The Time Has Come

WAY BACK in October, long before the above video went viral this week, I was thinking of writing a post on this topic, but I hadn't fully formulated my thoughts yet. I basically just put up an introductory video. I'm still not sure my thoughts are fully formulated, but this video has convinced me that the time has come to express them anyway.

I have been trying to decide if I am justified in my frustration with society's addiction to texting or if I'm just getting old and crotchety. I try to temper my opinions by trying to keep an open mind. For instance, as I have this internal debate I think about the advent of writing. I love reading, and I find books to be valuable beyond words (no pun initially intended), and yet the wise philosopher Plato wrote this about the invention of writing:

"The fact is that this invention will produce forgetfulness in the souls of those who have learned it. They will not need to exercise their memories, being able to rely on what is written, calling things to mind no longer from within themselves by their own unaided powers, but under the stimulus of external marks that are alien to themselves."

Honestly, I don't think writing has harmed us but rather has been of great benefit (though writing can be used to incite war or to spread garbage as well). The instant communication we have today can be used to good purpose and bad also. So, I wonder, am I reacting to texting like Plato reacted to writing. Is texting really something more good than bad that will some day be taken entirely for granted and as a genuine boon to the good of society?

In my experience I've seen it to be convenient but certainly not necessary - in fact generally quite unnecessary to the point of being worse than frivolous and sometimes actually dangerous.

I think there is at least a two-fold problem. In part, people aren't wise about using this technology. Additionally it has become an addiction. The first thing MOST of my students do as they are dismissed from class - every class - every day - is check their messages, even if they've only been in class 45 minutes - and were outside class as I walked up texting right up until the time class started. Although I require cell phones to be put away during class, many students have them sitting out visibly on the desk anyway, in case a message comes through. Last year I had a student who absolutely freaked out in class because it was too quiet, and it made her feel disoriented and as if she didn't know what was going on. I think she was just so used to having the constant stimulation of ceaseless connection that it was like sensory deprivation for her.

I've gotten a number of emails recently to my work inbox from prospective students, whom I'd never met, wanting to be added to my class, and many of these messages have come to me in "text speech" combined with such poor structure that they are nearly indecipherable (and I'm pretty good at deciphering!). Do people think this is appropriate for official or professional communication? Do they know that it is extremely casual communication? Do they even know that other forms of writing exist? Are they able to write in other forms?

That's where I see and deal with it mostly, but, of course, I see drivers who are talking on phones or texting and weaving all over the road. The statistics are sobering:

Talking on a cell phone causes nearly 25% of car accidents.

For every 6 seconds of drive time, a driver sending or receiving a text message spends 4.6 of those seconds with their eyes off the road. This makes texting the most distracting of all cell phone related tasks.

In 2008 almost 6,000 people were killed and a half-million were injured in crashes related to driver distraction.

Talking on a cell phone while driving can make a young driver's reaction time as slow as that of a 70-year-old.

Texting while driving is about 6 times more likely to result in an accident than driving while intoxicated.

52% of 16- and 17-year-old teen drivers confess to making and answering cell phone calls on the road. 34% admit to text messaging while driving.

Each year, 21% of fatal car crashes involving teenagers between the ages of 16 and 19 were the result of cell phone usage. This result has been expected to grow as much as 4% every year.

Despite the risks, the majority of teen drivers ignore cell phone driving restrictions.

So where do we go from here?

The woman pictured in the video was interviewed on the news later. She has hired a lawyer and is seriously considering suing the mall, first because because they posted this video, and it embarrassed her and, second, because "no one came to her aid" (um, she didn't appear hurt, and she got up so fast who could have gotten there on time anyway - and someone did come after the fact, which can be seen on this video, a maintenance worker walking by checked to see if she was OK). She concludes the interview by warning people that it is dangerous to walk and text at the same time. REALLY? It took falling into a fountain to figure that out?

Again, I ask, where do we go from here?

Can we use this technology as a truly good thing that is mainly of benefit? Can we learn from the accidents that have happened - from vehicular fatalities to falls into mall fountains - and turn this around? Can we undo the addiction and USE cell phones rather than having them USE us? Or is it just too far gone? Is there hope for this situation?

Here is the video I posted earlier:

The answer here is another phone.

REALLY?!

Somehow I just don't think so.

In the Connecting Tube

Parts of an Hourglass

Connecting Tube

A narrow tube connects the bulbs to allow the sand to flow between the bulbs. The tube is made of the same material as the bulbs, whatever it may be.

More to come (after more sand falls).

A bit more sand has fallen - though not enough to finish this yet, but a television commercial is right along the same lines:

Working to Create Wonder

Finally, can you not change the world through working to create wonder?

I came across this statement today on a student philosophy forum I am following. It caught my attention because of a recent NPR Science Friday program that touched on wonder (in math) - and because of a question I was asked this week by a fellow juror - and because of a conversation I had with a friend this morning in which we touched on topics of physics, faith, Beethoven and mathematics.

What was beautiful about that conversation was a sense of wonder.

What I try to convey in my teaching is a sense of wonder.

I'm often asked (not only by students but by acquaintances and even strangers) why people need to learn math and whether or not anyone EVER USES algebra.

Certainly we all have likes and dislikes. I'm a very picky eater and don't like or appreciate comestible delicacies that others savor and rave about. I would love to appreciate a wider variety of foods, because the ability to appreciate is a gift and enriches life.

I think the same is true of just about everything from sports to wine to academics to music to art to nature.

We can approach any of these things with a "What's it good for and how can I USE it?" attitude. But to only validate things for their USE to us seems to me to diminish the experience of the whole of life.

Yes, for most people math is intimidating or at least not inviting.

No, most people don't use algebraic formulas in their daily life or in their work.

EVER.

Though I would say, other than reading, math CAN BE one of the most readily applicable topics we learn in school and is useful in everyday life in everything from balancing checkbooks to determining gas mileage to cooking to splitting the bill at a restaurant to deciding on purchases to remodeling to making appropriate logical decisions after hearing political arguments. Of course you can avoid using math in this by not balancing your checkbook and by ignoring whether or not you get good gas mileage and by letting someone else figure out how to split the bill. So do you NEED math in your everyday life?

No.

It's also applicable through the technologies we have that people who understand math have figured out for us - computers, televisions, satellite dishes, airplanes, medical imaging technology, and so much more! But here too, we can just say, "I'll leave that to someone else who likes math and knows how to do it. I don't care how these things are made - just so they work."

OK.

But math isn't just about producing a product.

One other thing math (algebra and beyond) is about is training the mind to think. It's about logic and abstraction and strengthening that brain "muscle."

Another thing math is about is having a fuller understanding of the universe we live in, in all its aspects. Galileo said, "Mathematics is the alphabet with which God has created the universe." He also said that the universe "cannot be read until we have learnt the language and become familiar with the characters in which it is written. It is written in mathematical language, and the letters are triangles, circles and other geometrical figures, without which means it is humanly impossible to comprehend a single word." So if you want to go a little deeper in understanding how the world and universe hold together, you need to know a little math. You don't have to explore deeply the wonder of creation; you can take it or leave it, but here we are ALIVE and in the middle of an amazing world and universe, which is a really cool thing to explore and savor while in this short life we have the chance to do so!

Some people, including my favorite poet, Emily Dickinson, have expressed that mathematizing things makes them sterile and ruins the wonder. Dickinson says: "Arcturus is his other name. I'd rather call him 'Star.' It's very mean of science to go and interfere."

But does knowing the math or science of something really diminish it's wonder or beauty? I love Emily Dickinson, but I prefer Richard Feynman's view when approached by a friend who thought science diminished the beauty of a flower: "[There are] All kinds of interesting questions [for] which the science knowledge only adds to the excitement, the mystery and the awe of a flower. It only adds. I don't understand how it subtracts."

Another Feynman quote that gets to the heart of the matter, and for which I would insert "math" just as much as physics, is:

"Physics is like sex. Sure, it may give some practical results, but that's not why we do it."

When people ask me about learning math, they want to know how they can USE it, and I feel trapped in a corner because the question already presupposes that the only reason we might learn math is for how we will APPLY it in life or work. If we go about all our learning in this way - history, geography, chemistry, physics, math, literature, music - honestly, no one HAS TO USE any of these things in their everyday lives.

A third reason to learn math is because, just like music and art, it is (when viewed and presented properly) beautiful in its own right.

A significant part of education is to open eyes to see wonder.

I understand, not everybody is going to like math. I get that. I don't like blueberries - even though people think that's crazy. But I'd sure like to move the focus away from thinking EVERYTHING we learn has to be OF USE and on to at least trying to find the beauty and sense of wonder in things we encounter in life - whether they be Beethoven's Symphonies, food, galaxies, fine wines - or even - math!

The student comment I opened with was: "Finally, can you not change the world through working to create wonder?"

That is what I try to do with math in my classes and in my conversations. It is my hope that people will allow themselves to be open to the wonder - rather than shutting it down with the seeming coup-de-grace, "How am I ever going to USE it?"

And maybe I'll even give blueberries another try!

It's About Time!

It's about time a comic strip artist dealt with the ridiculous nature of television ads these days! GOOD GRIEF!!

Get Off the Ladder!

There is something wrong with the way mathematics is taught. Most people claim to hate math, but I don't think most people ever got a chance to know what Math (captial M) really is. Here is what often happens when I meet someone new:

Other person: What do you do?

Me: I teach math. :-)

Other person (after involuntarily jumping backwards 2 feet): UGH! I've always HATED math!

Me: Well, if it makes you feel any better, let me assure you you are not alone. Most people respond to me that way.

Other person: You know, I do remember a problem my teacher showed me in 3rd grade, though, it was about getting stuff across a river, a fox, a goose and some grain, I think. I've always wanted to know how to do that problem. Can you help me with it?

Me: Well, let's think it through . . .

Fun and joyful conversation about mathematics continues at length from here.

ALWAYS.

There should be more opportunity IN the math classroom for fun and joyful conversations about mathematics, which will help alleviate individual anxiety and perhaps benefit our nation as more students might decide they like math and want to pursue it!

Math is not linear on Prezi

Thoughts 1

I was just chatting with a cousin on facebook - reflecting on our grandfather's 97th birthday this week. We both expressed a hope that we got the genes from his side of the family. His father lived to be 100, and nearly all of his 10 siblings made it into their 90's, late 90's.

We also both expressed a desire to make it to our 75th anniversaries, but when I started thinking about those dates they range from the early 2060s to the early 2080s. Those don't sound like dates. They sound like numbers from science fiction! (Then again, so does 2010, but I'm getting used to that one!)

Grandpa Van Dyken was born in 1913 - before there was such a thing as a world war and only 10 years after the Wright Brothers flew at Kitty Hawk and Henry Ford produced the first Model A. He was born before highways or traffic jams or commercial air flight.

Today as we celebrated as a family at Bethany Home with Grandpa, we noticed the computers in the social room there and wondered how many of the residents use them! They look a bit dated but relatively untouched!

In his time both World Wars were fought, and families went from traveling by horse and buggy to car - and from using kerosene lamps to electric lighting. The Golden Age of Hollywood didn't BEGIN until more than 10 years after his birth. When he was born, Russia was still Russia and hadn't become the Soviet Union yet; now it is Russia again. The entire Soviet Era was encapsulated within only a portion of his life.

He was born the month after President Taft left office, and he has seen 17 different presidential administrations. He was born before "Hitler" or "Einstein" were household names - representing evil and intelligence respectively.

In his time the Roaring '20s have come and gone, as has the Jazz Age, the Big Band Era, Woodstock, the Beatles, Watergate, the Vietnam War . . .

He was born nearly 30 years before Penicillin was developed and marketed - before MRI's and CAT scans and Prozac. In his lifetime we have put man on the moon and sent rovers to Mars. We have developed computers and jet airplanes and cell phones, nuclear energy and nuclear weapons.

I often hear technology is increasing exponentially. If this is so, and if my cousin and I make it to our respective 75th anniversaries, we will have seen far, FAR MORE change in our lifetimes than Grandpa has in his. This is hard to fathom. I can't imagine anything beyond changes to what we have already - making things smaller and faster and more effective, but if we see change like he did, we will see things we can't even imagine!

Afterall, as a young man could he have imagined flying cross country or texting?

If this "progress" can sustain itself, what will we see? Human colonization of other planets? Time travel? Or things so far beyond that, that we truly cannot imagine them now - as he could not have imagined those things then?

It's That Time Again

Seriously.

Do we really have to "spring forward" again?

Ugh.

Way back when good ol' Ben Franklin thought this would be a good idea in order to save candles - because people burned them at night but slept past dawn in the summer. The US didn't institute Daylight Saving Time until World War I, thinking then that it would save fuel.

Experts disagree on whether it actually does save energy. And for people who think we get an extra hour of daylight - uh - think again, we don't actually control how long the sun is up, we just change the faces of our clocks.

There are few if any known good effects to this change, but there are known bad effects, some of them really bad, for instance the number of heart attacks increases 6% to 10% in the 3 workdays following the change.

Is any potential savings of electricity worth that?

It's also not pleasant or healthy for dairy cows - especially the switch back in the fall when they have to hold their milk half an hour to an hour longer, depending on how the dairyman deals with the change.

Other than health problems, it causes a lot of confusion in general. Other contries that also observe DST do not necessarily do so on the same day, which can cause confusion for travelers and business communications. Some US states and territories do not observe DST, so at some times in the year they are on the same time as adjoining states and at other times of the year they are not. The start of DST is determined by local time, so on the day of the switch the differences in times between states across the country is different than it normally is.

This sort of confusion led to an innocent student being accused of making a bomb threat against his school. He had called an automated line to get information about scheduled classes. Someone else had made the bomb threat an hour later.

This crazy shift not only causes these sorts of confusion and causes ill health in cows and people, but it very negatively affects people with sleep disorders.

And this is where it gets personal for me.

I feel absolutely nauseated at the thought of the upcoming change. I have a sleep disorder that makes rising early VERY difficult for me.

I teach at the college level, so my schedule varies from semester to semester. This semester I've had to get up at 6:30 daily to teach my 8 o'clock calculus class, and I feel ill every single work day because of that. It has nothing to do with how many hours I sleep, it has to do with rising early in the morning - so it does no good for me just to go to bed an hour earlier. Starting this week I'll be getting up at what was 5:30. I'm not even sure I can do it, and I'm certainly not feeling too confident about how well I'll be able to teach. Both I and my students will have to suffer the consequences of that. Thankfully my schedule next semester does not include an 8am class.

This affects me so strongly that I still remember 5 years ago when it was time to "fall back:" I got the kids up and ready for church. We arrived only to find that the parking lot was empty. It was then that I realized I had missed my chance to stay in bed an hour later, and I actually CRIED over that loss as I drove back home.

Please, PLEASE, someone repeal this INSANE practice between now and tonight. PLEASE!! I BEG YOU!

In 2005, citing negative health effects, the government of Kazakhstan did away with Daylight Saving Time. If only the US government were as smart as that of Kazakhstan in this matter.

Two Roads

The contrast between these two items from today's paper really struck me. What is our future as a nation and as a world? What choices are we making to bring about this future? Are we more like Doris Thompson or are we more like Rudy Leeman?

"Age Hasn't Slowed 80-year-old Burgler"

LOS ANGELES -- Doris Thompson hasn't let age slow her down. At 80, she's still ransacking and burglarizing medical offices. Thompson, whose criminal record stretches back to 1955, pleaded guilty Wednesday to taking about $1400 from the Children's Medical Group in Torrance. During the hearing, the amiable 5-foot-3-inch woman thanked the judge for letting her serve her time in the state prison rather than county jail. She also called Deputy District Attorney Paulette Paccione ''sweetie'' and told the judge "God bless you" as he sentenced her to three years behind bars. Thompson, who has used 27 aliases during her arrests over the years, was being held without bail under the name of Doris Ann Gamble pending her removal to a state lockup. After her latest arrest, she told authorities she wouldn't have to do all this "nonsense" if the government gave people more money."

Letter to the Editor:

Born during the Depression of the '30s, I saw how people relied on themselves and supported fellow men to help them maintain their lives. Government wasn't good at improving lives. Living in the San Francisco Bay Area, we grew our food and supplied neighbors and those passing through the area with necessities as we were able. It was the generosity of people, their spirit and the will to make everyone's lives better that won the day, never any largesse from city or state. This was ignored after World War II when, from the 1950's on, Americans became the "me generations." Now our economy collapses. In a new depression, we need to sow generously so we can reap betterment for our communities. If what we want in our community is important enough to wave a poster, it's important enough to put it down, roll up our sleeves and get to work on what's of such value to us. (Rudy Leeman)

Two roads diverge . . . we can only hope most people will take the higher and less entitled one!

Insanity

We seem to be awfully mixed up these days!

Two things converged for me this morning that illustrated the disconnect.

One is an article a colleague handed me about how accommodations for "disabilities" have gotten so out of control and the potential for Americans with Disabilities Act litigation has gotten so threatening that professional standards are being lowered in frightening ways. The article is called Let's Lower the Bar and recounts the story of a would-be lawyer who reads poorly and who, despite various accommodations for two years, still finished near the bottom of her class (143 out of 153 students). She sued in order to get special accommodations to take the bar exam. The accommodations were granted: 50% more time on the test that other test takers, a private room, and an assistant to read her all the questions. She failed anyway. She sued again and won an opportunity to take the bar a 6th time - arguing that she had failed because her reader had been too noisy. This time she will be allowed double the time others are given. Her lawyer stated that if she fails again she might go back to court for more accommodations. Do you really want a lawyer who is this lacking in ability to be able to read and analyze text at a reasonable speed? Is this not a significant part of what lawyers are required to do?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for an equal playing field, but you know, maybe not every job is for every person. We all have different skills, abilities, interests, talents. If something isn't the right fit, maybe it just isn't the right fit, and maybe that's OK, and maybe it isn't someone else's fault.

On the other end of the spectrum is the second article that came to my attention to day. This second article had to do with kindergartners and their parents feeling tremendous pressure to have them academically prepared BEFORE they enter the kindergarten classroom so that they will be able to keep up with their peers academically. Um, isn't kindergarten about learning to be in a classroom environment and how to socialize with others. I guess it's not anymore, but what's the rush? It seems crazy that kindergartners feel huge expectations for academic performance resting on their shoulders, but we have adults trying to get into professions they are not qualified for, and some in this litigious society that will sue and sue and sue until the bar is lowered enough for them to get what they want - at what cost to those who need their professional services.

What's wrong with this picture?

GREED is to Capitalism as . . .

“The mess we’re in is due to greed.”

We hear that a lot these days.

It sounds correct.

Greed is a sin.

So greed must be the problem.

We hear of companies that gave end of the year bonuses first and went to the government for a bailout right afterwards, and we tax-payers are, rightly, disgusted. We hear of CEO’s with trash cans valued at $32,000 in their offices, and we nod our heads knowingly, irate that while the rest of us barely have 2 pennies to rub together a greedy CEO has a cute little trash can worth far more than the vehicle we drive, and we say, “Yes, greed is what caused this.”

Greed is certainly a necessary condition for the creation of an economic mess such as the US and the world are in right now, but it is not a sufficient condition. Just as oxygen is necessary in order to have a fire, oxygen by itself is not sufficient to cause a fire.*

We have become a "microwave society" of sound bites. Rather than thinking deeply in this fast paced world, if we hear something that makes sense on the surface, we tend to grab it and go - just like fast food from the drive-thru. Ponder for just a moment, slap a label on it, move on . . . and just what fast food does to your body over the long term, microwave thinking does to our society over the long term. The sound bite that seems to be catching on right now is: "We're in this mess due to greed, and we need more government regulation in order to fix it." On a first hearing it sounds right, but we need to go deeper.

The US and the world are in such a dire state economically that we can no longer afford to allow our knowledge and understanding to be a skimming of the surface and a hoping for the best as we blithely leave things in the hands of others - simply rejoicing that there is a new administration, thus good change will automatically occur.**

I recently received the following thoughts from a friend, which, coincidentally and presciently preceded the article I am also supplying a link to:

In recent discussions of the causes of the current economic crises I've noticed an interesting point of view seems to be shared between religious folks and liberals. Both groups preferred explanation tends to be greed. Yes greed; one of the . . . seven deadly sins.

It appears that both groups believe that over the past decade there has been an unexplained outburst of greed regarding the residential real estate market. It's as if the MBAs and bankers suddenly abandoned all of their standards when they discovered this untapped market of previously "redlined" minimum wage workers, illegal immigrants, and "people of color" that they could exploit.

The weakness of this argument is somewhat masked by the well-known fact that humans are indeed prone to greed. No one will argue that given the proper incentives, or absence of disincentives, nearly anyone can be induced to exhibit an excess of "greed".

There was a time when our institutions and rules successfully governed greed and the residential real estate market in the USA. The rules changed, not the human condition.

This is the most difficult challenge that Capitalism faces today; to explain that greed, pragmatically channeled and balanced is best understood not as a sin, but the essential engine behind our prosperity and a normal component of human nature.

Greed is to Capitalism as lust is to marriage.

"The rules changed, not the human condition."

In other words, it was government interference and regulation that INITIATED this mess in the first place - creating rules that SOUNDED GOOD - and now, from what I hear around me, we think MORE government regulation is going to fix the problem.

The DEFINITION of INSANITY is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results!!

The human condition didn't change; government regulation did - so where is the problem? Are we going to use what caused the problem to fix the problem? How much sense does that make?

Coincidentally my friend's email was followed days later by this parallel column, which I find to be very well-written and insightful: Upside-down Economics

Here is a quote from this article by Thomas Sowell:

What was lacking in the housing market, they say, was government regulation of the market's "greed." That makes great moral melodrama, but it turns the facts upside down.

It was precisely government intervention which turned a thriving industry into a basket case.

An economist specializing in financial markets gave a glimpse of the history of housing markets when he said: "Lending money to American homebuyers had been one of the least risky and most profitable businesses a bank could engage in for nearly a century."

That was what the market was like before the government intervened. Like many government interventions, it began small and later grew.

We can no longer afford this insanity.

We can no longer afford to rest in mere hopes for the best.

We can no longer afford to be placated by platitudes.

We cannot afford to think that "change" is good by definition.

We need to stop the microwave mentality.

We need to get real.

We need to learn and understand and to do so at a deep level - rather than just not wanting to be bothered to think too hard. Consider the following from Adam Smith's classic of economics, The Wealth of Nations:

It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our necessities but of their advantages.

The Wealth of Nations, Book I Chapter II

*I owe the oxygen analogy and Smith quote to my friend Bob.
**I do wish our president only well and pray that God will give him wisdom. I wouldn't want to be in his shoes.

Quoteworthy

Cheating and drugs are the same thing but opposite. With drugs, DOING something affects you later in life; with cheating NOT DOING something affects you later in life.

Anthony made this statement Monday on the way home from school, and I thought it sounded quoteworthy. It was a frustrating day for him. There'd been a sub in advocacy class, and other kids spent their time talking about methods they use for cheating on tests. Later in the day he had a quiz on the first 11 chapters of Huckleberry Finn, which he was to read over the weekend and which he spent a lot of time on. After class another student, one who got 6 out of 5 on the quiz, told Anthony he had skipped the reading assignment and just read the "SparkNotes" summary. There's another student in his AP (Advanced Placement = college level) Chemistry class who cheats on everything and BRAGS about the fact that he KNOWS NOTHING about Chemistry, a class in which he has an A. Then there's the kid who calls Anthony regularly asking him for answers to homework. Anthony offers to HELP him figure things out, but this kid just wants answers. Anthony says "no;" the kid asks "why?" Anthony answers, "Because it's cheating, and it's wrong." Yet although he gets the same answer every time, this kid keeps boldly calling and trying again!

For lots of reasons this is REALLY frustrating Anthony. He is putting in a lot of time and effort, and others are not but there are no consquences (at least not immediate consequences). Anthony will be competing for spots in colleges with these kids, and if they all have similar GPA's there is nothing to distinguish the kids who EARNED the grades from the ones who cheated, so he may lose a spot to someone with the same GPA who didn't earn it. He's also just disappointed because, at the AP level, Anthony thought he was among peers who shared his vision and values and interest in learning and is saddened to see more and more that this is not the case.

SO as we drove home we had the classic talk about how cheaters are really cheating themselves and how his life is now and will later be RICHER for the work he is doing - both through what he is learning and due to what this hard work now is training him for in terms of life in general - and how it's just important to do the right thing no matter what, which he will. (Being who I am I extended this to the current economic conditions of our country having come from greed and selfishness and - let's be honest - stupidity, and living for the moment instead of considering long-term consequences). That's when Anthony made the statement above, which I thought was quoteworthy.

I know cheating has been going on as long as there has been something to cheat on, and I'm just deluding myself if I think that's going to change, but that doesn't make it OK. Not only as a mother but as a fellow teacher I give this CHALLENGE to other teachers. Make it harder for kids to cheat: give frequent short pop quizzes on the basic concepts (and watch the kids while they take the quiz), make up questions on quizzes and tests that could only be answered by having read the book and not just the "SparkNotes" . . . and then be gutsy enough to do something about it if it becomes clear cheating is going on! If a kid acing your class fails every little pop quiz on the basics . . . uh . . . hmm . . .

AS A TEACHER, I PUT OUT THIS CHALLENGE TO OTHER TEACHERS.

ANECDOTE: I think a lot of people don't think this is a big deal - that it's just expected - a rite of passage - something "everybody" does. (Although I have to wonder how they would feel about having a doctor who cheating in order to pass his medical board test!) As a child I attended a Christian school. I remember one occasion in which students were caught cheating. The teacher sternly lectured the class about that being wrong, and the students were actually bold enough to answer back and even supported their "position" using scripture. They said, "The Bible says to love your neighbor as yourself. Isn't it more important that we help other people than it is not to cheat?" They used THE BIBLE to justify cheating! If that can happen, maybe my "challenge" is hopeless, but I need to put it out there anyway.

Why August 27,1883?

And the answer is . . .

(If you have no idea what this is in reference to, read "Alphabet Soup" posted July 17).

Monday, August 27, 1883 has been called the day the world exploded. It is the date that 2/3 of the Indonesian island of Krakatoa disintegrated in the most catastrophic volcanic explosion in human history. Its shock wave traveled around the world 7 times. Temperatures dropped world-wide and sunsets were strikingly different in color and aspect due to the resulting dust swirling around the earth for years afterward. Its effects were felt and seen around the world; it was also heard around the world. The explosion itself could be heard thousands of miles away; in addition to this the invention of the telegraph and the newly laid sub-oceanic cables meant that news of the event was broadcast globally within moments of its occurrence. It is the first major world event for which this is true thus making it a herald for the technological information age.

The fact that this date represents a geologic event rather than the birth date of a historic, nationalistic or religious human figure makes it a particularly fitting choice since no one need feel slighted in terms of race, nationality or creed. Just as the sun is the basis for the length of the year and the moon is the basis for the length of a month, an earth-related event would now be the basis for the assigning of dates.

So, to the sensitive PC people of the world, I humbly submit my recommendation of Monday, August 27, 1883 as the new basis for a truly politically correct calendar. Oh, and don’t forget to use Mayan numeration as suggested on my earlier post – tolerate no more the oppressive BC/AD/BCE/CE Latin alphabetic notation!

(My apologies to all the school children who will have to forget the dates 1066, 1215, 1492, 1588, and 1776, but those are all such Western/Eurocentric dates anyway.)

NB: To those of you who know me well, the fact that my birthday would become an annual holiday by falling on New Year’s Day is strictly a coincidence. The selection of this date was entirely objective – no ulterior motives were involved – nor were any animals harmed in the publication of this post.

Alphabet Soup

BC AD BCE CE PC

If I continue to post and you continue to read, I’m sure it will soon become obvious that I am not a fan of PC (“political correctness”), so I may as well just state that right now.

When I read literature in which the author alternates between “he” and “she” as the generic pronoun, I don’t get all warm and fuzzy inside thinking that my femininity has been respected; I just get annoyed. I’m a big girl, and I can take it that the male “he” is used as the gender-neutral-third-person-singular pronoun. Alternating pronouns just sounds stupid.

Another proliferating PC phenomena that I find annoying is the use of CE/BCE (“common era”/”before common era”) in place of BC/AD (“before Christ”/”Anno Domini” meaning “year of our Lord”). CE/BCE is supposed to be more sensitive because it eliminates Christ-related terms.

While this does accomplish the PC purpose as far as notation, it leaves the numeration just as centered on Christ as it ever was. The year 1 CE is the same as the year 1 AD, so has the notation change REALLY accomplished the intended purpose? (And why use the Latin letters B, C and E anyway? Isn’t that rather Eurocentric?)

For those who really want genuine change in this area, I have an idea. First, use Mayan rather than Latin letters. Mayans developed the most accurate calendar of any culture, so they rightfully deserve the honor. Second, shift the numeration so that “Year One” of the new system would have begun on Monday, August 27, 1883. An added PC bonus to this is that there could be a natural shift to considering Monday, rather than the Christian holy day Sunday, to be the first day of the week. Now we're talking REAL change!

Why August 27, 1883?

I’ll explain in a future post, but I want to give you a chance to have the satisfaction of figuring that out on your own first (no fair Googling it!).