It's that time of year again. The days are shorter and nights are cooler. The Aspens are slowly turning golden and Aquarius is rising in the seventh house (well actually, it's rising in the south). Store aisles are filled with cheap waxy candies and carved pumpkins glow on windowsills. As October's end creeps ever closer like a mutant troll, we see more and more instances of scary things that go bump in the night (and whack in the day).
Very scary indeed. Weary citizens come home their favorite TV shows preempted, their answering machines filled with messages, and their mail boxes stuffed with frightening literature. Newspapers are speckled with slanderous ads and radio commentators debate important issues such as employment opportunities in slaughter houses, cow flatulence, bridges to nowhere, and the devastating economic impact incurred by increasing manufacturing costs of acne cream.
Yeah, you got it. Election day is almost here and politicians have chopped down that beautiful old tree in your front yard so that they can stump their speeches and fill your ears with promises of lower taxes, better education, national security, and more affordable acne cream. They are selling words of comfort and hope, but the price is high. Very high. They want your vote.
Something for something was the usual tactic to sway your decision. Vote for me and I'll set you free! A mule and twenty acres! Two cars in every garage and free instructions on how a gentleman should offer a lady a Tiparillo. But the lyrics of those songs have changed. No one is buying solutions anymore (and do they even still make Tiparillos?).
Instead, political pundits are now stocking the shelves with the hottest item on the market.
Fear. Fear of Muslims. Fear of Mexicans. Fear of death squads targeting your grandma. Yes, you can get fear in any size and flavor you want. Protect our shores from hostile aliens bent on destroying our way of life! Stem the tide of dangerous hordes of illegal immigrants stealing our jobs in the slaughter houses! Build walls and bombs and send out the drones! (What ever happened to sending out the clowns?)
Fear is all natural and calorie free and you can get as much as you want (and certainly more than you can stomach). Wrong wing conservatives (emphasis on the "con") and teabag wags offering wholesale fear, warning us of evil jihad lovers stalking our streets at night who will take away our liberty and freedom and apple pie. Life without apple pie? Oh no, Mister Bill! You've got my vote!
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. It is equally true that those who understand the past are empowered to repeat it. Hitler understood this and used fear to control people. My favorite quote from that sociopath is, "How fortunate for rulers that people do not think."
He nailed it though, didn't he? Thinking is the last thing politicians what people to do and fortunately for the powers that want to be, thinking is not in fashion these days.
But fear mongering is the easiest way to get elected. Fear here! Get your fear here! Vote for me and stop the flood of dangerous Canadian drugs threatening pharmaceutical profits! Vote for me and protect your second amendment right to own grenade launchers. Vote for me and we'll send all those drug crazed murderous illegal aliens back to Nicaragua (excluding your gardener and nanny of course!).
It's easy to criticize this technique, but one can't argue success. Regressive candidates are water-boarding public reason by singing mantras of "bringing liberty and justice back to our citizens" and promising to "fight for what's right" to the background tune of primal fear. Meanwhile, they're investing heavily in brick and mortar stocks. Yes, we do in fact have something to truly fear. These mouthpieces could win and gain real power.
Now that's a scary thought indeed. So let's see now. That's a double fear with cheese, hold the truth, and an extra large drink of carbonated lies. And would you like fries with that?
Friday, October 29, 2010
Listen To The Silence
What one does is important, but what one says can be just as important. In fact, we even have laws stipulating what can or cannot be said. You can't launch a volley of vulgarity in a public restaurant. You can't yell "Fire!" in a building just for fun. You can't joke about having a gun in an airport.
Oddly enough though, there's no law against lying. When running for Governor or the House or any other political office, you can pretty much say anything you want without risking prosecution for conveying a falsehood, for stretching the truth a bit, for distorting the facts, for making up facts, for misinforming or misleading, for fabricating fiction, for political prevarication, or for being an outright liar.
Yes, there's a lot of stretched truths and brazen mistruths tossed around lately. I find myself predisposed to sudden body weight loss when I hear a politician leveraging emotional rants of "secure our borders" or "smoke out the terrorists" to justify trampling civil rights or promoting racist behavior under the flag of patriotism.
But there is something far worse than the ubiquitous lies and distortions inundating us these days. We are suffering from a pathology of apathy that infects citizens coast to coast.
People simply don't listen.
Consider the problems that face you throughout the year. Your children's schools are underfunded. Your roads are crumbling. The distant mountains become dimmer and dimmer each year as the air around us is slowly polluted. Thousands of children are missing each year, families torn apart by grief. Alcoholism and drug addiction cost us billions each year. Hundreds of thousands die from cigarette smoking. Car theft, murder, kidnappings, theft, burglary, muggings. Our nation is dying.
And so what do regressive power-seekers do? They wave banners of national pride, blame migrant workers and slaughter house workers for the potholes in our roads, warn of impending doom, and chant well-rehearsed rhetoric of national security. You would think people would be more concerned with the quality of the water they drink, or the air they breathe, or the streets they drive? We're becoming a nation of reactive non-thinkers, the perfect breeding ground for politicians who rush towards power based on building walls rather than building trust, the very antithesis of leadership, people who work hard to separate rather than unite us.
But people don't listen, at least not to those trying to fix the world. Wave tea bags and yell about taxes and people will vote for you. Call someone a socialist and people will vote for you. Use racism and fear to demean your opponent and people will vote for you.
But talk about spending more money on schools and hospitals and fire fighters and you'll have an argument on your hands.
Well, arguments are a good thing. They induce people to listen. But you can't listen to what isn't said. And so the worst behavior isn't that of politicians. It's the dismal silence of people not voting. When you don't vote, it doesn't matter what you would like to say. No one is there to hear you.
The only thing that annoys me more than apathy is silent rage. This election, you must vote. Do you want more walls? Do you want more civil rights? Do you want police beating and dragging illegals out of the country? Do you want more money spent on schools? If you want something, then vote.
I really don't care if you're against or for military spending in Iraq and Afghanistan, against or for legalizing aliens who have worked here for years, against or for shooting polar bears and wolves. Your opinion is yours and it's your right to agree or disagree with me or anyone else.
But if you don't vote, then you have no right to say anything. Vote or shut up! You have rage? Then vote and be heard. Otherwise, sit back and just be quiet because no one wants to hear what you have to say.
Vote!
Oddly enough though, there's no law against lying. When running for Governor or the House or any other political office, you can pretty much say anything you want without risking prosecution for conveying a falsehood, for stretching the truth a bit, for distorting the facts, for making up facts, for misinforming or misleading, for fabricating fiction, for political prevarication, or for being an outright liar.
Yes, there's a lot of stretched truths and brazen mistruths tossed around lately. I find myself predisposed to sudden body weight loss when I hear a politician leveraging emotional rants of "secure our borders" or "smoke out the terrorists" to justify trampling civil rights or promoting racist behavior under the flag of patriotism.
But there is something far worse than the ubiquitous lies and distortions inundating us these days. We are suffering from a pathology of apathy that infects citizens coast to coast.
People simply don't listen.
Consider the problems that face you throughout the year. Your children's schools are underfunded. Your roads are crumbling. The distant mountains become dimmer and dimmer each year as the air around us is slowly polluted. Thousands of children are missing each year, families torn apart by grief. Alcoholism and drug addiction cost us billions each year. Hundreds of thousands die from cigarette smoking. Car theft, murder, kidnappings, theft, burglary, muggings. Our nation is dying.
And so what do regressive power-seekers do? They wave banners of national pride, blame migrant workers and slaughter house workers for the potholes in our roads, warn of impending doom, and chant well-rehearsed rhetoric of national security. You would think people would be more concerned with the quality of the water they drink, or the air they breathe, or the streets they drive? We're becoming a nation of reactive non-thinkers, the perfect breeding ground for politicians who rush towards power based on building walls rather than building trust, the very antithesis of leadership, people who work hard to separate rather than unite us.
But people don't listen, at least not to those trying to fix the world. Wave tea bags and yell about taxes and people will vote for you. Call someone a socialist and people will vote for you. Use racism and fear to demean your opponent and people will vote for you.
But talk about spending more money on schools and hospitals and fire fighters and you'll have an argument on your hands.
Well, arguments are a good thing. They induce people to listen. But you can't listen to what isn't said. And so the worst behavior isn't that of politicians. It's the dismal silence of people not voting. When you don't vote, it doesn't matter what you would like to say. No one is there to hear you.
The only thing that annoys me more than apathy is silent rage. This election, you must vote. Do you want more walls? Do you want more civil rights? Do you want police beating and dragging illegals out of the country? Do you want more money spent on schools? If you want something, then vote.
I really don't care if you're against or for military spending in Iraq and Afghanistan, against or for legalizing aliens who have worked here for years, against or for shooting polar bears and wolves. Your opinion is yours and it's your right to agree or disagree with me or anyone else.
But if you don't vote, then you have no right to say anything. Vote or shut up! You have rage? Then vote and be heard. Otherwise, sit back and just be quiet because no one wants to hear what you have to say.
Vote!
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Squirting Milk From Your Eyeballs
I really don't even know where to begin with this one. I was reading one of those side stories off the home page of a news site about a hot dog. Yeah, a hot dog, but not the kind that you or I might eat. It was a $69 hot dog. Grilled in white truffle oil and topped with duck foie gras, tourists can enjoy this overpriced tube steak while being laughed at by New York residents who find the whole idea a bit hard to digest.
The gist of the story was that this wacky wiener is now in the Guinness Book of World Records for being the most expensive hot dog ever. Knowing that there are people out there willing to fork over $69 for a foie gras grease special of the week somehow makes me feel superior in a comforting way. But seriously, you can't even enjoy a good chili on a thing like that.
The story went on to present a comedic (if not scary) list of record holders in the Guinness Book and it got me wondering; who are these people? Who takes personal pride in being known for having the longest fingernails (29' 8'' total) or the longest ear hair (7.12 inches)? It's mildly entertaining to know that someone can squirt milk out of their eyeballs or floss their nose with a strand of spaghetti, but do we really need a panel of judges to verify it? Okay, yeah, you can throw a cow pie farther than anyone ever recorded. But how are you with yak droppings?
Perhaps it's the sheer lunacy of it all that mesmerizes us as we watch some guy dangle 55 pound of potatoes attached to a sword he just swallowed. Or watching someone balance a 352 pound mini-car on his head. Frankly, I was absolutely astounded to find out that they make cars that only weigh 352 pounds! Um, maybe I'm missing the whole point about why this is exciting?
I soon found myself surfing through a never-ending list of incredible feats of stupidity, all neatly organized and documented by certified technicians at Guinness. Can you imagine the sheer discipline required to train for the "Most cockroaches eaten in a minute" record?
Some of these stories do get you thinking. A woman set a record for "longest time breath held voluntarily", an astounding 18 minutes 32.6 seconds. What I found particularly amazing is that the record holders thought it important to emphasize the adjective "voluntarily". I do suppose people have held it longer against their wishes.
Then there's a guy who holds the record for the largest kidney stone, nearly 22 ounces. I think he also set the record for loudest scream when he passed it.
Speaking of loudest, Guinness states that the record for the loudest burp is 107.1 decibels. That's equivalent to a twin-engine MD-80 at takeoff. Kind of makes a parent proud to know their kid is accomplishing something at college.
It seems that no record is too stupid to make, or break. At Warwick University, 451 students dressed up as Smurfs, blue skin and all. That record was broken by 1253 blue-skinned blue-shirt white hat adorned proud citizens of Castleblayney Ireland. That's enough Smurfs, isn't it? The students of Swansea University in Wales disagreed and came out in force, 2510 Smurfs strong! The real question is; was there only one female Smurf in the crowd?
A record 13,000 Santa Clauses in Derry City, Northern Ireland. A record of being dragged 1551 feet by a horse (while on fire). The most eggs smashed with one's face. A crowd of 13,597 people dancing to Michael Jackson's "Thriller". The most rattlesnakes hanging out of someone's mouth. A girl who balanced 15 books on her head while solving the Rubiks cube and reciting pi out 100 places.
Just when it was finally safe to go back in the water, the dry land is filled with nutcases! I don't really want to complain, but come to think of it, is there a record for complaining that I can try to beat?
The gist of the story was that this wacky wiener is now in the Guinness Book of World Records for being the most expensive hot dog ever. Knowing that there are people out there willing to fork over $69 for a foie gras grease special of the week somehow makes me feel superior in a comforting way. But seriously, you can't even enjoy a good chili on a thing like that.
The story went on to present a comedic (if not scary) list of record holders in the Guinness Book and it got me wondering; who are these people? Who takes personal pride in being known for having the longest fingernails (29' 8'' total) or the longest ear hair (7.12 inches)? It's mildly entertaining to know that someone can squirt milk out of their eyeballs or floss their nose with a strand of spaghetti, but do we really need a panel of judges to verify it? Okay, yeah, you can throw a cow pie farther than anyone ever recorded. But how are you with yak droppings?
Perhaps it's the sheer lunacy of it all that mesmerizes us as we watch some guy dangle 55 pound of potatoes attached to a sword he just swallowed. Or watching someone balance a 352 pound mini-car on his head. Frankly, I was absolutely astounded to find out that they make cars that only weigh 352 pounds! Um, maybe I'm missing the whole point about why this is exciting?
I soon found myself surfing through a never-ending list of incredible feats of stupidity, all neatly organized and documented by certified technicians at Guinness. Can you imagine the sheer discipline required to train for the "Most cockroaches eaten in a minute" record?
Some of these stories do get you thinking. A woman set a record for "longest time breath held voluntarily", an astounding 18 minutes 32.6 seconds. What I found particularly amazing is that the record holders thought it important to emphasize the adjective "voluntarily". I do suppose people have held it longer against their wishes.
Then there's a guy who holds the record for the largest kidney stone, nearly 22 ounces. I think he also set the record for loudest scream when he passed it.
Speaking of loudest, Guinness states that the record for the loudest burp is 107.1 decibels. That's equivalent to a twin-engine MD-80 at takeoff. Kind of makes a parent proud to know their kid is accomplishing something at college.
It seems that no record is too stupid to make, or break. At Warwick University, 451 students dressed up as Smurfs, blue skin and all. That record was broken by 1253 blue-skinned blue-shirt white hat adorned proud citizens of Castleblayney Ireland. That's enough Smurfs, isn't it? The students of Swansea University in Wales disagreed and came out in force, 2510 Smurfs strong! The real question is; was there only one female Smurf in the crowd?
A record 13,000 Santa Clauses in Derry City, Northern Ireland. A record of being dragged 1551 feet by a horse (while on fire). The most eggs smashed with one's face. A crowd of 13,597 people dancing to Michael Jackson's "Thriller". The most rattlesnakes hanging out of someone's mouth. A girl who balanced 15 books on her head while solving the Rubiks cube and reciting pi out 100 places.
Just when it was finally safe to go back in the water, the dry land is filled with nutcases! I don't really want to complain, but come to think of it, is there a record for complaining that I can try to beat?
Sunday, August 29, 2010
Just Do It!
[NOTE: This column was deemed "not fit to print" by the newspaper. I do in fact agree that the lyrics I quoted are indecent and as a family newspaper, their decision not to print it was more than reasonable. BUT this should make you think! What does it say when we agree that lyrics like these are unfit to print and yet these are the songs your 12-year old daughters listen to? These songs are played on the radio and lyrics FAR more vulgar are common in today's "top 20" songs. My column is designed to get you to think ... so think about it.}
Birds do it. Bees do it. Even educated fleas do it. Let's do it. Let's fall in love. Yeah, well falling in love wasn't really what Cole Porter was talking about, was it? For several generations, lyrics to popular songs have expressed "doing it" in most every way possibly imagined. Perhaps it was the Beatles who removed any last doubt with their explicit (albeit rather bizarre) request - Why don't we do it in the road?
Oddly enough though, it didn't seem all that dirty back then. Risque perhaps, but not dirty. In the 50's, parents were shocked and young girls thrilled at the antics of Elvis "The Pelvis" Presley. His gyrations prompted many a father to change the channel, much to the dismay of his daughter (and probably his wife.)
But the lyrics of songs today are increasingly outright pornographic. Man, if only my father were alive. To hear me complain about the music kids listen to? It's just as well that he's dead. He'd have a heart attack from dancing in joy to hear me talk like this.
Seriously, as much as I like calculus, there has to be a limit on limits. Many lyrics in top-ten songs these days can't even be printed in the newspaper. I'm not really sure how explicit I can get in my column without having it censored, but hey, let's give it a try and see. Just remember, these lyrics are verbatim from songs that your twelve-year old daughter listens to.
For example, consider Rihanna's hit song "Rude". How appropriate of a title. Its lyrics include: "Come on rude boy! Is you big enough? Take it! Take it! Tonight I'mma let you do your thing. I'mma let you be a rider. Giddy up! Giddy up, babe!"
Another top hit on the pop chart is "California Gurls" by Katy Perry. "I know a place where the grass is really greener. Warm, wet and wild. Laying underneath the palm trees. The boys break their necks try'na to creep a little sneak peek."
No innuendos there, huh? Even my 8th grade niece understands that one.
Let's not forget the Queen of Vile, Lady "Gag Gag". A couple lines from Bad Romance - "I want your psycho, your vertigo stick. Want you in my rear window."
Then there's Eminem. I won't even bother trying to write out his lyrics. The print machines at the newspaper office would have a melt down.
And finally, let's try a few lyrics from Ciara and Ludacris's hit, "Ride". Uh, the title kind of gives it away, doesn't it? I won't bother grossing you out with the explicit lyrics. How about a quick sampling of words from the song? Big - hard - ride - rollercoaster - scream - thoroughbred - again - again - again - touchdown - score!
Whatever happened to nice clean music that actually sounds good? Aside from the outright vulgarity, many of these songs are simply bad. I mean, they're just not good music.
And why is it acceptable to play this sewage on the radio? If I listed out the explicit lyrics in many of these songs, they couldn't print it. If you were to sing one of these songs while walking around Ashley Pond, you could get arrested for public indecency. And yet these are the words sung out proudly (and for lots of money) by the role models for our children. These are the songs that fill the iPods in the Middle School playground.
The lyrics for "I've got a feeling" by the Black Eyed Peas pretty much sums up the mentality of modern day music. And yes, this is verbatim - "Let's Do it. Let's Do it. Let's Do it. Let's Do it. And do it. And do it. Let's live it up. And do it. And do it. And do it do it do it. Let's do it. Let's do it. Let's do it."
But let's allow Cole Porter to have the last word here. "Cold Cape Cod clams, 'gainst their wish, do it. Even lazy jellyfish do it. Let's do it, let's fall in love."
Birds do it. Bees do it. Even educated fleas do it. Let's do it. Let's fall in love. Yeah, well falling in love wasn't really what Cole Porter was talking about, was it? For several generations, lyrics to popular songs have expressed "doing it" in most every way possibly imagined. Perhaps it was the Beatles who removed any last doubt with their explicit (albeit rather bizarre) request - Why don't we do it in the road?
Oddly enough though, it didn't seem all that dirty back then. Risque perhaps, but not dirty. In the 50's, parents were shocked and young girls thrilled at the antics of Elvis "The Pelvis" Presley. His gyrations prompted many a father to change the channel, much to the dismay of his daughter (and probably his wife.)
But the lyrics of songs today are increasingly outright pornographic. Man, if only my father were alive. To hear me complain about the music kids listen to? It's just as well that he's dead. He'd have a heart attack from dancing in joy to hear me talk like this.
Seriously, as much as I like calculus, there has to be a limit on limits. Many lyrics in top-ten songs these days can't even be printed in the newspaper. I'm not really sure how explicit I can get in my column without having it censored, but hey, let's give it a try and see. Just remember, these lyrics are verbatim from songs that your twelve-year old daughter listens to.
For example, consider Rihanna's hit song "Rude". How appropriate of a title. Its lyrics include: "Come on rude boy! Is you big enough? Take it! Take it! Tonight I'mma let you do your thing. I'mma let you be a rider. Giddy up! Giddy up, babe!"
Another top hit on the pop chart is "California Gurls" by Katy Perry. "I know a place where the grass is really greener. Warm, wet and wild. Laying underneath the palm trees. The boys break their necks try'na to creep a little sneak peek."
No innuendos there, huh? Even my 8th grade niece understands that one.
Let's not forget the Queen of Vile, Lady "Gag Gag". A couple lines from Bad Romance - "I want your psycho, your vertigo stick. Want you in my rear window."
Then there's Eminem. I won't even bother trying to write out his lyrics. The print machines at the newspaper office would have a melt down.
And finally, let's try a few lyrics from Ciara and Ludacris's hit, "Ride". Uh, the title kind of gives it away, doesn't it? I won't bother grossing you out with the explicit lyrics. How about a quick sampling of words from the song? Big - hard - ride - rollercoaster - scream - thoroughbred - again - again - again - touchdown - score!
Whatever happened to nice clean music that actually sounds good? Aside from the outright vulgarity, many of these songs are simply bad. I mean, they're just not good music.
And why is it acceptable to play this sewage on the radio? If I listed out the explicit lyrics in many of these songs, they couldn't print it. If you were to sing one of these songs while walking around Ashley Pond, you could get arrested for public indecency. And yet these are the words sung out proudly (and for lots of money) by the role models for our children. These are the songs that fill the iPods in the Middle School playground.
The lyrics for "I've got a feeling" by the Black Eyed Peas pretty much sums up the mentality of modern day music. And yes, this is verbatim - "Let's Do it. Let's Do it. Let's Do it. Let's Do it. And do it. And do it. Let's live it up. And do it. And do it. And do it do it do it. Let's do it. Let's do it. Let's do it."
But let's allow Cole Porter to have the last word here. "Cold Cape Cod clams, 'gainst their wish, do it. Even lazy jellyfish do it. Let's do it, let's fall in love."
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Back To School
It's a new school year and students are excited and enthusiastic as always! Well, okay, maybe not.
In preparation for this school year, I've reviewed my lesson plans, looked over new material, new techniques, new educational psychology theories, and I've pretty much decided that I'm a dinosaur. I learned math the hard way. I studied. I studied a lot. I opened my book in the evenings and worked on problems until I "got it", until something clicked and it made sense to me. It took a lot of my free time, a lot of paper, and a lot of band-aids from all those paper cuts.
But pencils and paper and open books laid out on the floor in one's bedroom is now passé. Technology is at the front lines of the learning battlefield and schools are looking to apply technology whenever and however possible. Networked collaborative learning environments are paving the educational highways to the future.
The question is; where is that highway taking us? And are there any Starbucks in the rest areas?
I recently attended a week-long conference on "The 21st Century Classroom" held at UNM-LA campus. It was very informative and we all walked away with dozens of great ideas for our classrooms. My problem is, I'm not sure how much of it I can use. The key to leveraging technology in an educational environment is to engage the students, to allow them to collaborate, to exchange thoughts and ideas and opinions. Are we really ready for this type of learning environment? Should I be texting assignments to my students?
Whether or not you use Twitter, blogs, glogs, texting, Facebook or wikis, your kids almost certainly do. We grew up with LAN phones, encyclopedia sets, mail and television. Our kids grew up with cell phones, computers, wikis, and video apps. Their world is a collage of meshed information networks, one in which knowledge is accessed effortlessly and immediately.
If I wanted to know the capital of Portugal, I went to the library, opened the "M" edition from the encyclopedia set, and looked up Portugal. If my nephew wants to know the average rainfall in Bolivia over the past fifteen years, he googles his question and finds himself immersed with data sheets and analysis.
It's a new world, sometimes a bit scary, but certainly one in which opportunities abound for education. These opportunities are not going unnoticed and institutions across the nation are embracing them with unbridled zeal. Schools are setting up wikis and blogs. Some classes use Twitter. Technology is a force of nature, but like Vader's force, there is a dark side and we need to understand the scope of this changing landscape.
The true advantage of technology is networking, engaging students' thinking in a real world context. But integrating "the world" into the classroom is not without risk.
Networking presents very real problems. We have to deal with sexual predators, cyber-bullying, and pornography. Internet access to ubiquitous knowledge opens many doors that we don't want our students going through, even inadvertently. Given these and other dangers, what are the legal issues that might face us by using the internet in our classes?
These issues are very real and can incur serious consequences if not managed properly. Students have been arrested for making cyber-threats. Peer pressure from Facebook hecklers have driven students to suicide. The growing usage of texting quickly instantiated sexting. Access to internet sites can bring racist propaganda into the classroom. And networked environments can lend themselves to academic dishonesty.
It's 2010 and so we're a little behind the times in establishing the 21st Century Classroom. UNM-LA deserves real applause for bringing together several school districts to address this need. Technology can't just be a better piece of chalk. We're going to be looking at this carefully and working hard to connect our students with the world out there.
Now class, I want you to google Emperor Commodus, determine the name of his parents, how many siblings he had, when did his twin brother die, what was the name of his oldest sister, and what relation to her was Appius Claudius Quintanus.
In preparation for this school year, I've reviewed my lesson plans, looked over new material, new techniques, new educational psychology theories, and I've pretty much decided that I'm a dinosaur. I learned math the hard way. I studied. I studied a lot. I opened my book in the evenings and worked on problems until I "got it", until something clicked and it made sense to me. It took a lot of my free time, a lot of paper, and a lot of band-aids from all those paper cuts.
But pencils and paper and open books laid out on the floor in one's bedroom is now passé. Technology is at the front lines of the learning battlefield and schools are looking to apply technology whenever and however possible. Networked collaborative learning environments are paving the educational highways to the future.
The question is; where is that highway taking us? And are there any Starbucks in the rest areas?
I recently attended a week-long conference on "The 21st Century Classroom" held at UNM-LA campus. It was very informative and we all walked away with dozens of great ideas for our classrooms. My problem is, I'm not sure how much of it I can use. The key to leveraging technology in an educational environment is to engage the students, to allow them to collaborate, to exchange thoughts and ideas and opinions. Are we really ready for this type of learning environment? Should I be texting assignments to my students?
Whether or not you use Twitter, blogs, glogs, texting, Facebook or wikis, your kids almost certainly do. We grew up with LAN phones, encyclopedia sets, mail and television. Our kids grew up with cell phones, computers, wikis, and video apps. Their world is a collage of meshed information networks, one in which knowledge is accessed effortlessly and immediately.
If I wanted to know the capital of Portugal, I went to the library, opened the "M" edition from the encyclopedia set, and looked up Portugal. If my nephew wants to know the average rainfall in Bolivia over the past fifteen years, he googles his question and finds himself immersed with data sheets and analysis.
It's a new world, sometimes a bit scary, but certainly one in which opportunities abound for education. These opportunities are not going unnoticed and institutions across the nation are embracing them with unbridled zeal. Schools are setting up wikis and blogs. Some classes use Twitter. Technology is a force of nature, but like Vader's force, there is a dark side and we need to understand the scope of this changing landscape.
The true advantage of technology is networking, engaging students' thinking in a real world context. But integrating "the world" into the classroom is not without risk.
Networking presents very real problems. We have to deal with sexual predators, cyber-bullying, and pornography. Internet access to ubiquitous knowledge opens many doors that we don't want our students going through, even inadvertently. Given these and other dangers, what are the legal issues that might face us by using the internet in our classes?
These issues are very real and can incur serious consequences if not managed properly. Students have been arrested for making cyber-threats. Peer pressure from Facebook hecklers have driven students to suicide. The growing usage of texting quickly instantiated sexting. Access to internet sites can bring racist propaganda into the classroom. And networked environments can lend themselves to academic dishonesty.
It's 2010 and so we're a little behind the times in establishing the 21st Century Classroom. UNM-LA deserves real applause for bringing together several school districts to address this need. Technology can't just be a better piece of chalk. We're going to be looking at this carefully and working hard to connect our students with the world out there.
Now class, I want you to google Emperor Commodus, determine the name of his parents, how many siblings he had, when did his twin brother die, what was the name of his oldest sister, and what relation to her was Appius Claudius Quintanus.
Monday, August 9, 2010
Whatever Happened To The Funny?
I love peanuts. That is to say, I love Peanuts. Charlie Brown was always my hero. Fighting off kite-eating trees. Pitching for the world's worst baseball team. Having a dog who fought to keep the skies safe from WWI enemy aces. And never never never giving up on kicking that football held by our favorite sadistic nickel-a-session psychiatrist.
Most of all, I love Charlie Brown because he makes me laugh. Whether it's watching him get outdone by his dog's Christmas decorations or having to deal with arguments over the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown is a true comic. And what a coincidence that his strip is in the "comics" section.
But these days, so many comics have little to do with funny. Go to the so-called comics or funny pages and suddenly you find yourself dealing with the trauma of life's realities. One strip had a family's dog die after saving their daughter from drowning. Another had a character die of breast cancer. And another had someone die of AIDs. If I want to see disasters and family tragedies, I'll watch the morning news. I read the comics in the hope of finding something to laugh about.
Many comic strips never lost the funny because they never had it. Some are mindless, some are boring, and some are downright morose. But this is nothing new. Brenda Starr, Mary Worth, Steve Canyon ... kids always skipped past those when reading the comics on Sunday.
Now, there are many comics that I do find funny. My taste is hardly a metric one should use to judge anything, but here's my take anyway. Along with Peanuts, some of the best comic strips have been Ziggy, Opus, The Far Side, Dilbert, Calvin & Hobbes, Broom Hilda, Baby Blues, Bloom County, Non Sequitur, Shoe, Off The Mark, Little Orphan Annie, Rubes, and The Lockhorns.
Umm ... I'm kidding about Little Orphan Annie. I don't know about you, but that kid really creeped me out. And what are the odds that she would find a dog that had the same spooky look? On a side note, in a much older and thankfully extinct comic strip, there was a very famous cartoon dog named Tige, the pet owned by Buster (of Buster Brown shoes). Without a doubt, Tige was the scariest creature ever concocted, the poster dog of nightmares for children and monsters alike.
Anyway, as I mentioned, quite a few comics from past years were never all that funny. Remember Henry? Henry was weird .. just plain weird. And Nancy was a freak of nature. Barney Google and Snuffy Smith were lazy dregs of society. Andy Capp was an extremely unlikeable drunk. Archie and his friends were tedious. Curtis was an insult to intelligence. Alley Oop was an insult to DNA. Gasoline Alley is just plain stupid and the Quigmans are just plain scary. Rex Morgan makes Mark Trail look interesting. And Beetle Bailey did the impossible, making the military look even more ridiculous than it really is.
So where's all the funny? Bugs Bunny was funny. The Road Runner was funny. What's wrong with wanting a little funny in our lives? Are people so hard up for misery that they have to read Apartment 3G, Judge Parker, or Funky Winkerbean to drag them down a few notches?
Yeah, yeah ... I know. I'm dissing some comics you love and perhaps I'm not trashing a few you hate. But seriously, does anyone out there really enjoy Blondie? How many times can Dagwood run into the postman? How many times are we supposed to watch that clown make a two foot tall sandwich? How many times can you expect people to laugh as we watch his sadistic boss beat him with a chair? It's just not funny anymore. Was it ever?
There are many comic strips that aren't funny per se, but do register wonderfully on higher levels of humor. Little Abner is a classic. And who could forget Pogo? Uh, you do remember Pogo, don't you? Am I showing my age?
Hey! I want funny! I want entertainment! I want to laugh!
I've got it. Let's put Congressional speeches in the funny pages! Every day, we could enjoy the light-hearted ramblings about death panels, Nazi saluting Presidents, and water-boarding to protect our shores. We could have strips about flying Cessnas and shooting Polar bears. We could watch fun loving characters like Rash Limball riding his trusty horse Openmouth along the borders of Texas as he ropes and brands illegals. Or maybe a series on the Adventures of Balloon Boy?
Then again, maybe old spooky eyes wasn't all that bad.
Most of all, I love Charlie Brown because he makes me laugh. Whether it's watching him get outdone by his dog's Christmas decorations or having to deal with arguments over the Great Pumpkin, Charlie Brown is a true comic. And what a coincidence that his strip is in the "comics" section.
But these days, so many comics have little to do with funny. Go to the so-called comics or funny pages and suddenly you find yourself dealing with the trauma of life's realities. One strip had a family's dog die after saving their daughter from drowning. Another had a character die of breast cancer. And another had someone die of AIDs. If I want to see disasters and family tragedies, I'll watch the morning news. I read the comics in the hope of finding something to laugh about.
Many comic strips never lost the funny because they never had it. Some are mindless, some are boring, and some are downright morose. But this is nothing new. Brenda Starr, Mary Worth, Steve Canyon ... kids always skipped past those when reading the comics on Sunday.
Now, there are many comics that I do find funny. My taste is hardly a metric one should use to judge anything, but here's my take anyway. Along with Peanuts, some of the best comic strips have been Ziggy, Opus, The Far Side, Dilbert, Calvin & Hobbes, Broom Hilda, Baby Blues, Bloom County, Non Sequitur, Shoe, Off The Mark, Little Orphan Annie, Rubes, and The Lockhorns.
Umm ... I'm kidding about Little Orphan Annie. I don't know about you, but that kid really creeped me out. And what are the odds that she would find a dog that had the same spooky look? On a side note, in a much older and thankfully extinct comic strip, there was a very famous cartoon dog named Tige, the pet owned by Buster (of Buster Brown shoes). Without a doubt, Tige was the scariest creature ever concocted, the poster dog of nightmares for children and monsters alike.
Anyway, as I mentioned, quite a few comics from past years were never all that funny. Remember Henry? Henry was weird .. just plain weird. And Nancy was a freak of nature. Barney Google and Snuffy Smith were lazy dregs of society. Andy Capp was an extremely unlikeable drunk. Archie and his friends were tedious. Curtis was an insult to intelligence. Alley Oop was an insult to DNA. Gasoline Alley is just plain stupid and the Quigmans are just plain scary. Rex Morgan makes Mark Trail look interesting. And Beetle Bailey did the impossible, making the military look even more ridiculous than it really is.
So where's all the funny? Bugs Bunny was funny. The Road Runner was funny. What's wrong with wanting a little funny in our lives? Are people so hard up for misery that they have to read Apartment 3G, Judge Parker, or Funky Winkerbean to drag them down a few notches?
Yeah, yeah ... I know. I'm dissing some comics you love and perhaps I'm not trashing a few you hate. But seriously, does anyone out there really enjoy Blondie? How many times can Dagwood run into the postman? How many times are we supposed to watch that clown make a two foot tall sandwich? How many times can you expect people to laugh as we watch his sadistic boss beat him with a chair? It's just not funny anymore. Was it ever?
There are many comic strips that aren't funny per se, but do register wonderfully on higher levels of humor. Little Abner is a classic. And who could forget Pogo? Uh, you do remember Pogo, don't you? Am I showing my age?
Hey! I want funny! I want entertainment! I want to laugh!
I've got it. Let's put Congressional speeches in the funny pages! Every day, we could enjoy the light-hearted ramblings about death panels, Nazi saluting Presidents, and water-boarding to protect our shores. We could have strips about flying Cessnas and shooting Polar bears. We could watch fun loving characters like Rash Limball riding his trusty horse Openmouth along the borders of Texas as he ropes and brands illegals. Or maybe a series on the Adventures of Balloon Boy?
Then again, maybe old spooky eyes wasn't all that bad.
Don't Count On It
If a hen and a half lays an egg and a half in a day in a half, how many eggs do six hens lay in seven days?
John Paulos' book, Innumeracy, cites a story about a weatherman who was discussing the chances of rain in the coming weekend. "Well folks, there's a 50% chance of rain on Saturday and 50% chance of rain on Sunday. So it looks like there's a 100% chance of rain this weekend!" It may or may not have rained that weekend, but clearly there was a low pressure cell between this guy's ears.
While taking a walk one summer, I stopped at a garage sale at which one child had a small table set up and was selling beaded bracelets he had made. When I asked how much they cost, he said "30 cents each or three for a dollar." And people still debate whether math skills are a problem in this country? Of course, I recognize a bargain when I see one ... I bought six.
Declining math skills are a constant sore point with me and I've voiced my strong objection against the use of calculators many times. If it were up to me, students would not be allowed to use calculators until 11th grade. Watching students pull out their calculators when asked to multiply 150 times 2 gives me mental agita worse than a weekend marathon of "Real Housewives of New Jersey." With each button pushed, these electronic black-holes of intelligence are sucking away our nation's future.
Calculators do contribute to the problem, but they're only a symptom of the more erosive effects of educational apathy. Many parents have joined the battle and are now fighting on the front lines of the war on education, employing weapons of math direction such as after-school tutoring, summer classes, home schooling and online courses. And yet, these are at best band-aids attempting to stem the bleeding of cognition and intuitive reasoning that now plague our educational institutions. The question asked by Morris Kline 25 years ago - "Why can't Johnny add?" - is no longer relevant. The question today is - "Why doesn't Johnny even care that he can't add?"
A test was given to a high school class, asking them "If a computer has a list price of $1500 and the store is offering a 30% discount, what is the final price of the computer if you have to pay 12% tax?" Students merrily poked their electronic Texas friend to retrieve the answer but neglected to use 0.12 as the multiplier for the tax, using "12" instead. Without even questioning the validity of the numbers being regurgitated, they wrote down their answer of $13,650. This is numerical illiteracy.
It's as if numbers have no more meaning than Klingon characters. Dor-sho-gha! jIwuQ! ¿Habla matemáticas?
Let's get serious about this. We have kids going to college who cannot determine the volume of a cube. People carry "tip cards" in their wallets because they can't calculate 15% of $20. Your average student in high school no longer knows common measurement substitutions, like; How many ounces in a gallon? How many feet in a mile? How many furlongs in a fortnight?
When did math lose its importance in America? We mandate that students know the capital of North Dakota, that they know what happened in the War of 1812 (and hopefully when it was fought), that they can recognize iambic pentameter. Why is it acceptable for them not to know how to add a fraction without the help of a Cray CX1?
So what's the solution? Ban calculators? Force every child to learn the multiplication table out to the 50s? Put basic math equations on the back of cereal boxes? Outlaw accountants and force people to do their own taxes?
Study after study shows the United States falling behind other nations in education. Test scores place the United States at average (at best) and more often below average. Has it really gotten that bad? Does being able to mentally calculate a 15% tip now require a college education?
Maybe the solution is as simple as one plus one (please don't use a calculator to figure this one out!). Maybe we, as a society, need to recognize that being able to add and multiply without a calculator does have innate value. Maybe we need to turn off the television set, put away the iPod, turn off the cell phone, and open a book. Maybe the reward that education brings is in fact worth the effort?
The answer, by the way, is twenty-eight eggs (not forty-two). Hmmm ... maybe we need better calculators?
John Paulos' book, Innumeracy, cites a story about a weatherman who was discussing the chances of rain in the coming weekend. "Well folks, there's a 50% chance of rain on Saturday and 50% chance of rain on Sunday. So it looks like there's a 100% chance of rain this weekend!" It may or may not have rained that weekend, but clearly there was a low pressure cell between this guy's ears.
While taking a walk one summer, I stopped at a garage sale at which one child had a small table set up and was selling beaded bracelets he had made. When I asked how much they cost, he said "30 cents each or three for a dollar." And people still debate whether math skills are a problem in this country? Of course, I recognize a bargain when I see one ... I bought six.
Declining math skills are a constant sore point with me and I've voiced my strong objection against the use of calculators many times. If it were up to me, students would not be allowed to use calculators until 11th grade. Watching students pull out their calculators when asked to multiply 150 times 2 gives me mental agita worse than a weekend marathon of "Real Housewives of New Jersey." With each button pushed, these electronic black-holes of intelligence are sucking away our nation's future.
Calculators do contribute to the problem, but they're only a symptom of the more erosive effects of educational apathy. Many parents have joined the battle and are now fighting on the front lines of the war on education, employing weapons of math direction such as after-school tutoring, summer classes, home schooling and online courses. And yet, these are at best band-aids attempting to stem the bleeding of cognition and intuitive reasoning that now plague our educational institutions. The question asked by Morris Kline 25 years ago - "Why can't Johnny add?" - is no longer relevant. The question today is - "Why doesn't Johnny even care that he can't add?"
A test was given to a high school class, asking them "If a computer has a list price of $1500 and the store is offering a 30% discount, what is the final price of the computer if you have to pay 12% tax?" Students merrily poked their electronic Texas friend to retrieve the answer but neglected to use 0.12 as the multiplier for the tax, using "12" instead. Without even questioning the validity of the numbers being regurgitated, they wrote down their answer of $13,650. This is numerical illiteracy.
It's as if numbers have no more meaning than Klingon characters. Dor-sho-gha! jIwuQ! ¿Habla matemáticas?
Let's get serious about this. We have kids going to college who cannot determine the volume of a cube. People carry "tip cards" in their wallets because they can't calculate 15% of $20. Your average student in high school no longer knows common measurement substitutions, like; How many ounces in a gallon? How many feet in a mile? How many furlongs in a fortnight?
When did math lose its importance in America? We mandate that students know the capital of North Dakota, that they know what happened in the War of 1812 (and hopefully when it was fought), that they can recognize iambic pentameter. Why is it acceptable for them not to know how to add a fraction without the help of a Cray CX1?
So what's the solution? Ban calculators? Force every child to learn the multiplication table out to the 50s? Put basic math equations on the back of cereal boxes? Outlaw accountants and force people to do their own taxes?
Study after study shows the United States falling behind other nations in education. Test scores place the United States at average (at best) and more often below average. Has it really gotten that bad? Does being able to mentally calculate a 15% tip now require a college education?
Maybe the solution is as simple as one plus one (please don't use a calculator to figure this one out!). Maybe we, as a society, need to recognize that being able to add and multiply without a calculator does have innate value. Maybe we need to turn off the television set, put away the iPod, turn off the cell phone, and open a book. Maybe the reward that education brings is in fact worth the effort?
The answer, by the way, is twenty-eight eggs (not forty-two). Hmmm ... maybe we need better calculators?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)