Better than a Guess
One weekend before New York State's Regents Exam in Global History, a student of mine confessed that she was nervous about the essay part of the exam.
Standardized tests are written in a specific language form. If you get comfortable with the discourse, navigating the questions and expressing in preferred terms becomes much easier. The best way thing for a student to do is practice, practice for the test by answering the questions on old tests. The student should be exposed to the test to mitigate the initial shock of seeing the presentation for the first time on the day of the test.
Then, when possible, a student should be taught how to decode the language of the test. If the student knows what the test is really looking for then they have another set of coordinates to locate the information.
These methods usually work wonders, but not always. Some people don't test very well. Whether it's the foreign nature of the content of the test, or the very real problem of test taking anxiety, not all people test well.
I try to explain to students that the world doesn't end with a bad test grade (Unless that was what the Mayan calendar was referring to). Nor, does a test indicate their intelligence or ability; nor does it predict the success levels of their future.
A test is a form of assessment, a flawed form, but one that has been popular for quite some time, much like baggy blue jeans. If a test offers anything at all, it is general information about the areas of a subject that require further study by a particular student.
So, knowing all this, I still encourage students to do their best. Tests are puzzles, you try to solve. You can't fail a puzzle. You either solve it or you don't. To some, tests are a game, and you can't win every game you play (Unless you are the 1972 Miami Dolphins) but you can certainly do your best. And as any fan of games (and I am one) will tell you, luck is part of the equation for victory.
"Guess," I suggested. "If you don't know the answer, just guess."
A sensible strategy, the sharing of this idea had particular relevance to my student as guessing was completely foreign to her. She would not answer unless she remembered reading the information or hearing it from a trusted source. If she didn't remember, she kept quiet. Some people rely too heavily on their memory. The brain is capable of so much more: synthesis, dreaming, re-writing commercial jingles for chicken to include the names of presidents-- I feel like Grover Cleveland, like Grover Cleveland.
Use what you have. And luck, scientifically speaking, is just understanding probability. So in that way a guess is scientific.
I spoke to her on the phone after the exam.
"How was it?" I asked.
"It was good," she replied. "I didn't know the essay."
"So what did you do?"
"I guessed."
"Good!" I shouted into the phone. "That's great. What was the question?"
"How did geography affect the development of the civilization in places like India?"
"What did you guess?"
"I wrote about how the mountains kept other cultures from mixing with the Indian culture."
Lucky? Or properly prepared? Or, truthfully, she was just much smarter than she knew! By eliminating self doubt, she was able to deduce, or induce, the right answer.
Sometimes, a guess is better than what you know.
Standardized tests are written in a specific language form. If you get comfortable with the discourse, navigating the questions and expressing in preferred terms becomes much easier. The best way thing for a student to do is practice, practice for the test by answering the questions on old tests. The student should be exposed to the test to mitigate the initial shock of seeing the presentation for the first time on the day of the test.
Then, when possible, a student should be taught how to decode the language of the test. If the student knows what the test is really looking for then they have another set of coordinates to locate the information.
These methods usually work wonders, but not always. Some people don't test very well. Whether it's the foreign nature of the content of the test, or the very real problem of test taking anxiety, not all people test well.
I try to explain to students that the world doesn't end with a bad test grade (Unless that was what the Mayan calendar was referring to). Nor, does a test indicate their intelligence or ability; nor does it predict the success levels of their future.
A test is a form of assessment, a flawed form, but one that has been popular for quite some time, much like baggy blue jeans. If a test offers anything at all, it is general information about the areas of a subject that require further study by a particular student.
So, knowing all this, I still encourage students to do their best. Tests are puzzles, you try to solve. You can't fail a puzzle. You either solve it or you don't. To some, tests are a game, and you can't win every game you play (Unless you are the 1972 Miami Dolphins) but you can certainly do your best. And as any fan of games (and I am one) will tell you, luck is part of the equation for victory.
"Guess," I suggested. "If you don't know the answer, just guess."
A sensible strategy, the sharing of this idea had particular relevance to my student as guessing was completely foreign to her. She would not answer unless she remembered reading the information or hearing it from a trusted source. If she didn't remember, she kept quiet. Some people rely too heavily on their memory. The brain is capable of so much more: synthesis, dreaming, re-writing commercial jingles for chicken to include the names of presidents-- I feel like Grover Cleveland, like Grover Cleveland.
Use what you have. And luck, scientifically speaking, is just understanding probability. So in that way a guess is scientific.
I spoke to her on the phone after the exam.
"How was it?" I asked.
"It was good," she replied. "I didn't know the essay."
"So what did you do?"
"I guessed."
"Good!" I shouted into the phone. "That's great. What was the question?"
"How did geography affect the development of the civilization in places like India?"
"What did you guess?"
"I wrote about how the mountains kept other cultures from mixing with the Indian culture."
Lucky? Or properly prepared? Or, truthfully, she was just much smarter than she knew! By eliminating self doubt, she was able to deduce, or induce, the right answer.
Sometimes, a guess is better than what you know.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
When a Fatso isn't a Fatso
For a few years, I worked with a little boy who was the youngest in his family of four by almost ten years. The difference in his personality, when compared to the other family members, was remarkable. While his siblings were polite and shy, he was bombastically direct. Where the others deferred to their elders, he championed his cause until he got what he wanted. His weapon of choice -- Fatso!
Fatso shot from his mouth faster than a speeding bullet and had more concussive force than a bomb. He leveled people with a resounding "Fatso!", a presumed judgement on their physical attractiveness, strength and overall value as a human being.
I've fielded my share of insults from children, but I have come to understand that they are a result of a young mind's inability to recognize a staggeringly handsome, brilliant and witty super ... Well, my mom thinks I'm cool.
Anyway, kids, and adult as well, lash out to express discomfort (anger, frustration) and they only have the words they know at their disposal. Harder sounds (phonemes) help drive home the emotion. Drat! Blast! Curses! These illustrate the point and happen to be some of my favorite expressions of anger. (Of course, I was rasied by Snidely Whiplash.)
So, as unpleasant as it is to hear, kids say nasty things so they don't have to do work. Upsetting the teacher shuts down the process. So, I have learned that my glasses make me a "four eyes," my academic interests make me a "nerd," and the fact that I like teaching makes me a "Weirdo!" I find that, ironically, most qualities selected for insult are often either innocuous or laudatory (Important to note when counselling victims of bullying).
This boy did not want to finish his homework, while I had been charged with getting him to do just that.
"You're a Fatso!" he said.
"I need you to do your work," I said.
"You're a Fatso."
"We need to get this done."
"You're a Fatso."
"But, I'm not fat!" I replied, in a moment of candor.
"No, you're a Fatso," he explained.
So, Fatso, like the island on Lost, was not all it seemed to be. I continued to observe his usage with his parents and his siblings. Fatso was, in fact, a word that referred to something other than weight. To him, a "Fatso" was someone who kept him from doing what he wanted. A "Fatso" was someone who didn't agree with him. Most importantly, a "Fatso" was a temporary state, as he used it with his loved ones whose attention he cherished.
Why Fatso? Well, in this case, he found it worked. Members of a weight-conscious family, and I found his family to be just that, would react strongly to an attack on their physical appearance. However, his reason for choosing the word was not an attack on their BMI, but rather an attempt to convey how he felt by making them feel teh same was -- lousy.
From then on, I worked to equip him with a variety of words, so that he could express how he truly felt. When he used "shorthand" expressions, I had him provide context and subtext so that we could find a better alternative. I prompted him to be aware of the actual reactions his words engendered. Finally, I translated the true meaning of Fatso to his family.
As he acquired words, he needed help learning how they worked. He wanted to communicate clearly and he was interested in learning. We made a good team and when time permitted we showed our sychronicity with a game of frisbee. One time, he even felt compelled to express his opinion of my throwing style.
"No offense," he started. "But, you're a great Frisbee player!"
Admittedly, there was more work to be done.
Fatso shot from his mouth faster than a speeding bullet and had more concussive force than a bomb. He leveled people with a resounding "Fatso!", a presumed judgement on their physical attractiveness, strength and overall value as a human being.
I've fielded my share of insults from children, but I have come to understand that they are a result of a young mind's inability to recognize a staggeringly handsome, brilliant and witty super ... Well, my mom thinks I'm cool.
Anyway, kids, and adult as well, lash out to express discomfort (anger, frustration) and they only have the words they know at their disposal. Harder sounds (phonemes) help drive home the emotion. Drat! Blast! Curses! These illustrate the point and happen to be some of my favorite expressions of anger. (Of course, I was rasied by Snidely Whiplash.)
So, as unpleasant as it is to hear, kids say nasty things so they don't have to do work. Upsetting the teacher shuts down the process. So, I have learned that my glasses make me a "four eyes," my academic interests make me a "nerd," and the fact that I like teaching makes me a "Weirdo!" I find that, ironically, most qualities selected for insult are often either innocuous or laudatory (Important to note when counselling victims of bullying).
This boy did not want to finish his homework, while I had been charged with getting him to do just that.
"You're a Fatso!" he said.
"I need you to do your work," I said.
"You're a Fatso."
"We need to get this done."
"You're a Fatso."
"But, I'm not fat!" I replied, in a moment of candor.
"No, you're a Fatso," he explained.
So, Fatso, like the island on Lost, was not all it seemed to be. I continued to observe his usage with his parents and his siblings. Fatso was, in fact, a word that referred to something other than weight. To him, a "Fatso" was someone who kept him from doing what he wanted. A "Fatso" was someone who didn't agree with him. Most importantly, a "Fatso" was a temporary state, as he used it with his loved ones whose attention he cherished.
Why Fatso? Well, in this case, he found it worked. Members of a weight-conscious family, and I found his family to be just that, would react strongly to an attack on their physical appearance. However, his reason for choosing the word was not an attack on their BMI, but rather an attempt to convey how he felt by making them feel teh same was -- lousy.
From then on, I worked to equip him with a variety of words, so that he could express how he truly felt. When he used "shorthand" expressions, I had him provide context and subtext so that we could find a better alternative. I prompted him to be aware of the actual reactions his words engendered. Finally, I translated the true meaning of Fatso to his family.
As he acquired words, he needed help learning how they worked. He wanted to communicate clearly and he was interested in learning. We made a good team and when time permitted we showed our sychronicity with a game of frisbee. One time, he even felt compelled to express his opinion of my throwing style.
"No offense," he started. "But, you're a great Frisbee player!"
Admittedly, there was more work to be done.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Precision and the Missing Clock
I returned to my room at the learning center to find my travel clock missing and my student with a grin from ear to ear.
I used a small travel clock because the room in which I worked had no way to keep time, despite a rigid time based schedule, and I had an irrational devotion to the Swiss. My watch battery had died and cell phones were things of the future (Well, to me anyway, as I only reluctantly joined the club a few months ago. And no, I'm not updating this post by kerosene lamp).
"Did you take my clock?" I asked my student.
She was my first student, ever, and one I wound up seeing through high school. My relationship with her symbolizes the notion of the dialogic discourse (Freire) as I learned as much from her as I ever taught. Diagnosed with Central Auditory Processing Disorder and already well aware of what that meant thanks to her mother, a speech language pathologist, she let me know what she needed and I provided. Mostly, I sued my own background as a student in Catholic schools with rigorous curricula to translate the requirements of her school into terms she could understand. It went swimmingly and we became respected friends. So when she responded, "No," to my query, I knew she was telling the truth.
But, she kept laughing.
I searched the cabinet, the windowsill and the area outside the room. No clock. I asked her again.
"Did you take my clock?"
"No," she replied, her laughter increasing.
It was a conundrum, a logical riddle that bent my brain in a knot, much like the enduring appeal of the Kardashians. A missing clock, but the only suspect didn't take it. There had to be a logical explanation to it all.
Then, for whatever reason, it dawned on me. I exercised control over what I could. I changed my terms.
"Did you hide my clock?"
"Yes," she said bursting into laughter.
I learned three valuable lessons.
One, you must choose your words carefully. Even a degree off in a calculation can send a space shuttle millions of miles off course. The same goes for words.
Two, minor modifications can yield staggering results. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes it requires some effort, but the difference in improved communication is amazing.
Three, kids can be such stinkers!
I used a small travel clock because the room in which I worked had no way to keep time, despite a rigid time based schedule, and I had an irrational devotion to the Swiss. My watch battery had died and cell phones were things of the future (Well, to me anyway, as I only reluctantly joined the club a few months ago. And no, I'm not updating this post by kerosene lamp).
"Did you take my clock?" I asked my student.
She was my first student, ever, and one I wound up seeing through high school. My relationship with her symbolizes the notion of the dialogic discourse (Freire) as I learned as much from her as I ever taught. Diagnosed with Central Auditory Processing Disorder and already well aware of what that meant thanks to her mother, a speech language pathologist, she let me know what she needed and I provided. Mostly, I sued my own background as a student in Catholic schools with rigorous curricula to translate the requirements of her school into terms she could understand. It went swimmingly and we became respected friends. So when she responded, "No," to my query, I knew she was telling the truth.
But, she kept laughing.
I searched the cabinet, the windowsill and the area outside the room. No clock. I asked her again.
"Did you take my clock?"
"No," she replied, her laughter increasing.
It was a conundrum, a logical riddle that bent my brain in a knot, much like the enduring appeal of the Kardashians. A missing clock, but the only suspect didn't take it. There had to be a logical explanation to it all.
Then, for whatever reason, it dawned on me. I exercised control over what I could. I changed my terms.
"Did you hide my clock?"
"Yes," she said bursting into laughter.
I learned three valuable lessons.
One, you must choose your words carefully. Even a degree off in a calculation can send a space shuttle millions of miles off course. The same goes for words.
Two, minor modifications can yield staggering results. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes it requires some effort, but the difference in improved communication is amazing.
Three, kids can be such stinkers!
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Earth's Two Moons and Deliberately Getting it Wrong
On February 23, 2012, I entered the phrase “earth has two moons” into a Google search. Here is a list of the headlines produced followed by the Website, in parentheses) taking credit for the story.
Earth has two 'moons' right now, theorists say - Technology (MSNBC.com)
Christopher Maag: Surprise: Earth Probably Has Two Moons (Huffington Post)
3753 Cruithne – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Wikipedia)
Earth has always had two moons| Mail Online (The Daily Mail)
Earth has always had two moons!-Hindustan Times (Hindustan Times)
Earth Has Two Moons, But It’s Not What You Think - Technology (Atlantic Wire)
Earth Has Two Moons, But It’s Not What You Think - Yahoo! News (Yahoo News)
Scientists: Earth Has Two moons - Softpedia (Softpedia)
Two Moons on August 27? –Mars Spectacular - Urban Legends (About)
By the end of perusing that Google page, it’s pretty clear that the Earth has two moons. Only one headline, repeated twice, indicates that there is more to the story. And somewhat ironically, of all the sources, only the few lines for the entry from Wikipedia (Scourge of education!) bothers to mention that the use of the word “moon” in the stories is misleading.
For those of you who don’t know, Earth does not have two moons. It has one noticeable, consistent and reliable satellite we call the moon, and the occasional, relatively smaller object, like a massive rock, that gets caught in the Earth’s gravitational pull. The MSNBC article goes on to refer to the particular object of interest as a ‘second moon’, an asteroid caught in Earth’s gravitational field, a “space rock”, one of the “natural satellites other than the moon” and finally “temporary moons”. These words and phrases are only very loosely synonymous, but also indicate a wide vareity of things other than the moon.
I see two major problems with the use of the word “moon” in these headlines. According to Dictionary.com’s primary definition, the moon is the primary natural satellite of the Earth. I think many would see the word “moon” as the name of the object and not the description. The sun is a star; a star is not the sun. In this way, the definition of moon allows for more than one satellite, but not more than one moon, at least for us. As a Star Wars fan, I know that the Ewoks were from the third moon of Endor, but we don’t live on Endor. We only have one moon which leads me to my second point.
The majority of people understand the moon to be the sphere in the sky, but as the moon it has different significance to different people. The moon has inspired everything from creation myths to love songs. A generic satellite in the sky, one replaceable by any other floating object, hasn’t done that, the moon has. So even if there was another sphere, same size, same mass, orbiting the Earth it would not be the mythological, religious, geopolitical moon.
Why am I stomping all over poetic license? I’ll tell you why, thanks for asking, because there are two major aspects of writing: creativity and communication. Creativity should have no boundaries, no rules and no limitations. Communication, however, must so that it can be shared and understood in an expedient manner. There is a place, a n exhalted one, for creativity in communication, but not if it makes the message unclear and confusing.
Imagine you are a young student or just someone new to astronomy or even new to the English language. You are charged with researching the moon. You go to Google, punch up information on the moon and come across this staggering revelation that there are two moons. You write your paper with vim and vigor, excited to learn something new, hand it in and are told you are wrong. You question yourself. Did I misunderstand? You doubt relaible sources like scientists and Google. You are rocked to the very foundation of your being ... okay, maybe not, but the experience would still sting.
However, there is something worse, the information could go unchecked and spread. It would be like the old game of telephone, where a line of people transmit a sentence from ear to mouth. The actual truth is lost as it is passed from person to person. and bold falsehood becomes accebale truth. The Earth is flat. The Earth is the center of the universe. Barbara Hershey did the voice of ET.
That is why it is imperative that the information be presented as concretely and consistently as possible. I know why the expression “two moons” was chosen. It draws eyes to the story. It draws Web surfers to the site, but do the people who surf the Web, particularly the children know that? I belive writers can do better. They must. When the written word is so easily reproduced, when editors put their spin on it, when advertising wants to drive traffic, specificity in words is essential.
If not, it is up to educators to spread the word about the problems in mass communication and to correct the mistakes that are made. Otherwise, children might not be as impressed at the feat of a certain nursery rhyme and the remarkable jump of a cow. Why didn't it clear both moons? Of couse, in this day and age the cow would also face accusations of steroid abuse. Insert your own beefed up joke here.
To see for yourself:
https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&tab=nw&authuser=0#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=hHF-uHb8Ty1q2aIzNzKm8g&cp=15&gs_id=1m&xhr=t&q=earth+has+two+moons&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&authuser=0&site=webhp&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=earth+has+two+m&aq=0&aqi=g4&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=d10435dcaad589af&biw=1619&bih=798
Earth has two 'moons' right now, theorists say - Technology (MSNBC.com)
Christopher Maag: Surprise: Earth Probably Has Two Moons (Huffington Post)
3753 Cruithne – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Wikipedia)
Earth has always had two moons| Mail Online (The Daily Mail)
Earth has always had two moons!-Hindustan Times (Hindustan Times)
Earth Has Two Moons, But It’s Not What You Think - Technology (Atlantic Wire)
Earth Has Two Moons, But It’s Not What You Think - Yahoo! News (Yahoo News)
Scientists: Earth Has Two moons - Softpedia (Softpedia)
Two Moons on August 27? –Mars Spectacular - Urban Legends (About)
By the end of perusing that Google page, it’s pretty clear that the Earth has two moons. Only one headline, repeated twice, indicates that there is more to the story. And somewhat ironically, of all the sources, only the few lines for the entry from Wikipedia (Scourge of education!) bothers to mention that the use of the word “moon” in the stories is misleading.
For those of you who don’t know, Earth does not have two moons. It has one noticeable, consistent and reliable satellite we call the moon, and the occasional, relatively smaller object, like a massive rock, that gets caught in the Earth’s gravitational pull. The MSNBC article goes on to refer to the particular object of interest as a ‘second moon’, an asteroid caught in Earth’s gravitational field, a “space rock”, one of the “natural satellites other than the moon” and finally “temporary moons”. These words and phrases are only very loosely synonymous, but also indicate a wide vareity of things other than the moon.
I see two major problems with the use of the word “moon” in these headlines. According to Dictionary.com’s primary definition, the moon is the primary natural satellite of the Earth. I think many would see the word “moon” as the name of the object and not the description. The sun is a star; a star is not the sun. In this way, the definition of moon allows for more than one satellite, but not more than one moon, at least for us. As a Star Wars fan, I know that the Ewoks were from the third moon of Endor, but we don’t live on Endor. We only have one moon which leads me to my second point.
The majority of people understand the moon to be the sphere in the sky, but as the moon it has different significance to different people. The moon has inspired everything from creation myths to love songs. A generic satellite in the sky, one replaceable by any other floating object, hasn’t done that, the moon has. So even if there was another sphere, same size, same mass, orbiting the Earth it would not be the mythological, religious, geopolitical moon.
Why am I stomping all over poetic license? I’ll tell you why, thanks for asking, because there are two major aspects of writing: creativity and communication. Creativity should have no boundaries, no rules and no limitations. Communication, however, must so that it can be shared and understood in an expedient manner. There is a place, a n exhalted one, for creativity in communication, but not if it makes the message unclear and confusing.
Imagine you are a young student or just someone new to astronomy or even new to the English language. You are charged with researching the moon. You go to Google, punch up information on the moon and come across this staggering revelation that there are two moons. You write your paper with vim and vigor, excited to learn something new, hand it in and are told you are wrong. You question yourself. Did I misunderstand? You doubt relaible sources like scientists and Google. You are rocked to the very foundation of your being ... okay, maybe not, but the experience would still sting.
However, there is something worse, the information could go unchecked and spread. It would be like the old game of telephone, where a line of people transmit a sentence from ear to mouth. The actual truth is lost as it is passed from person to person. and bold falsehood becomes accebale truth. The Earth is flat. The Earth is the center of the universe. Barbara Hershey did the voice of ET.
That is why it is imperative that the information be presented as concretely and consistently as possible. I know why the expression “two moons” was chosen. It draws eyes to the story. It draws Web surfers to the site, but do the people who surf the Web, particularly the children know that? I belive writers can do better. They must. When the written word is so easily reproduced, when editors put their spin on it, when advertising wants to drive traffic, specificity in words is essential.
If not, it is up to educators to spread the word about the problems in mass communication and to correct the mistakes that are made. Otherwise, children might not be as impressed at the feat of a certain nursery rhyme and the remarkable jump of a cow. Why didn't it clear both moons? Of couse, in this day and age the cow would also face accusations of steroid abuse. Insert your own beefed up joke here.
To see for yourself:
https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&tab=nw&authuser=0#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=hHF-uHb8Ty1q2aIzNzKm8g&cp=15&gs_id=1m&xhr=t&q=earth+has+two+moons&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&authuser=0&site=webhp&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=earth+has+two+m&aq=0&aqi=g4&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=d10435dcaad589af&biw=1619&bih=798
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Save the Voice
Save the Voice! Not, the TV show which I think is doing fine, but rather the voice of each emerging writer.
Late one night, I met with a student of mine who presented me a problem -- a pile of work and a few hours to do it. Now, take it from me, this young woman is a worker. She does all her schoolwork, extra credit as well. An aspiring artist, she spends five hours a day after school working on her art portfolio and takes courses on the weekends when she's not volunteering at her school or her church. In between all of that, she filled out about a dozen applications accompanied by various and sundry essays all for college admissions. So when she presented me with one of her brother's old papers as a way to save some time on an English assignment, I was a little surprised.
Kids, sometimes they just don't think, right? Wrong. The problems that kids get into, particularly the ethical ones, happen when kids think very practically, almost utilitarian.
Problem: Homework is boring.
Solution: Don't do it.
Problem: School is hard.
Solution: Stay home, watch TV, play games, listen to music, and have fun.
(My strategy of choice as a lad, but in all fairness, I learned a lot from the $25,000 Pyramid).
Problem: Need a good grade, but can't seem to get one with your own work.
Solution: Take work from someone else.
And I learned that was the true motivation to the scheme. Sure time was short, but she really wanted to pull up that English grade. After I read the paper, I made a face that elicited an "Oh God!" from my student. She feared the paper was bad. It wasn't. She feared I was disappointed in her plan. Nope.
"This doesn't sound anything like you," I explained.
Over the past year, this young woman has made phenomenal strides in her writing. Her early work was redundant. Now she got to the point. Once, she wrote vague statements. Now she supported her ideas with clear and coherent examples. Grammar and spelling were not ever problems. However, what excited me the most was the emergence of her voice: her observations, her comparisons, her choice of words, and a little of her humor. None of that was present in the paper that she borrowed.
She had re-written a bit and as I read through it, I could see her expressions (phrases and clauses) as sure as fingerprints. Would a teacher notice? Possibly, but maybe not. Teachers have a lot to read. So, maybe she would get away with it, but that's not the point.
I feel strongly that in the teaching of writing, one of the primary goals should be the protection of the individual's voice. I don't want to read the same written work over and over again. I want to hear the unique observations that people have to offer. So that was what I communicated to my student; no judgements, fully understanding her reasoning.
My student re-wrote her paper because she cares about her work. She's not a cheat in any sense of the word. She was just being practical. However, she was cheating herself, an opportunity to voice her own identity, and cheating the world, pluralism and individuality are the strengths to a society.
Overstating it, am I? I don't think so. Save the voice and save the world! (Maybe that's overstating it a bit, and lifting from the TV show Heroes).
Late one night, I met with a student of mine who presented me a problem -- a pile of work and a few hours to do it. Now, take it from me, this young woman is a worker. She does all her schoolwork, extra credit as well. An aspiring artist, she spends five hours a day after school working on her art portfolio and takes courses on the weekends when she's not volunteering at her school or her church. In between all of that, she filled out about a dozen applications accompanied by various and sundry essays all for college admissions. So when she presented me with one of her brother's old papers as a way to save some time on an English assignment, I was a little surprised.
Kids, sometimes they just don't think, right? Wrong. The problems that kids get into, particularly the ethical ones, happen when kids think very practically, almost utilitarian.
Problem: Homework is boring.
Solution: Don't do it.
Problem: School is hard.
Solution: Stay home, watch TV, play games, listen to music, and have fun.
(My strategy of choice as a lad, but in all fairness, I learned a lot from the $25,000 Pyramid).
Problem: Need a good grade, but can't seem to get one with your own work.
Solution: Take work from someone else.
And I learned that was the true motivation to the scheme. Sure time was short, but she really wanted to pull up that English grade. After I read the paper, I made a face that elicited an "Oh God!" from my student. She feared the paper was bad. It wasn't. She feared I was disappointed in her plan. Nope.
"This doesn't sound anything like you," I explained.
Over the past year, this young woman has made phenomenal strides in her writing. Her early work was redundant. Now she got to the point. Once, she wrote vague statements. Now she supported her ideas with clear and coherent examples. Grammar and spelling were not ever problems. However, what excited me the most was the emergence of her voice: her observations, her comparisons, her choice of words, and a little of her humor. None of that was present in the paper that she borrowed.
She had re-written a bit and as I read through it, I could see her expressions (phrases and clauses) as sure as fingerprints. Would a teacher notice? Possibly, but maybe not. Teachers have a lot to read. So, maybe she would get away with it, but that's not the point.
I feel strongly that in the teaching of writing, one of the primary goals should be the protection of the individual's voice. I don't want to read the same written work over and over again. I want to hear the unique observations that people have to offer. So that was what I communicated to my student; no judgements, fully understanding her reasoning.
My student re-wrote her paper because she cares about her work. She's not a cheat in any sense of the word. She was just being practical. However, she was cheating herself, an opportunity to voice her own identity, and cheating the world, pluralism and individuality are the strengths to a society.
Overstating it, am I? I don't think so. Save the voice and save the world! (Maybe that's overstating it a bit, and lifting from the TV show Heroes).
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
What You Don't Know Could Change the World
I read a study once (actually it was an article about a study, but I wanted to sound a bit more academic) which concluded that people who don't know, don't know they don't know. No, that wasn't a type-o on my part. People don't know the areas of their own ignorance. Interesting. Young romantics who fall for the wrong person, will still fall for the wrong person because they don't know what led them to that decision. Poor investors will still follow bad advice, even after they are burned. However, there is an important caveat to this theory. Sometimes people don't know that they do know.
Just yesterday, a student of my acquaintance begrudgingly admitted her self-assessed deficiencies in the course of literature as well as her subsequent hatred for the subject as a whole. Someone hates writing?! This is a job for Super Tutor (or me, for those who find my references opaque).
I asked her if she needed help reading the stories. No shame. Just as some students have trouble seeing words in order to read, others have trouble comprehending written words even if they have the ability to read them. Think of me as a living, breathing pair of reading glasses, cat's eye frames, of course. However, she had already completed all three works from authors the likes of Hemingway and Updike.
S,o I suggested we discuss. She demonstrated no trouble comprehending: identifying symbols and conflict; traversing subtext and context; recognizing motives; or finding a common theme running through all three separate narratives, which was what her paper required.
"So why, exactly do you hate Literature?" I asked.
"Oh you know, grammar and spelling. I'm terrible," she explained.
I will save the debate over the value of grammar and spelling for another post, but I will say this, grammar is not literature. If so, start tossing poetry out of literature courses. It does have it's place as a system developed to improve communication, but not as bonds to shackle expression, especially when that expression works without it.
Spelling is not literature, either, and as we continue to develop into a world of e-mails and texts, it is less and less a part of communication. I don't mean to give up the ship on teaching spelling. It is another tool in uniform, and therefore, convenient communication, but let's understand the arbitrary nature of the etymology of words. Some spellings of words stuck, others didn't. English is a Germanic language. American English is a derivation of that and a further amalgamation of other influencing languages. The spellings, as well as the pronunciations, of English words have changed over time. We have 26 letters for over 44 sounds. It is not as simple as it appears.
Again, let's not give up, let's work on it, but let's recognize that the study of literature is something different than commas and I before E .
So, my student needs to work on her grammar skills and she needs to practice spelling, but her comprehension skills are superlative. Had I not pointed that out to her, the literature course would have lost a potential star pupil; the literary world would have lost a valuable reader, and a promising voice would have been silenced. The very fate of the world would have been doomed! Too melodramatic? Maybe, but the point is, allowing her to judge herself that was would have been a shame. (And if you will allow me some word play), it would also be a shame, as in a guilty conscience, she wore like a Scarlet Letter, unjust and unnecessary.
Just yesterday, a student of my acquaintance begrudgingly admitted her self-assessed deficiencies in the course of literature as well as her subsequent hatred for the subject as a whole. Someone hates writing?! This is a job for Super Tutor (or me, for those who find my references opaque).
I asked her if she needed help reading the stories. No shame. Just as some students have trouble seeing words in order to read, others have trouble comprehending written words even if they have the ability to read them. Think of me as a living, breathing pair of reading glasses, cat's eye frames, of course. However, she had already completed all three works from authors the likes of Hemingway and Updike.
S,o I suggested we discuss. She demonstrated no trouble comprehending: identifying symbols and conflict; traversing subtext and context; recognizing motives; or finding a common theme running through all three separate narratives, which was what her paper required.
"So why, exactly do you hate Literature?" I asked.
"Oh you know, grammar and spelling. I'm terrible," she explained.
I will save the debate over the value of grammar and spelling for another post, but I will say this, grammar is not literature. If so, start tossing poetry out of literature courses. It does have it's place as a system developed to improve communication, but not as bonds to shackle expression, especially when that expression works without it.
Spelling is not literature, either, and as we continue to develop into a world of e-mails and texts, it is less and less a part of communication. I don't mean to give up the ship on teaching spelling. It is another tool in uniform, and therefore, convenient communication, but let's understand the arbitrary nature of the etymology of words. Some spellings of words stuck, others didn't. English is a Germanic language. American English is a derivation of that and a further amalgamation of other influencing languages. The spellings, as well as the pronunciations, of English words have changed over time. We have 26 letters for over 44 sounds. It is not as simple as it appears.
Again, let's not give up, let's work on it, but let's recognize that the study of literature is something different than commas and I before E .
So, my student needs to work on her grammar skills and she needs to practice spelling, but her comprehension skills are superlative. Had I not pointed that out to her, the literature course would have lost a potential star pupil; the literary world would have lost a valuable reader, and a promising voice would have been silenced. The very fate of the world would have been doomed! Too melodramatic? Maybe, but the point is, allowing her to judge herself that was would have been a shame. (And if you will allow me some word play), it would also be a shame, as in a guilty conscience, she wore like a Scarlet Letter, unjust and unnecessary.
Mission Statement
I share these observations about teaching and tutoring for four reasons. The reasons, it just so happens, are also my goals when I work with a student, which is convenient because I struggled to come up with one workable acronym and now I can double dip. I like to think of it as intellectual frugality, but I digress. The four reasons (well five, my intense egomania) follow:
1. Awareness
2. Reflection
3. Translation
4. Self Esteem
ARTS. Or I could rearrange it to STAR or TARS or RATS ... or another utterly forgettable word that would insure I fail any basic marketing course. Anyway, for now, it's ARTS (subject to change) and these four dynamics provide the backbone in the relationship between a teacher and a student.
Why awareness? A teacher should develop awareness in a student, so a student can self correct. "Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish ..." Well, in dealing with academic material the "fishing" is developing cognitive skills. A teacher who develops awareness about a student makes a more substantial connection.
Why reflection? I agree with the widely held idea that knowledge is acquired through experience, but learning helps strengthen the understanding. Reflection, a form of metacognition, provides an opportunity to learn about what is acquired. It works for both students and teachers.
Why translation? Essentially, translation is what I do. I make the material relatable to the student. Mathematics is as much a language as English or Spanish. Computers have a language, so does the field of Social Studies. Philosophy, Psychology, Physics all have their own languages, fascinating ones that should be shared. James Gee calls the different languages Discourses. Students have their own and may be willing to teach an educator who treats the students, as well as their modes of communication, with respect. I like to learn, so the more languages the better.Let's all be exegetes. (Impressed logophiles? Not so much, sesquipedalians?)
Why self-esteem? (Why do I keep asking why?) People need to have their own backs because the world does not. I'm what Viktor Frankl called a tragic optimist. I believe the world provides the negatives without prompting, so it is up to people to remain as positive as they can. Pointing out good qualities (truthful, observable, substantiated characterstics) is a hobby of mine. So is comic book reading. Just kidding. Comic reading isn't my hobby. It's my lifestyle. And I think, in this time in particular, teachers need a bit of a boost, too.
Recently, I read about the idea of dialogic discourse (thanks to the works of Paulo Freire), a fancy way of noting that students learn from teachers and teachers learn from students. So, here is a blog, celebrating all the students who have taught me so much through anecdotes and observations. I hope it will help improve the relationships between educators and students.
1. Awareness
2. Reflection
3. Translation
4. Self Esteem
ARTS. Or I could rearrange it to STAR or TARS or RATS ... or another utterly forgettable word that would insure I fail any basic marketing course. Anyway, for now, it's ARTS (subject to change) and these four dynamics provide the backbone in the relationship between a teacher and a student.
Why awareness? A teacher should develop awareness in a student, so a student can self correct. "Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish ..." Well, in dealing with academic material the "fishing" is developing cognitive skills. A teacher who develops awareness about a student makes a more substantial connection.
Why reflection? I agree with the widely held idea that knowledge is acquired through experience, but learning helps strengthen the understanding. Reflection, a form of metacognition, provides an opportunity to learn about what is acquired. It works for both students and teachers.
Why translation? Essentially, translation is what I do. I make the material relatable to the student. Mathematics is as much a language as English or Spanish. Computers have a language, so does the field of Social Studies. Philosophy, Psychology, Physics all have their own languages, fascinating ones that should be shared. James Gee calls the different languages Discourses. Students have their own and may be willing to teach an educator who treats the students, as well as their modes of communication, with respect. I like to learn, so the more languages the better.Let's all be exegetes. (Impressed logophiles? Not so much, sesquipedalians?)
Why self-esteem? (Why do I keep asking why?) People need to have their own backs because the world does not. I'm what Viktor Frankl called a tragic optimist. I believe the world provides the negatives without prompting, so it is up to people to remain as positive as they can. Pointing out good qualities (truthful, observable, substantiated characterstics) is a hobby of mine. So is comic book reading. Just kidding. Comic reading isn't my hobby. It's my lifestyle. And I think, in this time in particular, teachers need a bit of a boost, too.
Recently, I read about the idea of dialogic discourse (thanks to the works of Paulo Freire), a fancy way of noting that students learn from teachers and teachers learn from students. So, here is a blog, celebrating all the students who have taught me so much through anecdotes and observations. I hope it will help improve the relationships between educators and students.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)