Inside/Outside

One of my first memories of working at SF is of a happy hour. The first or second week I worked, a bunch of people who worked in the office were going out to happy hour and inviting everyone. The people "organizing" the happy hour were two people who, for some reason, seemed to think I had taken their job. I'm not sure of all the politics, but for whatever reason, they did not like me. So they proceeded to ask everyone around me if they were coming to happy hour, and not ask me.

Now, I don't think they plotted and said "We're going to ask everyone to come out but her right in front of her," but I do think it might have been sadistically fun for them to make sure I knew they were going out and that I wasn't invited.

A couple of people who work here in the office just did the same thing, I think with less malicious intent, but nonetheless, sort of "forgetting" that anyone else might be around and might appreciate an invite. Especially when one person is saying, "Oh, run after C (the boss) and ask her if she'd like to come."

I know, I'm doing a bit of whining, but it seems that a lot of my life I feel as if I'm on the outside. But this organizational situation at SF seems to encourage this kind of behavior. And other schools, too, seemed to have a need to have "insider" and "outsider" groups to define and organize themselves. I wonder if this is inherent in school politics, and how it affects the students. Because it must, and it can't be a good precedent for them.

Wow!

My blogging has been LAME, y'all! (I'm channeling my inner Britney Spears). As you probably can tell, I'm working on writing about 14 3-million page papers. Ok, ok, by my random use of numbers, you can tell that's exaggeration. Whatever. I reserve my right to exaggerate.

For the moment I'll reserve my right to silence. I'll just say that it's that point in the semester when I get sick of my ideological classmates and want to rip out all my hair. After a week of "The culture of the South is f'ed up" and "White people have no culture," I'm ready to go celebrate my lack of culture and my f'ed up culture (wait, do I not have any or is it f'ed up? I'm confused. Please, liberal know-it-alls, explain!) with my family and eat deep fried turkey an' mashed patatas an' graaavy an' some greens fried in butta. Yum. And use some improper English. Like, "she don know how to cook the turkey!" and "this ole dress? I just drug it outta the back o'my closet."

Just remember, the "culture" that waves the Confederate flag is also the one that produced Faulkner, Flannery O'Connor, blues, jazz, and fried chicken. It's not one monolithic thing. I wish we could separate them and have only the beautiful things, but sometimes it seems pain and beauty are all mixed up in one. And that one would be the South.

Democrats and Higher Ed

First, a colleague of mine tipped me off to the great "Inside Higher Ed" emails you can sign up for. Since my interests are kind of K-16 (mostly centered around foreign language ed policy, as many of you know), I like to sort of scan the field and see how everything works together for or against foreign language. If you like getting little sound bites, go to Inside Higher Ed and sign up for their emails. It's cheaper than subscribing to the Chronicle of Higher Education, in any case.

In my inbox today was a comprehensive report of how Democrats in Congress will change higher education. It seems they want to make college more affordable (which the article says will be very expensive), but also will not let up on accountability for higher ed, which has university types quaking in their boots. Hey, as long as it doesn't turn into No Undergrad Left Behind, I think we might be ok. We'll see.

"Colleges and the New Congress." (Lederman, D. Inside Higher Ed. Nov. 8, 2006.)

What will they do for us?

Now that the Democrats have taken control of the house (I'm unspeakably proud of the fact that we have a woman as speaker - yeah!) and presumably the senate (um, c'mon, Burns and Allen. Just like when we knew it was over for Kerry, we know it's over for you. Conceed. Be the bigger men.), what will the dems do for education?

There's an article in EdWeek to that effect - apparently dems will work to lower interest rates on student loans in their first wave of legislation (thank God), and then eventually work on tuition tax credits. Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.) has said that he will work to reauthorize No Child Left Behind, but that they will examine state accountability and testing for special education and English language learners. Sounds good to me. I believe in high standards and accountability (especially fiscal accountability, which I don't think NCLB really does), but I don't know that any of that is actually happening at their schools. To me it seems that states are lowering their standards to ensure their schools recieve federal funds.

Oh, and former Dem governor of Iowa Tom Vilsack is going to run for president. I need to check out his education record before I make any decisions. I've decided to become an education voter. I abstained from voting for DC mayor because I'm inclined to dislike mayoral control of schools, which Fenty seems to want. Although I am slowly warming up to Fenty. We'll see where he takes us. I also didn't vote because I don't like not being given a real choice in the election. A Republican no one takes seriously doesn't do much for debate. And all the Republicans here run in Democrats clothing. What does it tell you that our "Democratic" mayor-elect wants to do some of the same reforms that the "Republican" mayor of New York City has done? I don't think either one of them fits party label.

How can we help immigrants learn English?

This article from the Rocky Mountain News demonstrates something many in the foreign language/ESL fields already know; teaching immigrants English is an uphill battle, and not always for the reasons one might expect. 1) There aren't enough English classes that are accessible to students (both financially, location-wise, and child-care wise). 2) Some (and please, I know immigrants are as varied as U.S. citizens) immigrants come with little education in their home language; teaching someone to read in English is infinitely harder if they can't read in their native language. Many of the immigrants who are educated speak at least some English, and therefore learning it is much easier. Imagine learning a different language if you can't even read in your native tongue.

It seems many of these articles say the same thing - immigrants want to learn English, but there aren't enough programs, they aren't easy enough to get to, given the constraints of being a member of the working poor, and it's not easy to learn English.

"Pressure to speak 'American' grows." (Quintero, F. Rocky Mountain News. Oct. 2, 2006)

HQTs

Or, to laymen, "Highly Qualified Teachers."

Case in point - for some teachers, taking a teacher qualification program in order to meet the highly qualified teaching standards of the states is degrading, expensive, takes away from their real duty of teaching, and, most importantly, is completely useless to someone who has 22 years of teaching experience. That's what professional development is for - keep up with lifelong learning, constantly improve teaching methods, etc. But being told that you're not a "real" teacher - well, that's just ridiculous.

Go to the private schools!

"EduCracy Run Amok." (The Education Wonks blog. 10/12/6.)

Cite your sources!

I cited Bennett and Page's op-ed in the Post in this blog entry last week, and this week in my History of Ed class, we discussed it (I sent it out to everyone in the class). In any case, the article cites James S. Coleman's research, stating that his research proves "that there's no reliable connection between the resources going into a school and the learning that comes out" (Bennet, W. 2006-9-21). My professor, being the dedicated scholar she is, went back to check the source. I'm not sure that the report "makes clear" that funding has no impact on outcomes; it seems that after Brown V Board, Southern schools increased their funding as a sort of noncompliance compliance with Brown (see Wikipedia, "James S. Coleman," last updated 9/19/6). I'm just citing sources from the Internet, so I would probably need to dig around a little more to get a more scholarly opinion. This isn't one of my areas of research, so I don't know if I would have time to do it... one of my problems seems to be that I'd like to research everything!

In any case, Coleman's report makes a strong case that black students do better in integrated classrooms. This seems to be the main thrust of his argument, not that funding doesn't matter. His report eventually led to busing, which I think we can agree was a bit of a disaster. I think their hearts were in the right place, but as for for actually working... not so much. I can't seem to find an actual draft of the report online, but I'll keep looking. It's interesting to look at the social and policy effects of research; like an author's novel or play being adapted to film, television, or the theatre, sometimes the author of the research has no say and orignial intent is thwarted in the reproduction.

I have to run - tons of work and not much time!

No Desk for Them

A funny article on teachers who don't use desks. I never did. I shoved mine to the back of the classroom and used it to pile up (aka "lose") student papers. Sometimes my 7th grade study hall would re-organize it for me, but I still never sat there. I ran around from the tape recorder to the dvd player to each kid to the computer too much.

But this article does show how desperate some are for school reform - at one point the article says something about how "no studies have been done to prove the effectiveness of not using a desk." Um, we have to do studies for this? I think that it depends on the teacher's style. I used to sit on top of one of the kids' desks and teach, too. In fact, my eighth graders would never sit in one desk, and when I finally asked them why, they said, "Because that's where you always sit, Ms. Cottrell." Gosh, hadn't even noticed it myself.

At the bottom of the article is a great layout of one teacher's classroom. This is my dream classroom. A rolling cart for a projector! Tables for my students so they can work together! Even if I were teaching college (which I am thinking is more and more of a possiblity, because PhD's for college instructors are mandatory, and the number of college teachers is only going to increase), I would want a set-up like this. I think it's great for students of all ages to work together.

"At the Head of Some Classes, Desks Dismissed." (It just goes to show you that when I saw this title, I thought they meant student desks. What teacher sits in front of the classroom and teaches from a desk?) (Matthews, J. The Washington Post. October 3, 2006. Page A08.)

La Fugitive

By the way, my friend has some new postings up on her blog. She works for the government. Hilarity ensures.

La Fugitive blog

100% Perfection

Several people have mentioned recently the fact that NCLB mandates that by 2014, 100% of students score at grade level or above on their reading, math, and science tests. I seem to have lost track of the liberal argument. At the (terminally boring) American Educational Research Association (AERA) conference in May, I attended a workshop which pitted Richard Rothstein against Fredrick Hess of the American Enterprise Institute, a free-market conservative think tank in Washington.

Considered by many to be a "great" scholar in our field, Rothstein made an argument that reminded me of one of the last scenes in Schindler's List, where Schindler looks at his ring and says something to the effect of, "I could have saved one more person with this ring." It's a beautiful scene, one that makes you cry at how a hard-driving businessman has become more human at a time when many were becoming less so. Rothstein essentially stated that the problem with charter schools is that while some students will succeed because of innovative teaching practices and market-driven schools looking at their bottom line, some will fail. The question is, how many is acceptable? This is the question Rothstein posed to the audience with the same sort of fatalism as Schindler - the answer he thought to be acceptable is of course, none. So, 100% of our students must be succeeding in schools. And morally, it is unacceptable that we let children fall "through the cracks," or perhaps more aptly, below the bottom line.

However, unlike Schindler's List, lives are not at stake here. And as morally reprehensible or distasteful as it may be to say this, some children, people, students will not make it. Unless we have a comprehensive social welfare system, some people, for whatever reason, will not succeed in life. This is not ideal. No one wants it to be this way. But even in France, with a comprehensive social welfare system, there are street people. I don't know how or if it's possible to create a society which doesn't let people fall though the cracks completely. Maybe lives are at stake, I don't know. But there's a difference between saving someone's life from a racist, fascist death camp and not being able to get a child to read on grade level, Rothstein fatalism aside.

HOWEVER. 100% is what NCLB regulates. This blog entry on The Education Wonks makes the argument that this stipulation de-professionalizes teaching, because no one expects a doctor to be able to cure all of his patients or a lawyer to win all of his cases. Sometimes the more difficult the patient or case, the better skilled the doctor or lawyer is, but also the more likely it is he will fail. (Orshe. Got it. I know, I hate my own gender. Can we just accept that I'm using "he" as a gender neutral pronoun?)

If we're asking that 100% of students score at grade level or above on assessments, then what happens to students with learning disabilities, mentally handicapped students, and the like? Are they excluded from the 100%? (I'm reminded of President Clinton - "It depends on what the meaning of is is.") It depends on the meaning of what 100% is. Does 100% refer only to children who pass the grade prior to the grade where tests are taken? Sometimes holding children back a grade (especially in kindergarten and 1st grade, it seems) can be beneficial. Some children, because of a September birthday, are younger than their grade by almost a year. But can we hold students back merely because they might not be able to help schools make the 100% mark? I wonder if we won't just alter the tests so that 100% of students can pass them.

I agree that we should set high standards, and I agree that schools (and liberals) sometimes fall into the "soft bigotry of low expectations," to quote (gasp!) President Bush. The discussion at the Cato Institute about teacher quality and school choice reminded me of this, because the "liberal" argued that socioeconomically, racially, ethnically, whatever-ly disadvantaged families won't choose as well as advantaged families for their schools. I think the rapid exodus of DC families from public schools proves this wrong. I mean, it doesn't take a college degree to want to get your kid out of a school where the roof leaks and the teacher's lesson plans are yellowed.

I want to look into this a little more. Along with the 15 papers and 400 pages I have to read. But it's all for you, dear reader!

I know I'm a bit all over the place with this entry. I'm trying to piece my thoughts together. I hate to see a child fall through the cracks. And yet I hate the liberal idea that "everyone should just be who they are and express themselves and we should boost their self esteem and say yay you're all honors students." Because not everyone is an honors student. Not everyone should be an honors student. It's almost as if by making this "let's boost everyone's self esteem" argument, we're saying that if you're not an honors student (or a doctor, or a professional who makes $100,000 a year), your value as a person is less. I wish we could find a way to value everyone's worth as a person without everyone needing to be college-educated and reading above grade level. For some, it is simply not possible.

No God Left Behind!!!

Yes! Finally. Although really, this seems more like an Onion article than anything else. Conservatives are really up in arms about this plan to test college students to see if they're learning. It seems to be the culmination of the "Declining by Degrees" phenomenon, which I believe is an attempt to make American think of colleges the way they thought of public schools after 1983's A Nation at Risk. Maybe they don't like liberal professors? They stand to hurt our colleges though, by driving away lucrative foreign students. And don't yell at me about how foreign students should be thought of as more than just money makers. I'm telling you what many college fundraisers are thinking, not what should be.

Liberals, no doubt, will be angry too, but for completely different reasons. I generally think that a "this costs too much money and we don't need it" works better than, "We shouldn't pressure underprepared college students into selecting a career path or major too soon," as one of my colleagues was just arguing. I don't know, I think that liberals overplay the "oh, poor underprivileged, unprepared student" hand. I think we need to give people more credit. This also comes under why I am starting to think more about school choice as an option. But more on that later.

Ok, so to sum up... here's what you should check out.

"No God Left Behind - Why Not?" (Durden, W. Inside Higher Ed. September 21, 2006.)

"Ivory Tower Overhaul: How to Fix American Higher Ed." Policy Forum. (Cato Institute. September 27, 2006.)

On the blog again...

I know, my last post was about 5 minutes ago. And now I have that Willie Nelson song in my head, but as it was played in the "NORML" public service announcement everyone used to play on WUTS, the Sewanee radio station. I had a show entirely of French music. It was cool. Anyway, totally off topic....

Conservatives are disagreeing with each other about a national curriculum and national test. Some, like William Bennett and Rod Paige have come out for both, while Neal McCluskey of the Cato Institute is totally against. Basically, conservatives can't decide if now that they have power over, oh, everything, if they should use the power or if they should stick to their principles and root for small government - even if it means they can't give all their buddies jobs. I think it's easy to see how and why they no longer want "small government" and less spending.

Read the articles and see what you think. Personally, I like the idea of a national curriculum. Shakespeare for everyone! Algebra and geometry for everyone! French for everyone! Grammar for everyone! Latin for everyone! Wow, the fun I could have making up a national curriculum. Little tykes everywhere memorizing Latin poetry. It's a beautiful thing.

"They're All Federal Educators Now." (McCluskey, N. National Review Online. September 25th, 2006).

"Why We Need a National School Test." (Bennett, W. J. and Rod Paige. The Washington Post. September 21st, 2006. Page A25.)

News Roundup

Normally, I would never read USA Today. At college we called it the "picture pages" and ignored it as it sat in our dining hall begging to be read. Be that as it may, while picking up my free copy of the New York Times (thanks, College Readership Program!) I grabbed the USA Today when I saw the headline "College overhaul called 'overdue.'"

My first whiff of this particular story came from the Cato Institute. I went there on Monday for a discussion on teacher quality (the Cato conclusion being, free market education will solve the problem. How predictable. Although school choice is sounding better and better to me... I'll have to write about that at another juncture.) Anyway, they hate Spellings plan to create a "national database to track how well students learn" because of the huge federal involvement in education it will create. Think billions of dollars... to survey a system that has often been called the "crown jewel" of American education and attracts thousands (more?) students from all around the world.

It's funny how Democrats and "Liberal" (as in "free market") Republicans are beginning to see eye-to-eye on things. Like how I believe things like gay marriage (and maybe abortion?) should be left to the states - wasn't that the Republican mantra of yore? States rights? Sometimes I don't know whether Democrats have come to these conclusions via reasoned, thoughtful avenues or if it's just knee-jerk reactions to Republican positions. Anyway.

Well, Barak Obama is on campus today campaigning for Ben Cardin. Wish I could go!

Blogging made easy?

You know what I want? I want blogging to be easier. I want, when I'm reading a blog post, to be able to click on something that will automatically go to my blog, make a link to that post, and then write something about it. For example, I saw some sort of blog entry on a bilingual education blog that began with "Did you know that in most other countries outside of the United States, a second language is compulsory at the elementary level?" and I wanted to comment, um, get a new argument, because no one cares about that one. Did you all see what happened when the Supreme Court cited international examples in deciding the case about minor executions? (or was it mentally handicapped people executions? I don't remember.) In any case, no one cares what the heck (I would be more vulgar, you know me, but this is public space. Restraint.) they do in other countries, so find a new argument.

Well, I can't blog, eat, and fight off my cat from my dinner anymore. So someone make blogging easier. Please.

Teacher Preparation called less than ideal

This article will create a firestorm in my school, I'm sure. He came out with an article regarding the dearth of good programs for school principals and superintendents, and someone sent a link to in on our listserv. Suffice to say that certain people (the same ones who get up in arms anytime you suggest tolerance) attacked him ruthlessly, and then insulted him for being white and male and heterosexual.

I haven't read the whole report (it's quite long, but I am going to try), but the article gives a synopsis and introduction to the criticism. I like that at one point the NCATE president said,

“We might all wish that elite institutions would produce a more significant share of America’s teachers, but given the current economics of higher education and the teaching profession, that has never occurred in the past, nor does it appear likely to happen any time in the foreseeable future,”

but Levine actually cited as one his top schools Alverno College Milwaukeekee, and two state schools, Emporia State University in Kansas, the University of Virginia in Charlottesville. Um, not exactly all "elite." I mean, maybe a little more elite than Valencia Community College, but it's not as if they're all Ivys. Alverno accepts students who generally are not well prepared and then turns them into good teachers, according to Levine. Not an impossible task, I would think. I content that sometimes "ill prepared" students, or those with learning disabilities, can make great teachers because they understand what it's like to struggle in school. My cousin struggled with reading, and now she's a reading teacher - who better to help children with difficulties learn that someone who has been there herself? (I'm very proud of my cousin, by the way. I think she rocks.)

Anyway, like I said, I haven't read the whole report. Some of the criticisms expressed in the article about his methodology seem a bpicayuneyne. I think that if they want to say how great teacher schools are, then go out and do a study yourselves. Don't complain and criticize without something to back it up - that's what a lot of the dummies in my program do. Knee-jerk, knee-jerk.

"Prominent Teacher-Educator Assails Teacher Assails Field, Suggests New Accrediting Body in Report" (Honawar, V. Education Week. September 20th, 2006.)

Bloglines!!!

A new way to keep up with your favorite blogs (like Symbol and Substance!!!)

Click on bloglines.com and log in - you can get a feed of all your favorite blogs and read them in one place. It's awesome if you like to read several blogs and are sooo pressed for time like a busy grad student. (Kidding. I realize many of you are MUCH busier than I.)

In any case, it's really worth a look, especially since you can subscribe to my blog! You won't get my lovely columns pic I worked so hard on, but you can see what I'm up to. As well as many other fun blogs... basically, if it's a blog, you can subscribe to it.

Blogologizing

Every time I post now, I feel guilty for not posting more often. And I can say that it's not getting any better. Arg. In any case, I'm still here - just back from Martha's Vineyard at a wedding that cost in the range of half a million to throw... it was spectacular. And fun. And all I did was eat. The drinking wasn't even what make me feel yucky by the end, it was all the lobster I ate. Imagine - too much lobster. What a world I live in. In any case, lobster. Yum. By the end I was popping a lot of Alka-Seltzer. And I think I gained about 8 pounds. But it was lovely. When various other guests email out pictures, I will post some! How about that? I think there were lots of me laughing and eating. And a few drinking (I had my own personal bartender at one point). And some kissing my boyfriend. All highly recommendable pastimes.

In any case, one of these days I'll get back into writing about education. But after a very romantic wedding in Martha's Vineyard, who wants to think about human capital?

More and More

Please don't start thinking I take only an un-nuanced, flag-waving view of America. I never knew what everyone was talking about when they said that once you left your country for a foreign one, you appreciated America so much more. I appreciated certain things about America - actual diversity, a respect for forming a line, professors who don't assign you books that are out of print, bookstores where you can actually buy your textbooks (no hunting in 15 different bookstores around the city), over the counter acne medication, etc. Weird what you appreciate, isn't it? Maybe if I had been in Mali or Vietnam I would have thought about it differently. There are fewer amenities there. But France was great.

One thing I hate about America is how easy it is to be fat. Our gluttonous attitude of "more is more" makes us eat more, buy more, use more, throw away more. I'm in a constant war with myself over "I NEEEEED this!" and "Don't be a conspicuous consumer! It all eventually goes to the trash anyway!" I was buying some items in the drugstore today and really attempted to limit myself to the smaller package of what I needed - it's difficult, because in America we're taught that more is less expensive. It probably is, but then we have so much crap lying around. Don't get me wrong, I love Costco (great olive oil!), but do I really need 14 razor heads for my razor? Or 2 gallons of mayonnaise?

This slide show in Forbes online illustrates the point quite nicely. Look how expensive it is to eat healthily! I was relieved to see that the average single American spends $54.44 a week on food - I thought this was crazy, but apparently I'm relatively normal. I aim for more in the $30 range, but you can only eat so many pounds of rice and beans. Life of a grad student. In any case, these diets are pricey. Now, the slide show says that the cost is based on New York City prices, which means you can subtract about 15-20 from the total bill to see what it would cost in your area, but they're still well over what the average American spends on food. And yet how much of our population is considered obese? I think 2/3rds are overweight, and 1/3 of that is obese, or something like that. And it's not because people are eating good food. It's because good food is just so damn expensive. Combine that with a "more more more" American attitude (hey, we power the economy! by going ridiculously into debt! yayayayay!), and you get a lot of fat people. I think everyone should just take up smoking again. It's so much cooler than being fat.

By the by, I have been writing my blog entries in Writely, and I love it. It's a web-based word processor, so it gives you the feeling that you're working on your computer at home, but with more mobility. In any case, it doesn't seem to allow me to post titles, so.. I apologize. The entries have had titles, but whatever. I'm sure you could really care less. But in any case, check out Writely. It wrocks. Hahahaha.

I'm reading an article for my Culture in Education class, and it has started to annoy me a bit. The article itself seems to be of that vaguely defined and hard-to-pin-down "Blame American First" school of thought conservatives love to throw at liberals. I think it's a bit more subtle than that, but since I work with many foreign language and international "area" studies types, it's one I encounter often in subtle ways. I would say that it's an attempt at cultural sensitivity, but ends up being a sort of obtuse and non-reflective slam on our own culture as a way of being sensitive to others.

Take the article I'm reading, an excerpt from Understanding Cultural Differences: Germans, French, and Americans. It's written for business people, and perhaps I should limit my thinking to them. Even so, the article says that we are a "low context" culture, meaning that more information we communicate lies in the actual code or words we say (or materials, etc) than it does in a sort of implicit understanding between us. I disagree. I'll give an example from today. B and I went to hit some balls at the public golf course at Haines Point. (Sidebar: I'm combining hitting golf balls with my breathing exercises and finding that it works quite well! Inhale on the swing, exhale as I hit the ball, watch it fly!). I asked him what I should wear, and he said that there's no dress code, but I would probably want to wear shorts.

When we got there, we were eating hot dogs and watching people when he commented, "It doesn't matter what you wear here, but it so matters what you wear." He came last week with some friends and arrived late for their tee time, but the starters golf carted him out to where his friends were. He could see that they sized him up when he arrived, and he "passed" in a polo shirt and golf shoes. He said that when someone comes in a t-shirt and sloppy clothes, it takes them 1/2 an hour longer to play, because people aren't as friendly.

I think that anyone who thinks America is a low-context culture has not spent much time around WASPs. I had a friend who talked a lot about "white priviledge" in her class, and this is what it means. B and I aren't WASPs, but we "pass" as them all the time due to the way we speak, the way we dress, our understated manner, and our generally non-offensive good looks. Having all of that is as good as gold some days, and hell yes I benefit from "White Privledge." I benefit from more than just that - I benefit from looking like someone from the upper classes, even though I'm not. If that's not high context, I don't know what is. I'm sure other cultures within the American one have similar was of judging how you "fit" as well, but I'm not as aware of them because that's not where I "belong." Even in business, to say that there's a lack of "context," I think it shows a lack of understanding about American business culture. Maybe these researchers never got out on the golf course with the business types they were studying, or never went to a cocktail party where lawyers brought their wives (or husbands, I suppose) along. All of that provides the context for American businessmen. Oops, people. I'm so politically incorrect.

I know I'm going to probably have to nod and smile while everyone talks about how great other cultures are and how "artificial" our high context behavior of calling someone by their first name is. I don't understand how that's artificial - I think it carries an incredible amount of context, and I think that calling it artificial denigrates the context in our culture.

When people say "Take a chill pill," they're usually talking to people like me. And I can say, I need one today. It's a little tough being on the firing line during the first week of school. Between students freaking out/almost crying/hyperventilating/being REALLY dumb sometimes, I feel like I need a week at the beach. And then there's the fun people who come into my office in suits demanding that I tell them where their whatever event is. As it happens, it's in the school of public policy. How would I know where it is? This is the business school. It's not my fault you're dumb. I wish I had a button that could make rude people disappear.

Just so you know, if you call a place and are polite to the person answering the phone, then you will get a lot further with them. Everyone has a double standard - if you smile and are polite, you can often get people to do a lot more for you. It also helps to be persistent in a polite way, because the squeaky wheel that you really like always gets the oil.

This article reminds me of my high school. We had all of the same cliques the young lady from Vietnam talks about in her school in Loudon County (Virginia) - and even more! We had several different cliques of Indians, various Asian cliques (the smart Asian clique, the cool Asian clique, etc). It was fun to be friends with people who didn't fit any stereotypes - in fact, many of the stereotypes I learned after I left high school, because the reality of who people were was present and in my face every day. I still miss that experience, because the "real world" I live in now seems to be so much more segregated. Almost all of my friends are white, and most people I know tend to hang with "birds of a feather." It's a shame kids do it better than adults - although isn't that what Brown vs. Board of Ed asked them to do in the first place?

This article made me realize that it's a great time to be a teacher right now. The schools are expanding, and it's a chance to get into a good district and work with a diverse set of kids who will really change this country. Plus the pay's really not bad - I know, so many people complain about teacher's salary, but think about what most government workers make, and then add in the fact that teachers get at least 2 months off. It's really worth thinking about if you're willing to get your certification. If they're looking for advanced math teachers in Vietnam, I think a few of us might be able to go in and teach those classes. Heck, after taking this statistics class, I think I could probably teach some advanced math! And actually enjoy it.

"In Schools Across the U.S., the Melting Pot Overflows." (Dillon, S. New York Times, August 27th, 2006)

Well now I've seen everything...

The president of Iran has his own blog. Now howm'I supposed to compete with that to become a "Blog of Note"?


Mahmood Ahmadinejad's Blog

Dig it

"Bush signs vocational bill into law." (CNN, Aug. 14th, 2006)

Because really, saying that everyone should go to college and study Chaucer just isn't realistic. Do you know how much money plumbers and auto mechanics make? Not to mention that most people don't need a college degree for some really cool jobs in fashion, like being a buyer. An associates degree and some quality vocational training will do the trick. Hey, if Nicky Hilton can do it...

I like that these programs still have a focus on academics. Because some mid-higher level math skills do a body good.

Yeah, Ward 3

So Ward 3 candidates for council chair in DC are using school improvement as the best way to get to their predominately white voting district. A bunch of white people who send their kids to private school. Hmmm.

Yeah, it would be great if parents didn't have to contribute $1000 per kid to improve the salaries of the public school teachers and aides in this area, or pay almost $26,000 a year to send their kids to Sidwell Friends (also located in Ward 3). But they do.

What I don't understand is how the basic needs of the school seem so overlooked. Every school around here looks like a prison. I really want a camera, because I'd love to take some pictures and show you all just how decrepit the schools look around here. Basics, like decent facilities and enough teachers are a start. Then we can get fancy. But part of the reason 10,000 kids have fled to charter schools, which don't necessarily have that much stronger of an academic record, is because they're just plain nicer. They have a fresh coat of paint. They don't look so much like prisons. At DC Prep in Northeast, the walls are adorned with gallery-quality pictures of the teachers and students. It's a lovely effect.

People come up with these fancy plans, but really, if they could get back to basics, a little might go a long way.

"One Word Dwells on the Lips of Ward 3 Candidates: Schools." (Stewart, N. The Washington Post. Tuesday, Aug. 15th, 2006).

By the way, what's with that title? "Dwells"? Whatever, people. I can't stand journalists.

Slow and steady wins the race

Well, maybe not the Indy 500, but that sport's not for the intellectually minded anyway.

How should the Gates Foundation invest their money in education? Much of the talk surrounding the Warren Buffet gift to the foundation surrounded around health issues; the education issues appeared far less (at least after the gift; they received high profile in Business Week). So how will the Gates Foundation invest their money in American schools? How should they invest it?

Paul Hill suggests research and development will help uncover new ideas to improve our schools, which will be slow, but in the long run, effective. The school system suffers from political motivation (although given his description, I would say the problems demonstrate rather an organization eating itself to protect itself:

the delivery system is frozen by politics, and has all but a small proportion of its money committed to employees and mandated services. Insider groups tolerate small-scale experimentation but resist wide adoption of new ways of doing things, because these can cause job insecurity and upset deals that have been painfully hammered out among organized groups... Thus, in education, new ideas seldom get traction because the delivery system makes sure money and people donÂ’t flow to them.)

In any case, he says that education suffers from a "paucity of ideas." I hate to say it, but I agree. Generally, in my school of education, the same ol' same ol' politically correct, everyone's a victim, we're all entitled to more more more groupthink surfaces again and again. One of my classmates self-righteously proclaimed, "I'm not anyone's expert," when I asked what was the point of getting a doctorate if you couldn't be considered an expert at anything. Yeah, yeah, yeah. If you're not an expert, then why are you studying for a degree that in the eyes of most people in our society will make you one? Go live in the commune with your hippie friends and get outta my face (New York accent pulled out there).

We need people who are brave enough to stand up and say, "Listen to me - I've studied this a lot and I think I have an idea." I think people are afraid of saying they're an expert because a) it might hurt someone else's feelings; just like my 7th grade students all being in the honors class, we're ALL experts! Yay! Cookies for everyone!!! and b) you might, once in awhile, be wrong, and aren't experts never supposed to be wrong? And then YOUR feelings might get hurt. Boo-hoo.

A little courage never hurt anyone. Let's be not afraid to stand up and give our ideas - even if it takes years to prove what works, even if they seem too new or different. Even... hold on people... IF WE ARE WRONG. Yes, we, the EXPERTS. Are our schools working right now? No. I'm sorry, but they're not. Not when 10,000 children in DC public schools have fled to charter schools since 2001 in the District, and the student who remain are attending class in decrepit facilities. (see the article I quoted in my last entry.) You think you can learn when the air conditioning or heat are always cutting out, you're sharing space with rats, and the ceiling of your classroom is falling in? Less than ideal, I would say.

Really, how can it get worse?

"Money, Momentum, and the Gates Foundation." (Hill, P. T. Education Week. August 9th, 2006)

Changes in DC Board of Education

DC Chief Administrator Robert Bobb will run for president of the D.C. Board of Education.

Just FYI.

"D.C. Chief Bobb to Run for Education Post" (The Washington Post, Wed., August 9th, 2006)

Back from the Catskills

I had a lovely weekend away with N. and B. in the Catskills. Except for the annoying inconvenience (as opposed to those welcome types of inconvenience) of a flat tire, all was peaceful and relaxing. Now I'm back and have two more weeks of a decidedly hellish schedule before R. comes back from India to take over her half of the work week in my office. My mantra now is "two more weeks, two more weeks."

I have a midterm today. Which I did not study for. Ooops.

Thanks, Diane Ravitch!

So, thanks, Diane Ravitch, for reading BusinessWeek's coverage of Bill Gates and his mixed result of success in educational endeavors and summarizing it for us in the L.A. Times a month and a half later! Wow, what would we have done without you? Not, perhaps, read Nicole's brilliant summary written right after the appearance of the story on the web. See, it just goes to show you that the Hoover Foundation should make me a fellow.

In any case, I love Ravitch's "scary" final statement to her piece: "In light of the size of the foundation's endowment, Bill Gates is now the nation's superintendent of schools. He can support whatever he wants, based on any theory or philosophy that appeals to him. We must all watch for signs and portents to decipher what lies in store for American education." Oooooooh. Scaaarrryy. They're actually going to make a horror film and call it "The Superintendent."

"Bill Gates, The Nation's Superintendent of Schools." (Ravitch, D. The L.A. Times. July 30th, 2006.) Free subscription required.

Losers.

I told you this existed. Remember my privileged white boy tirade? I love the idea that work is "beneath" people. You're not the aristocracy. Get over yourselves and get a job.

By the way, I would think just as poorly of this phenomenon if it said "women with no jobs or ambition." It's not like they're dedicating their lives to charity. They're sleeping until 11am and playing piano.

"It's a trend: Men with no jobs or ambition." (Uchitelle, L. and Leonhardt, D. The New York Times (by way of The International Herald Tribune.) July 31st, 2006.)

English Only Arguments

Against, of course. Don't think I've changed my tune!

TESOL has a nice write-up dispelling the "myths" behind English-first and English only legislation. I particularly liked this:

Myth 3: English-only will promote efficiency and fairness in government by conducting all official business in a single language. Offering multilingual government services is costly and inefficient, according to proponents of English-only. Supposedly, thousands of dollars spent on multilingual services would be saved if government business were to be conducted only in English. Furthermore, if government services cannot be provided in all languages, they claim that it would be fairer to provide them only in a single language.

Reality: Very little money is spent federally on translation of documents and multilingual services... In the case of the Internal Revenue Service, the primary reason multilingual services are provided is for cost-effectiveness: The amount of taxes collected as a result of such services far exceeds the cost. (TESOL. "Position Paper on English-Only Legislation in the United States." June 2005.)

I had a friend who worked for a division of the New York City education department that translated communication with parents into something like 8 different languages. It would be interesting to do a case study of how much money they spent versus the benefits it provided - basically something like a "cost-benefit analysis." This is why I need to take business classes. This is also why I don't quite fit into the education school.

Gonna take a freight train, all the way to Georgia...

Well, maybe not THAT far South. We all know what evil lurks in Georgia. (Exboyfriends, KKK, 3 million roads named "Peachtree"...)

I was wishing that Sewanee had a higher profile in this article, when I remembered that in the last article about Sewanee in the New York Times, some dimwit alumnus said something to the effect of, "We don't want them Northerners in our school anyhow."

Sigh. Of all the Southern places Northerners are going, Sewanee might just be a tad too Southern for any of 'em. Heck, it was a tad too Southern from this girl from Florida. When I introduced myself and said I was from Florida, most of my classmates immediately piped up, "Florda's not thuh South." Got it. Thanks. Funny, because as I recall, we fought with the Confederacy during the Civil War. I guess the influx of New Yorkers changed all that.

"Southbound." (Moore, A. S. NYT, July 30th, 2006.)

Ugh

I think people know they should learn English when they move here. I would only support an "English Only" policy if it means we're going to go out in force and teach it in the communities. Which we're not going to do, because the real reason they want to pass this law is so that they never have to pay for a translator to help any non-English speaking person again. What idiots. And yet Americans go around the world and speak their dorky English loud and proud and refuse to learn a word of any other language.

"House Panel Examines The Future of English." (Lakshmi, R. The Washington Post. Thursday, July 27th, 2006.)

Blog War!

Somehow I can never find my friend D.'s comments when she posts them. In any case, she took offence to some comments I made in my public vs. private debate. You can see her thoughts here.

I'm not sure why, but I have felt particularly uncreative of late. Hmmm. I do have some funny events that happened in my office yesterday, but I'm occupied with practical matters today, like how to pay the rent for August (oops - hope I can!) and filling out my student loan paperwork for the upcoming school year. Rent needs to be paid, books need to be bought, and a girl needs to have a little fun here and there. So I'm off to do that, and I'll comment on D.'s post and other things when I have a little more down time.

Busy busy!

Lots of items to report.

1. I am going to be a reader for the FLAP grants - FLAP is the Foreign Language Assistance Program, funded through Title V of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. I'm not sure how that's abbreviated. In any case, I might be extremely busy between my two jobs, classes, and being a reader between Aug. 9-18. Just a warning. However, once I return I will share whatever knowledge I can about how to apply for your hunk of government cheese - for your school of course.

2. Because I'm in a quantitative methods class right now (which basically means I'm learning how to apply statistical analysis methods to education research), I found this editorial really interesting. Normally the WSJ editorial page makes me angry, but I found this refreshing. No, really, No Child Left Behind does lie about progress schools make. And it is criminal.

"Acid Tests." (Murray, C. WSJ, Tuesday, July 25th.)

3. I can't believe the attitude of some of my fellow graduate students. As some of you know, I taught middle school for 3 years. Part of teaching middle school - in fact, a very large part - involves giving students "life lessons" - how to behave in school, how to study, how to take tests. I spent time going over how to take a test and how to study, but never would I give them the exact material the test covered. Or tell them how many questions there are. (Except on the final, because I thought it was ridiculous that 7th and 8th graders had a "final" anyway).

Once you reach graduate school, these sorts of lessons should be learned. And if you have not learned them, well, you need to get a job where you don't need to worry about them. Apparently I am alone in my thinking, however. Yesterday in my EDMS 645 (this is how everyone refers to the class; I tend to call it "Statistics," but no one ever knows what I am talking about), graduate students demonstrated that middle school tendencies are alive and well in COLLEGE GRADUATES.

On Tuesday, one young man (who continually asks questions in class that demonstrate he has not yet cracked his textbook) asked a question during lecture to the effect of "Will this be on the quiz?" My teacher, K., really cares about our learning, unlike the other EDMS 645 professor whose nickname is "Speedy." She's from Minnesota, has one of those cute accents, and enjoys teaching us and making us laugh at her truly awful jokes. In any case, K. answers by saying, "We'll talk about that tomorrow," since, well, the quiz is Thursday.

He asked the same type of question again yesterday, and she replied that we would talk about the quiz later in the class. At this point, my response would have been, "The quiz is on everything we learned in class. That's what you should study." K, because of her kindness, did a brief review of everything we needed to know, not just for the quiz, but for the midterm and final as well. She did it to "jog our memories" and help us recall everything we had learned. We've covered a lot of material, but it is a summer class.

Anyway. I'm blathering on. One student in the class raises her hand during the review and says, "Um, like, I don't mean to be rude, but can you just tell us exactly what is going to be on the quiz?" When she didn't get her desired answer, she tried again,"Well, how many questions are there going to be? Like, 20?" When she still didn't get an answer, she proceeded to mumble nasty things about the teacher for the rest of the class under her breath.

Sigh. These are graduate students. And our future teachers. And, apparently, incapable of acting like adults.

More Public V. Private Hoop-la

The National Review Online would like to comment on the public versus private school debate, but first they would like to get in a jab at the New York Times for placing this story on the front page, above the fold. (If you don't know what that means, just think literally about the newspaper that you get on your doorstep - oh wait, maybe you don't get those, since newspapers are single-handedly destroying the environment and are the secret weapon behind Jonathan Swift's "A Modest Proposal" for eating Irish babies).

Ok. Now that we're done knocking the Jew York Times - oops, did I just verbalize NRO's real problem with the NYT? - we can get on to talking about what's wrong with public schools. Or private schools. Or... wait, what?

I like this article because Chester E. Finn Jr, Hoover Research Fellow, admits many of the truths that people don't often talk about when they discuss private schools. Such as, of course private school kids are going to score better on tests, 'cause they be rich. And that part of the reason parents send their kids to private schools is to self-select their peer group - I always thought of this as "I want my kids to go to school with white kids." I guess at some schools, like the school I worked at here in DC, it was, "I want my kids to go to school with liberal white kids are the 'right' minorities." Whatever. It's basically the way that people complain about the DMV. Public school, to many upper middle class whites, is like going to the DMV. We only go there because we have to, and if we can avoid it, we will at all costs.

At least Chuck admits this. (I know, "Chuck" is a nickname for Charles, but I think it works for Chester, too. We could call him Chester the Molester. I bet he got called that as a kid. In any case "Chuckyfinn" is hilarious.) He also says that "they a’re free to hire the best teachers available, certified or not, their instructional staff is often knowledgeable as well as caring." While in my last post about this, I disparaged private school teachers for not being certified, I have to say I completely agree with this assertion. Even though I have a master's degree in the subject area I taught for three years, I am not good enough to teach in public schools anywhere in the country without jumping through a few flaming hoops first. I would be in a Prince George's county school right now if they would let me, but I'll be damned if I'm going to take a bunch of loser-ish education classes where they A. insult my intelligence and B. treat me as if I'm not a real teacher. I'd rather not waste my time, thank you. If I miss teaching so much that I need to do it again, I'll go back to a private school where they value my degrees, my high grades, and my creative approach toward lesson planning.

Chuckyfinn also comments rightly that private schools can teach character in a way public schools can't. Sometimes this "character" is a bit hypocritical (ahem, Quaker schools, anyone?) but most of the time even if not done perfectly, private school students are more likely to say please and thank you and have the ostensible trappings of civilization. This doesn't mean they're not posting naked pictures of themselves on the internet or sniffing glue, but at least on the outside they're well-behaved and well-dressed. Hahaha.

My big problem with this article is that he insists on criticizing the New York Times, and I think it clouds his point. Because what is he really trying to talk about, schools or how much he (and all conservatives) hate the New York Times?

"Private Performance: The New York Times gets excited." (Finn, C.E. NRO, July 17th)

Some related articles...

...to the previous post.

"Private Schools on Par With, Outperform Private Schools in Some Areas, Federal Study Says." (Zehr, M.A. EdWeek. July 18, 2006). (registration required; you can register for free and view two articles per week!)

"Public vs. Private Schools" (NYT, July 19th, 2006)

"Long-Delayed Education Study Casts Doubt on Value of Vouchers." (Steward, Z. WSJ. July 15th, 2006, Page A5) (subscription required; if I love you I'll let you use mine!)

"But There are Internal Validity Threats!"

Don't you love learning? Before Monday, I would have had no idea what this meant. However, now I am fully aware due to my wonderful statistics class. Recently, a survey appeared touting the benefits of public school, since when factors like race, socioeconomics, gender, etc are "controlled for" (i.e. evident in the same proportions) in public schools and private schools, public school students perform better on tests.

This appears to underscore the same point as the Education Sector's "Truth about Girls and Boys" report - really, the problems go back to issues of race and class. I wouldn't be shocked if private school students don't perform better than public school; private school teachers often have little to no formal education training (although many actually majored in the subjects they teach.) People are shocked when I tell them this, but in many areas, private schools pay their teachers less than public schools. Benefits aren't as good. Turnover is high; those same young teachers who leave public schools within the first 5 years also leave private schools, and the numbers may be higher because many good, dedicated teachers will go to public schools where the pay and benefits are better.

In case you don't know, I was a private school teacher for 3 years. I loved my kids and my school, and was too lazy to go back and take a year and a half of "how to write a lesson plan" classes, as I saw them. Besides, when I did take that class at Long Island University, they treated me as if I were not a "real" teacher since I taught in an independent school. Jerks. I stayed because I knew I wouldn't be there forever, and I liked the rapport I had with my small classes of (relatively) motivated students.

So what is an internal validity threat and what does it have to do with public vs. private school students? Basically, according to EdWeek, private schools do not survey students for their ethnicity, class, social status, peanut allergy, whatever, in the same way that public schools do. Therefore there's an "internal validity threat" (i.e. the survey data cannot be seen as valid). Paul Peterson, a Harvard government professor, says "Public schools must by law classify people according to whether they are English-language learners, need an individualized education program, are eligible for a free lunch, and whether they are disadvantaged under Title I" of the No Child Left Behind Act... Private school managers have no legal obligation to do any of that, and many object to that' so the students may not in fact be labeled the same way, thus skewing the comparison" (Zehr, M.A. EdWeek July 18, 2006). There ya have it.

Apparently Dr. Peterson is going to run a new survey where the students "self-report," i.e. tell him what their background is. I don't know if it's more accurate or not. I know when I "self-report" on the silly course evaluations we're given at the end of our classes here, I always say I'm a fabulous student. Like, I work so much harder than other students, I'm generally smarter, better dressed, more wonderful, cooler, etc. I think I actually just fill in "5s" down the row. Call it lazy. I am lazy. I've got too much else to do, like gossip with DS about celebrities and her husband. ;)

In any case, I wouldn't be surprised that if you do control for socio-economic status, free lunch, or other such factors, public school students probably do about the same as private school students. Why? People are so shocked when you say that SCHOOL CAN'T DO IT ALONE. School cannot do anything without a home life in which parents encourage their children's intellectual and emotional development. My family was solidly middle class, and I think my mom read to me in the womb. And now I'm a PhD student (wait, I don't know if that proves that I'm smart. If I were smart, I'd be in business school. Anyway). But it does demonstrate that a love of learning can transform the way a child looks at the world. And school can help, but we get there too late. Turn off the tv. Invent a bedtime story with your children. Go for a walk and look at the plants and animals and try to count how many you can name. All of this begins to pave your child's way to a better future.

One of these days I'll tell you about this fun activity I did with kids I babysat that involved inventing stories and going outside to explore. If I don't make a book of it first!

Women Who Talk Too Much

Or, for those of you who love acronyms like me, WWTTM.

One reason I've heard (and observed) men frequently interrupt women is that women blather on A LOT. We talk a lot. I try not too, because I listen to classmates and colleagues do it and I hate how it sounds. Many women don't demonstrate much confidence when they speak, and so to reassure themselves they are making a clear point (or something - I'm not actually sure of the reason), they tend to repeat themselves and then trail off in the middle of a sentence. In fact, it's almost as if many women have been interrupted so often that they speak expecting to be interrupted.

I think women should practice making concise statements that express their point, practice delivering them confidently, and practice ENDING a statement. Time yourself. Talk to yourself in the car. My radio was stolen and I'm an impoverished grad student, so instead of listening to NPR I talk to myself. Once you've established yourself in a certain forum as a straightforward speaker, you can then elaborate more. At least in theory.

Thinking back to the Rice/Lavrov incident, however, Condi was not, as some women do "going on and on." Lavrov really interrupted her. Partly nature, partly nurture? I don't know, but I'm sick and tired of listening to my classmates speak in a way that does not demonstrate confidence and that continues to reinforce the "Blathering Woman" stereotype. We can be pity, witty, and incisive - all it takes is practice. Don't set yourself up to be interrupted - that way if someone does, you'll have the confidence to say, "Excuse me," and keep talking.

Just try to interrupt me. ;)

Good Morning, O World on Fire

This morning during a very special treat for myself at Starbucks, I happened to look at the front page of the New York Times. There was a photo of, basically, Lebanon on fire. Now, last night I ate at Lebanese Taverna (with two random people I met who were from out of town - they convinced me to eat with them rather than do takeout!) and I kept thinking, how do the people who own this restaurant feel about what's happening in their country? I mean, there's a reason they're not there, but still - ties to your native land can be strong.

I'm terrified, honestly, about what's happening. It seems as if there is no forethought, merely knee-jerk reactions.

In any case, I was late to work this morning (this morning? no, wait, every morning) because I was listening to a story on NPR about how the Department of Defense is paying for students as young as kindergarten to take "critical language" classes. You can listen to it here.

Oh, and there was an interesting story in the WSJ yesterday about a scientist (did you immediately think man? bet you did!) who used to be a woman and then had a sex-change and became a man. He has some interesting observations on how different it is to be a woman in science; my favorite came at the end: "People who do not know I am transgendered treat me with much more respect," he says. "I can even complete a whole sentence without being interrupted by a man."

I thought about his quote this morning, when I was listening to a "tiff" during the G8 meeting of foreign ministers between Condoleeza Rice and Sergei Lavrov. At one point he completely cuts her off and starts talking. It's interesting that in this Washington Post article, they don't mention that but DO mention when Condi cuts Lavrov off. Because, I guess, it's inappropriate for women to interrupt, but completely acceptable for men.

Which leads me to that "checklist" I talked about but never had a link to. It mentions the fact that women are more likely to be interrupted than men. There's also a white privilege checklist, but as it was in Comic Sans font which I hate, I chose to not have a link to it. Google it yourself, you lazy so-and-so!

"Pentagon Pays for Students to Learn Foreign Langauges." (NPR, Morning Edition, July 14th, 2006)

"He, Once a She, Offers Own View On Science Spat" (Wall Street Journal, by Sharon Begley, July 13th, 2006; Page B1)

"A Spat Over Iraq Revealed on Tape" (Washington Post, by Glenn Kessler, June 30th, 2006; Page A20)

Henry is also the son of a terrorist prostitute

But because my cat doesn't speak English (or really, Human), he did not head butt me for saying so. Zizou, however, did. Those racist Italians, I tell ya. Spittin' and cussin' all over the place. (I can't remember who it was that said that "cussing" was an uneducated Southern term, so to please them I stopped using it. Obviously, I have changed my mind. I mean, you didn't grow up talking about people "Cussin' each other out"?)

Zizou said that he apologizes to all the fans and the children watching, but that he doesn't regret his action because that would mean "he who said it was right to say it." You can listen to something once, twice, but if the person keeps repeating it...

It shows you can never ignore who you are and where you came from. Those roots, that little child will always resurface at the most inopportune time.

Zinedine s'excuse mais ne regrette rien. (Le Monde, 12 juillet 2006)

ChinaKids

In the WSJ this morning I read an article about a blog called Chinakids, where Chinese youngsters, under the pressure of being the perfect only child and the weight of 20-lb backpacks, can "get back" at their parents. Rather than go with the "give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile" philosophy (do they use inches and miles in China? or for that matter, pounds?), China thinks, if we let them think they're free to express themselves in small ways, maybe they will be satisfied and not go further. Besides, "my mom makes me study too much" does not a political statement make.

I love the WSJ's subhead for this one - "Tale of the 20 Pound Backpack." DS, don't you carry one of those? ;)

I would send you the link to the blog, but it's in Chinese. And if you do speak Chinese, you are perfectly capable of Googling "Chinakids" your darn selves.

"In China, Griping About Mom and Dad Gets an Official OK." (WSJ, July 12th)

By the way, if I really love you, I'll give you my log in so you can access the WSJ online.

Entitlement

My dad told me once that the problem with liberals is their sense of entitlement. "Give me something for showing up" - at least that's how he characterizes it.

I see this infestation in Democrats in Congress right now. I may be a registered Dem, but I'm having a hard time getting excited about voting for them right now. At least when the Republicans took over Congress in 1994, they had a "Contract with America." Maybe it was just lip service, but those guys aren't entitled to anything. They owe us their service, and if we don't like it, then too bad for them. We're the ones entitled to representation, and if they're not representing us well, we have the right to kick them out. But instead of any sort of even... lip service to the power of the people, I'm hearing crickets from the Dems. Like the idea that winning back Congress in 2006 might hurt our chances of the presidency in 2008. Sigh. Power of NOW people - let's focus.

The entitlement debate grows especially sticky because of the racial implications. Programs supported by liberals such as affirmative action aim to "even out" the injustices in society perpetuated by a long history of racism. Conservatives think that no one is entitled to anything; they're big fans of what I call the "bootstrap narrative." It's awfully easy to pull yourself up by your bootstraps if your parents have steady jobs, they've paid for you to attend college, and the "disability" you're struggling with is, like, low self esteem. Imagine "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" when you haven't seen your mom in two days because she's pulling a double shift at the hospital and hasn't been around to cook dinner. Or breakfast. Or lunch. Hard to pull yourself up by your bootstraps when they keep breaking.

On the other hand, some conservatives charge there is a deep racism inherent in entitlement programs. Yes, they may make up for a history of injustice, but they also suggest "You wouldn't make it without me helping you." And so I will help you, I will give you the boots, and the bootstraps and a hand. Aren't I great? You couldn't have done it without me. And because I keep helping you, you'll never learn how to make your own boots. Or that maybe, your bootstrap narrative consists of something different, like linking arms with others in your community to create strength. That "pulling yourself up" is not so important as making where you are better.

There's also a racism in disliking affirmative action - privileged white folk who think, well, if I were Black I could have gone to Harvard. People who feel that they deserve the slots "taken" by minority students, or workers, or whatever. I know this because I've been there - I wasn't kidding about being a privileged white girl. Maybe not as privileged as some, but privileged enough to think that I "deserved" to get into an Ivy League school because I had perfect grades. Perfect grades are a whole lot easier to get when you've got a peaceful home to study in, good food to eat, and the opportunity to travel around the world.

Ultimately, though, I think we all know, liberal and conservative, that "entitlement" programs are not the answer to the deep questions of racism and inequality in our society. We need to heal our communities, create safe homes for children, and work for all people to give them a sense of self and accomplishment. And not hand-out work - but real work, the kind that inspires us to be better people, the kind that you and I do every day because by the grace of our birth and/or our "bootstraps," we are where we are today.

Maybe guys should, um, try?

So here we go some more with this. It's really hard for me to feel sorry for them, it really is. How many guys did I date at Sewanee who, well, just expected good grades to be handed to them? It's not like I was born smarter. I worked my tush off to graduate summa cum laude.

"I have a penis. Give me good grades."

SHUT UP! Get your ass out of the bar and do some work, for chrissakes. Stop trying to land tail and head to the library. Try GETTING A JOB. That usually builds that character you lack.

By the way, our PWBs are still attending college in higher numbers than women in the same socio-economic group. So they're given a leg up, and what do they do? Drink beer and complain about gender bias.

And I love how they're always citing the lack of dating options for women. It's back to that "No women over 30 will ever get married." First of all, they were wrong about that. And second of all, why would I want to date/marry any of these losers anyway? If they try taking a shower and cracking a book, then maybe I would eat dinner with them. But if you run around whining when the system has been "against" you for, like, 5 minutes (as opposed to the CENTURIES of oppression, not being able to own anything, or vote, or, like, breathe AIR, that we women endured), I don't really see how you're going to get anywhere.

They just can't take it that we might be better than them. I think they should go back to their disgusting frat houses and kill themselves. Please, spare me your sob story.

Gender Divide article in NYT

Zizou, how could you?

Ok, so my beloved Zinedine Zidane behaved badly in the World Cup final. That's not why France lost... we lost because the Italians are dirty cheaters. But really, who can blame Zizou for headbutting a guy who called him a "dirty terrorist"?

So, no, I'm not making it up

My brain is fried from posting grades. And I still have 10 more to do before my work is done!

However, I am going to take a very quick break and reveal to you the "checklist" I discovered for male privilege. Now, don't get me wrong - I love the male. Gotta love the male. Love dads, guy friends, boyfriends, etc. But how many of the guys I love have a. been paid less for doing the same job; b. been sexually harassed by a work collegue; c. been followed and harassed by men on the street since the age of 13; or d. paid ridiculous prices for dry-cleaned clothes? Because all of this has happened to me. I'm not saying I don't benefit from the occasional eyelash-bat to get a free drink (or, one time, a free train ticket into NYC from Long Island) but all-in-all I'd rather have the higher salary.

I don't agree with everything on this list, but some of the items are pretty good. And shush - y'all don't get drafted anymore, and you know it.

Oh, and this one happens to me all the time. I think I'm going to start saying "I'll smile when you go away." Of course, sometimes it's these nice old grandfather type men, and I always smile for them because I feel bad and what could it hurt anyway?

44. Complete strangers generally do not walk up to me on the street and tell me to “smile.”

Some of the items on the list are ridiculous and over-sensitive in my opinion, so don't write me about how you don't agree with #32 or whatever.

Mistress of the B School

BTW, one of the advisors told us today that as grad assistants, we're kind of like "kept women." Grin.

Don't click if you're easily frightened

Jesus, Mary and Joseph - can someone get this woman a peanut butter sandwich?


And she is, apparently, a plagiarizer, according to the uber-reputable New York Post. But wait... doesn't Rupert Murdoch own that? So... apparently attacking Ann Coulter can sell some newsprint. Which, I remind you, is a horrible, horrendous waste of resources and is destroying the environment as we speak. Newspapers kill babies, too. Can you believe it? How horrible.

In the article they write than Ann Coulter is trying to look like an academic, but fails. You're just a shrill, Annie, and you know it. Only we doctoral students are the real experts. Or not, depending on your epistemology. This came up in class yesterday - I'm like, wait, so I've gotten all this education and I would have been smarter if I'd stayed in Orlando and worked at Disney? Can't we at least use "expert" as a relative term? Like, ok, I know more about this that at least 20 other people? I'm off topic. You have no idea what I'm saying. Let's go back to Annie. Annie, you're a sad, sad woman.

But true to form, how someone looks is so much more important to me. I think I'd dislike Ann Coulter much less if she weren't so frightening to look at.

"White Guilt"

Is that like Privileged White Boy syndrome?

Shelby Steele has come out with a new book, and you can read excerpts of it here. I'm going to check it out as soon as it's in the library (not being one to afford the luxury of my own books these days! Unless their statistics textbooks. Sigh.)

Steele is a fellow at the Hoover Institution, a conservative think tank based at Stanford. I have to say that I learn so much more from my Hoover Institute daily report than anything from the stupid American Progress report I get all the time. Basically they tell me where I can go drink free beer in DC with a bunch of interns and how dumb Republicans are. Um, that's not helpful. I'll have to see if Brookings or one of the "liberal" think tanks has a daily report. Wait, is Brookings liberal? I can't keep it all straight anymore.

Hello to any new readers from my summer class - thanks for stopping by!

Wait... Immigrants can learn English?

Who knew? Good teaching techniques actually work!

I am desperate to start a program like this in DC, but terrified at the same time - I don't want to go it alone, and I'm afraid of committing myself where there is an obvious need and feeling overwhelmed. What this guy does, though, is great, and wouldn't take that many resources. I've always felt that successful language teaching is more about giving students the confidence to speak. They're going to make mistakes, but it's not the end of the world as long as you're communicating.

Unless, of course, you're in a higher level French university course where your professor will take about 20 minutes of class time ridiculing your accent. That would be the opposite of inspiring confidence. Thankfully, I already spoke French well enough to be able to call him a "connard."

"Breaking the Language Barrier in Six Months." (Winter, E. The Capital Times from Madison, WI. If you happen to live in Madison and are interested in teaching, there's some contact information available.)

Allez! Allez! Allez!

Oh yeah! GOOOAAAAL!

I'm highly annoyed that I was answering some annoying girl's questions on the phone that are ALL AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE during that goal. Why are you on the phone during the World Cup semi-final? WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU?

And my favorite person in the world is the French goalie Barthez. He's a smoker, yet somehow still a great goalie. Gotta love the French!

Allons enfants de la Patrie...

...le jour de gloire est arrivee! Contre nous de la tyrannie (et les Portugais!)

...Marchons, marchons (et gagnons La Coupe du Monde!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Education, schmeducation. Today it's all about soccer. I mean, the Yankees lost again, so really, soccer is the only game in town!

Plus I have a huge paper. If you see me posting, please make me stop. I've got twelve pages to write for tomorrow. About, like, something. Fabulous that I'm not really sure what.

Zizou! Zizou! Zizou! Zizou! Zizou! Zizou! Zizou! Zizou! Zizou!

Allez les Bleus!

GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAA-
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-
AAAAAAAAAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL-
LLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Um, yeah. I love soccer.

ALLEZ LES BLEUS!

Phenomenology

I woke up this morning to something my classmates (dorkily, I think) are always calling an "A-Ha Moment." (Take me on... take on me... take me on... I'll be gone... doo-doo-do-dooooo! Um. yeah. Sorry.)

I keep saying I'm going to presnt all the cool stuff I'm learning in my reserch methods class, and then never do. Well, I'm ready. One way to conduct research, to which I'm drawn, is called phenomenology. What this kind of research studies is "lived experience." So, for example, we did a mini-phenomenological study in my class on two common experiences, "Eating an Ice Cream Cone" and "Daydreaming." While these topics may seem inane, "serious" researchers often do more salient topics, such as "The Lived Experience of Being a Gang Member" or "The Lived Experience of Being a First-Generation College Student."

First, why do this type of research? In education, you have positivist/qualitative research, normally based on numbers and "regressions," some sort of statistics measurement, interpretive/qualitative research, usually conducted through observations, interviews, background cultural research, and critical research - think Marxist treatises on observing a societal phenomenon and breaking it down in terms of power, resources, etc. These are simplifications, but I think you get the idea.

Much in the way that history classes try to present the daily lives of the cultures they study as well as the dates, big names, and figures of numbers dead, GDP, whatever, qualitative research fleshes out the lives of participants behind the stats of a quantitative study. I think they work quite nicely together - it would be great if two teams of researchers got together to study a phenomenon, like... ok, the failure of boys in school (a subject in one of my recent posts). Then you would have both statistical data and the voices of boys to help give a full picture of the phenomenon. In our postmodern little way, it is of course impossible to convey the Truth, but we can get at some truths.

In phenomenological research, you choose a "phenomenon." Then you identify some participants, usually at one university or one school, and then interview them in an open-ended fashion. You can also observe them, but the real meat of the study is in speaking to them about their experiences. You write up their observations, identify themes, take it back and forth to have them read, edit, illuminate, dispel... whatever. It's almost a collaborative process between you and your participants, although in the end you focus the research through your own critical lens.

One of my odd but firmly held beliefs is in the Catholic (and other faiths) idea of "The Cloud of Unknowing." It's much like Plato's myth of the cave - and, being me, I do believe in Truth (Capital T!). So there is a Truth, out there, somewhere. However, on earth we are prevented from seeing it by a "cloud of unknowing." The shadows we see here on earth are reflections, distortions, and rudimentary versions of that Truth. The same way there is a spark of God in all humans, there is a spark of Truth in all text. I could take this to the postmodern extent, where the Phone Book and Hamlet have equal weight... I won't go quite that far.

I once wrote a paper on Chaucer's Canterbury Tales to this effect, stating that Chaucer was attempting to mirror this cloud of unknowing idea through his choice of multi-narrator storytelling. Conducting a phenomenological study is much like interviewing Chaucer's pilgrims. Ask eight people for their versions of a particular event, and you're likely to get eight different answers.

You can see where this is leading - those of you who know me most likely know my love of literature and stories. In a way, I become God as a phenomenologist!!! Hahaha. No, but seriously, I take eight different stories that might have not otherwise been heard. I synthesize them into a narrative that weaves them into something that will (or well, will not, but whatever) be read by the academic community. It will at least be read by my dissertation committee! These unheard stories, existing only in eight people's minds, become part of the narratives... and I have this weird thought that if you were to synthesize all those narratives out there, you would find the Truth. That synthesis of all narrative ever created is... the mind of God.

;) It's still me in here, guys.

How does this relate to recent events? Well, even when I'm being a spiteful, bitter bitch (wink to JB), I always bring academia into the fore. Let's go back to my judgement (nay, let's call a spade a spade - envy) of Privileged White Boys and Girls everywhere. There was a report about first generation college students, of which I am one! Reading the findings of this report are so funny, because the "findings" are so contrary to what I know as a first generation college students. There's a book called Caucasia by Danzy Senna, and it's a great read. It's the story of two sisters, born to a white mom and an African-American dad who met and married during the civil rights era. When the parents divorce, the "blacker" daughter becomes part of the Black communtiy dad, while the "whiter" daughter begins to "pass" as Jewish with her white mother. They pick Jewish because the daughter's skin is a little darker and her hair is kinky.

There's this mythology of "passing" as white in the African-American community that I have always found intriguing. It never occurred to me that I identified with it before this morning. Where to start, where to start...

Suffice to say, that when I was reading the findings of the quantitative, statistical study of first generation college students, I did not see myself in the portrayal of a student who is in a 2-year school, non-traditional student, has to take remedial classes to "make it," but then generally achieves the same socio-economic status as his or her peers upon graduation. I did, however, get a feeling in my gut when I read this:

Even when controlling for many of the characteristics that distinguished them from their peers, such as socioeconomic status, institution type, and attendance status, first generation student status still had a negative effect on persistence and attainment.

Ouch. So we still suck... ok, I know, I have a chip on my shoulder.

I'm going to write my own piece of "The Lived Experience of a First Generation College Graduate," but some of it will come out as I write this. N. and I had dinner on Thursday, and she told me about this diversity seminar she attended at Wellesley after some racist graffiti was found in one of the dorms. The moderator asked a few questions about people's socio-economic and ethnic backgrounds and had them raise their hands if they "fit" into a certain category. The other Latina girls were surprised that light-skinned N. fit into their category. Apparently everyone was shocked when a girl who dressed in designer clothes raised her hand when he asked, "Who here is a first generation college student whose parents had manual jobs?"

I guess technically I'm a second generation college student, because my parents attended community college off and on, but could never finish because of the pressures of work, and, oh, getting drafted. They began at fairly low levels in the tech industry, but given the times, were able to take advantage of the educational resources available to them at work. Besides that, they're both smart people :) ! I've always admired what they were able to do, and I kind of thought their story was everybody's story - it's the American dream to grow up poor and make it through hard work and determination, right? Plus, I went to high school with tons of immigrant children who fell into a very similar category.

Then I went off to college. And I realized, not only do I not fit in to this culture of upper middle class wealth, but I'm terrified everyone will find out that I don't fit in. Unlike being from a different ethnic background, no one could tell from looking at me or speaking to me that my parents were not fifth generation college students who came over on the damn Mayflower. No, no, we came over on one of those coffin ships from Cobh. (B., by the way, is just one generation ahead of me. His Mick ancestors came over about 10-20 years ahead of mine, but we're all from the same drunk, potato-eating stock!). I looked the part. I sounded the part. And no one really knew, until they got to know me, that I spent a lot of my time at Sewanee terrified about how different I was.

This of course, didn't really hit me until I started dating at Sewanee. I had to keep my jaw from dropping as we'd pull up to his house in some rich suburb. "House." It made the house I grew up in look like some sort of shack. (Nobody ever had a pool though. Maybe that's a Florida thing.) And I never had the right manners, or the right clothes, or the right religion. I would whisper on the phone to my parents, "He's really rich." I found out that no, not everyone goes to public school. And then I realized that his parents were footing the entire bill for him to go to Sewanee, that he wouldn't have ended up at state school had he not worked his butt off to get the scholarship. This isn't any one guy I dated - this is all of them.

And the way that feels... hmmm. It's kind of hard to describe. I think I overcompensated a bit by being the best student, the best dressed, the most... well, as some of my sorority sisters used to say, I was "intimidating." Not being from genteel Southern wealth, I was out to prove that not only did I need to be, but I was better than all you jerks anyway. (Especially after a few Southern Gentlemen broke my heart. Especially that one who married his hometown girlfriend while dating me. Ouch.)

So, can those feelings come across in a quantitative study? Of course not. And that's not to say that statistics of first gen college students don't tell us some important information. But I think that my story of how I wandered into applying to certain colleges, not knowing the "right" way to go about it, and how I felt horribly out of place while at school (don't get me wrong - I loved Sewanee and still do) might provide some insight as well. I could not conduct such a study, because my feelings would color the results.

Perhaps I should do a phenomenological study of "The Lived Experience of Not Having to Work Your Ass Off to Get and Keep a Scholarship to a Private School Because If You Did Not, You Would Be at The University of Florida and Even So Hearing from Your Parents on Every Holiday How Damn Expensive College Is and How Hard They Work to Keep You There." No? Exposing that envious chip on my shoulder too much?

And the beat goes on...

Must keep posting... must not let feeling stupid get in the way! I have these visions of writing my dissertation and misinterpreting something one of my subjects says - I mean, grossly misinterpreting - and having him or her withdraw from my study. At least then maybe I will have learned not to be intentionally mean.

In any case, here is the latest in the Listserv War! My posting:

First, I'd like to make the comment that [two of the other respondants] and I were calling for something that needs to happen before we can debate school vouchers or school choice or right-wing extremism or any hot topic, for that matter. For a true debate, in which various parties may disagree, but come together to listen to each other's arguments, a climate of respect must be established first. I am unwilling to share my views when I believe that an audience may attack me personally and prevent me from speaking further. Some of our classmates have been booed in class, told that their language was wrong, and had their speech thwarted in other ways. No one can feel free to speak unless they first know their voice will be listened to and respected. Then, let the disagreement and debate begin!


And I remind all parties involved (and those of you who have had class with me will probably roll your eyes) that the etymology of the word debate does go back to the Latin "to fight." ;) However, even in the House and Senate they follow parliamentary rules. Each is allowed his (or her, but not as often the case, right?) time to speak. Personal attacks, even mentioning another representative by name on the House floor, are considered errant from the established and respected order. Even Republicans thought Representative Jean Schmidt (R-OH) had gone too far when she named Jack Murtha by name on the House floor in an attack.

Second, in a classroom environment, our professors often set the tone and tenor of the debate. That many feel we cannot openly express our views in the classrooms suggests something about our leaders in those forums.

As for school vouchers, I can't say I know enough about them to engage in a debate. I do know that it will be an issue we as educators will need to learn more about, since business is coming our way, whether we like it or not. The recent gift by Warren Buffett to the Gates Foundation displays this, but the Business Roundtable and others also have shown interest in charter schools and sometimes vouchers. We all have our pet issues, and this isn't one of mine, but I'd be willing to learn more about it and discuss in order to form a more concrete opinion.

Oh, and one more thing – yes, it is logical advice for someone to research a job before they take it. As educated masters and PhD students, however, I think we all know this. If your intent is to start a debate over school vouchers, then please be honest about your goals. We're all colleagues here, and I'm all for engaging each other in debate; but the more transparent we are about our agendas and our goals, the more comfortable others can be opening ourselves up.