This Cannot Be Real, Can It?

I was so stunned when I read this that I forgot how I even got to the site. It can't be real, can it? It's like naming your son Mike Hunt or something.

Comments

I've noticed that some comments are posting and some are not--I've run a few tests and cannot figure out the problem. Until them I'm turning off comment moderation and turning on word verification--that will be a temporary fix until I hear back from Blogger Support.

Update: OK, I republished the entire blog and it looks like things are going ok now. I'm going back to comment moderation (with word verification off) and so far it looks like it's working. Cross your fingers. I'm really not deleting your comments! I haven't had to do that in months, and that was just for repeated foul language and personal attacks.

If it looks like more comments aren't getting posted, though, I'll switch comment moderation off.

Angels In The Sky

Today at the end of lunch the Blue Angels flew low and fast over our campus. They'll be performing this weekend at an airshow at the former Mather Air Force Base. I heard them fly over but didn't see them.

On my way home from work I saw them. How could I not? They were so low that I could read US Navy under their wings! I'm surprised there weren't car accidents everywhere as people craned their necks to see those amazing pieces of military hardware. Loud, fast, and powerful--I'm glad they're on our side! Additionally, people from businesses on both sides of the road were outside, eyes skyward, trying to catch a glimpse of whatever it was that was causing that roar.

I think I know what we're doing this weekend.

Liberals

Here's a post I agree with.

I've been saying it forever--one of the primary differences between the left and right in America is that the left sees people only as members of groups, whereas the right sees people as individuals with inherent rights of their own. The linked post above identifies even more differences between left and right.

Update, 3/18/06: Here's another one :-)

Carnival of Education

For the latest and greatest from around the edublogosphere, click here, my dear.

I certainly fear
that this sounds bad to the ear,
like a sound from the rear.

No Pink Slip Blues

Layoff notices in our district were sent out last Friday. When I didn't get the little yellow notice in my mailbox at home, telling me to come to the post office to suffer the ignominy of having to sign for my layoff notice, I assumed I was safe. A short chat with my principal on Monday confirmed that only our rookie and sophomore teachers got such notices.

This is my 9th year of teaching, my 5th in this district.

Teacher Bites Student

Via the Edwonks (see blogroll at left) comes this story of a teacher who was fired for biting a student. Go read that short news report and then come back to this post.

No, go read the news story first! Can't you follow directions???

I will not defend the teacher's actions here. However, I will state categorically that the student definitely contributed to the problem. I'd assess fault here at 98% teacher and 2% student. Why do I fault the teacher so much? She bit a student! Who the heck does that?!

The catalyst for the problem, however, was that the student did not follow the teacher's instructions. She told the boy to go stand in the hall, and he took it upon himself to return to the class because, apparently, he wanted to get his books. I'll be honest, here, I'm not buying it. I assert, without any fact at all but lots of experience in this type of situation, that the boy returned to class because he wanted to garner a little more attention, either from the teacher or from his classmates. He wanted to show that he was cool or tough enough to violate her instructions. He was trying to be a punk, and he totally succeeded. It's oh so common in junior high. I've taught kids like him.

However, the teacher should not have gotten physical with the student. Perhaps I'm fortunate to always have worked at schools where the administration at least most of the time backed up and supported the teachers in discipline issues. They may not always have done what I would have liked in a given situation, but I never felt like students could run roughshod over me--knowing I would resist the urge to beat the snot out of him or her, even if he or she desperately needed it--and not suffer some consequences. I truly do pity teachers who labor under such circumstances, and I know they're out there.

But I hope that those teachers would never try to justify or excuse biting a student.

Teachers Make The Worst Students

Here's an interesting column with the same title. The teaser:

In this line of work, you have to be willing to adjust your thinking when confronted with new evidence.

So here goes: I used to think that left-wing Latino activists, Minutemen vigilantes and politicians in both parties had the thinnest skins on the planet. But now that I've been scolded for criticizing the critics of the No Child Left Behind education law, I'd have to say that public schoolteachers win the prize.

A Patriot's History of the United States

I wonder how many teachers and professors will put this book on their reading lists....

Racial Gap in Education

John at Discriminations (see blogroll at left) has an interesting post about the underrepresentation of minority teachers in Connecticut's schools. Oddly enough, minority representation in teachers evenly matches the percentage of minority graduates of teacher colleges, yet still there's a problem.

And the freakin' CTA says we don't talk about race in education. Geez. But back to John's post.

Officials in Greenwich want to attract a more "diverse" teaching staff. There's nothing wrong with that, except when you really mean "darker skinned" when you say "diverse". But the question is, why would you want people of different colors, which to the Greenwich officials is synonymous with different cultures, teaching your kids? John provides an answer:

In addition, it appears that the jargon of “cultural competence” is spreading throughout educationdom as a rationale for hiring minorities. “Minority teachers act as cultural interpreters for the entire school community," one administrator claimed.

Ah yes, cultural competence. Ranks right up there with having the correct "disposition" to teach. I wrote about cultural competence last October and will copy the main points here:

Again, I argue that teaching disadvantaged students, giving them some "cultural capital" to spend, is to open the doors to success in society. Others argue, however, that "cultural competence" is not the perview of the student but rather is the responsibility of the teacher; the teacher should adapt, accomodate, respect, and nourish the culture of each child, whatever that culture may be, instead of teaching them the tools they'll need to function in the larger society. In other words, the social engineers want to create a "society" in the schools that is entirely different from the one in which we live. This accepting of other cultures seems to be a one-way street, and only the dominant culture needs to do the accepting. While there is good reason to merge the two beliefs and find some meeting between them, it's not a happy medium--we need to teach the children to function in the society we have much more than in the Utopia we want.

Wendy McElroy writes the following about the new "cultural competence" requirement some schools have for prospective teachers:

In practice, the term is the new face of political correctness, which is often accompanied by the PC concepts of "diversity" or "multiculturalism."

"Cultural competency" advances the same basic goals as those buzz words. Certain groups (such as minorities) and certain ideas (such as gender feminist interpretations of oppression) are to be promoted by institutionalizing policies that encourage them. Of course, this means that other groups and other ideas are de facto penalized or discouraged.

Her article continues:

Norman Levitt, Professor of Mathematics at Rutgers University, explains, "'Cultural competence' is…a bureaucratic weapon. 'Cultural competence,' or rather, your [an educator's] presumed lack thereof, is what you will be clobbered with if you are imprudent enough to challenge or merely to have qualms about 'affirmative action', 'diversity' and 'multiculturalism,' as those principles are now espoused by their most fervent academic advocates."

So already we see that "cultural competence" is a buzzword for thought control and conformity. So-called non-diverse teachers (you know, the monolithic white bloc) will learn cultural competence from our diverse brethren and sistren, which will make us better able to teach algebra to our diverse students.

But let's take John's quote about "cultural interpreters" at face value for a moment and see where it leads us.

For starters, it assumes that people from different cultures will have different values or see things in different ways than we do. In fact, a person from a culture steeped in oppression might well sympathize with the 9/11 hijackers, might hate Jews, might hate America, or might advocate violent revolution. Or, a person from a religion of peace might not believe in having women bosses, might not value the girls in his/her class, or might want gays crushed under toppling walls. Are we to say to these people, "Share your culture with us, but unlike Jay Bennish of Colorado, do it in an even-handed way"? Is that not asking them to subvert the very culture they're supposed to be sharing with the rest of us, and interpreting for us?

Additionally, does this not make our diverse teacher now the spokesperson for his or her identity group? After all, this teacher is here to provide different views for the rest of us, so presumably we can go to this person for the "black" perspective, the "Moslem perspective", or the "gay Guatemalan" perspective on major events of the day. Does this seem at all respectful? It seems to me to be more like having animals in a zoo--let's go see how the lemurs are reacting to this stimulus!

Our goal should be to provide the best education for the students. If we teachers are only supposed to teach English, math, science, PE, art, foreign language, history, or whatever to our students, why does it matter at all what our "culture" is? If 2x+5=25, x=10 no matter what culture my students or I come from. If, however, we want to create "thinking citizens" who will be "activists in the community", why even bother with the facade of teaching academic content at all? Let's just put a bunch of leftist demagogues, suitably chosen based on race and culture, in the classrooms and let them rant.

Yes, of course there's a middle ground. People of different backgrounds can share insights in class while still addressing the academic content of their course. That's part of how you build rapport with students, by showing just a little bit of what makes you as a teacher more of an individual and not just an academic automaton. However, the primary goal for hiring teachers must be academic and pedagogical comptence, which can be measured, and not some nebulous cultural competence. Hire the most highly qualified teachers to teach the children, and don't worry if these teachers "look like" the kids or not. In that way you're doing the children a service instead of pandering to vocal constituencies.

Joanne's Book Is Awesome

I just finished reading Joanne Jacobs' (see blogroll at left) Our School, a book about the first few years of an urban charter school which caters to underachieving students. I could pile on the praise here, but look at the time. Besides, the reviews at the Amazon link are dead on.

As I emailed to the author, I really enjoyed the vignette format of the book. The reader is moved along as much by the characters as by the events. In that regard it reminds me of The Goal, a book ostensibly about how to manage a factory efficiently but told as a real story with characters, a plot, as well as a lesson. Both books have a focused topic, but both also draw the reader into the story by sheer force of writing ability.

Now I can go get some sleep.

Oh, and go read Our School. You'll be glad you did.

Here's Another Book I'd Probably Agree With

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0895260905/qid=1142093167/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/103-4193258-8740657?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

Students and the First Amendment

Here again, a principal gets it all wrong.

Carnival of Education

Did I forget to link to this week's Carnival of Education?

I Guess It Was Real After All

I posted back in November about some peace activists, including one American, who were supposedly kidnapped in Iraq while looking for evidence of American atrocities. I mentioned the "tasty" irony of that situation and wondered if perhaps it wasn't staged.

Well, if it was staged, they're going all out to make it appear real. Turns out the American has been found dead. And sad as that is, may it serve as a reminder of who the real terrorists are--and it's not the Americans, you lefty idiots. If just that point gets across to a few lefties, then perhaps this naive man didn't die in vain.

Outsourcing Education Jobs

John Kerry tried to make the outsourcing of American jobs an important point in his campaign--it's an esoteric enough topic that most people yawned and waited for his next Bush-bashing comment, and they were duly rewarded. As a free marketer myself I'm ok with outsourcing jobs, as I don't see how protectionism helps anyone. Besides, if low-skill American jobs are outsourced, that frees up labor and (some) capital that could be put to even more productive use here in the United States.**

But what about education? Can that be outsourced? Currently I'm in another one of those periods in which I consider getting a masters degree. Not that I really want one, of course--what the heck do I need such a degree for? No, the reason I'm considering getting one is purely financial in that I would "move over" on the salary scale and make over $10,000 a year more than I currently do.

No way do I want to get a generic Masters in Education degree, especially the generic Masters in Education with an emphasis on Curriculum and Instruction. Gawd, I can't imagine having to put up with more politically correct tripe in the guise of higher education. If you don't know, schools of education at our universities are hotbeds of Marxism, multiculturalism, academic fuzziness, and anti-Americanism. I've had enough of that crap; I want a degree in something real. I talked to a colleague at school this week who's getting a masters in education. He was very upfront with not really caring about the education he's paying for and not really thinking he'll be able to apply any of it in his classroom--he's just tolerating it for the big fat pay raise he'll be getting. I don't want to spend so much of my time in a pursuit like that. I've done enough of that with my credentialing classes and CLAD (Cross-cultural, Linguistic, and Academic Development--think "bilingual ed") coursework. I want to value the education I receive from now on, and value it for more than just the financial rewards it brings me.

One of the fields I've considered is a Masters in Education with an emphasis in what's called "distance learning"--in other words, how to conduct online classes. A couple of CSU's (Cal State University) offer such degrees online, thereby practicing what they teach. This kinda interests me because the subject matter is more technological than political; I could actually use this knowledge. I see a future where online courses will be delivered to certain high school students--homeschoolers (but partially educated by the local school district), expelled students, "home and hospital" students (those who miss great lengths of school due to illness or injury), dropouts, etc. So this is one field in which I can see value, one I might consider.

But let's get back to the original topic--given the education future I envision, what's to stop the education field from outsourcing jobs overseas? The impetus for these thoughts at such an ungodly hour of a Saturday morning was this article about outsourcing, in particular these few sentences about education:

Parts of the education sector are at risk as well. Personal interaction is everything, no doubt, so far as K-12 is concerned, but is it necessary in colleges? Reading about the travails of Lawrence Summers at Harvard, one is reminded that personal interaction with academics (as opposed to graduate-student teaching assistants) is something that undergraduates get rather little of in any case -- despite the colossal fees.

Add this view to my previous post about the value of a college education--at least one that costs upwards of six digits--and I wonder if perhaps higher education might see some of the same outsourcing-related issues that other service industries are currently facing. It's likely that my current job is safe, but perhaps that future I've envisioned will include video streaming from Shanghai, Tokyo, Taipei, Singapore, or Dehli, and not from Sacramento, Denver, St. Louis, or Philadelphia.

Or perhaps maybe the Rust Belt states should quit whining about the loss of their steel-centric economies and hop on this futuristic bandwagon.


**Here's a quote on that topic from the same article, a quote I hadn't read when I wrote my first paragraph above. I'm glad I'm not the only one with faith in the American economy:

The danger, as Blinder rightly argues, is not rising unemployment. People will find work. That happened during the first Industrial Revolution (farming to manufacturing) and the second as well (manufacturing to services). Tens of millions of jobs were lost; tens of millions were created. The American labor market is superbly efficient at moving people out of old jobs and into new ones. (It will be a different story in Europe.) The problem is that the adjustment will be painful. Blinder therefore wants to see a much larger commitment to trade-adjustment assistance. He also seems to favor a thicker and stronger social safety net: unemployment insurance, public health insurance, and so on. (There, I hesitate: Europe's safety net is surely one of the reasons why its labor market is so bad at creating new jobs.)

College Not The Best Investment?

Here's a contrarian view if I've ever heard one: perhaps college isn't as good a financial investment as it's been for the past 25 years. Hmmm. And this view is coming from an author in Forbes magazine.

Why does the price of a four-year degree keep rising? Past performance is one reason. The cost of college degrees earned in the 1940s--tuition at Yale was $450 in 1940--through the 1980s looks like a bargain compared with the cost of those today. The return on investment for older degrees has been spectacular. Take a well-known statistic: As recently as the 1970s, there was little difference in the lifetime earning potential between a high school grad and a four-year-college degree holder. But in just one generation the four-year degree holder has leaped ahead in the earnings wars. In 2003 he could have expected to earn 62% more than the high school grad...

But what if you could guarantee those qualities [intelligence, ability to set goals and achieve them--Darren] in other ways (military service, missionary work, etc.)? See, I think the Harvard or Yale degree is worth plenty, not because of what Harvard or Yale teaches--the postmodern university can do more harm than good; witness Yale’s admission of a former Taliban spokesman. The degree simply puts an official stamp on the fact that the student was intelligent, hardworking and competitive enough to get into Harvard or Yale in the first place. May I present to the jury Bill Gates? He was smart enough to get into Harvard. Then he proved his financial intelligence by dropping out to start a company. (emphasis mine--Darren)

It's worth a read. The parents at the school at which I teach will still insist on sending their kids to Stanford, though.

American Political Families--Kennedy and Bush

An interesting read. Not intellectually rigorous, but a good conversation starter for the cocktail party circuit.

I do grow tired of the use of the word "dynasty" in American politics, though. The Kennedys have only had two generations of serious input into American national politics, the same as the Bushes. If you count Prescott Bush I guess the Bushes could claim three generations, but whatever. To me, that isn't a dynasty.

If the Washingtons were still influential? That would be a dynasty.

The "Right" To An Education?

What about those who don't really want an education? Here's an interesting view from an interesting libertarian.

Anti-Gay School Broadcast

On the first day, a few students talked about supporting gay rights, and no one paid much attention.

On the second day, a school counselor talked about respecting each other, and no one paid much attention.

On the third day, a few students spoke against homosexuality and a teacher said it is ''wrong according to the Bible'' -- and people noticed very much.

That final segment of a Miami Sunset Senior High television project roiled the normally placid West Dade campus, drew sharp response from both students and teachers and has raised questions about the free exchange of ideas and religion in public schools.

Interesting. Read the whole thing.

Another hat tip goes to EIA.