No Thanks

I don't like celebrating birthdays. I don't know if I have mentioned it, but I think birthdays should not be remarked upon. As I wrote in that other post, the same holds true for other days of commemoration -- it is offensive to me that we need the reminder to thank our parents or our veterans, and the fact that people feel heartened by our setting aside this special time simply highlights our sorry state. Thanksgiving is no exception.

"Hey look," you say, "I want to make a list of all the things I am grateful for."

"Nice work," I respond, "but why didn't you make that list yesterday? Was something stopping you? Do you need a reminder? Thanksgiving is on the calendar every year so while you are counting days until your colonoscopy, you can pass through November, see that such a day exists, and maybe look up and take a moment to be appreciative on a random Tuesday in April."

I try to remind students that Jewish prayer includes an element of thanks in each of the day's central prayers. They respond, "sure, but that thank you is thanking God for all he has done."

"True," I explain, "but once you are in the habit of thanking, who stops you from expanding upon that once you are having a conversation with a person and not with God?" Jewish law has a notion of "hakarat hatov", recognizing the good that another has done. That's an every day thing, regardless of the presence of football, turkey or political arguments amidst too much Pabst Blue Ribbon.

That all being said, I do see the good in the day because we clearly, as a nation, have sunk to a level of depravity that, were it not for this one day, would not include a simple appreciation for the world around us. If we didn't have Arbor Day we would never say thank you to a tree. Without Grandparents' Day, we would drop the kids off and run to Olive Garden without even a mumbled "thanx." So I do take some time to stop and smell the Rosens today, and make a phone call, send an email, or just construct a mental list of those people, places, things and experiences which formed me and turned me into the sour, bitter, sometimes sweet and even occasionally salty but never umami dish of cynicism that I am.

And tomorrow, I'll do it again.

So for the record, I have two great siblings who have magically delicious families and an extended family who make me feel like family. I have a wife who embodies the 3 B's -- beautiful, brilliant and benevolent, and 2 kids who make me proud daily. I live in a community of strong and driven people whose warmth carries me week to week. I have a great job at a school which is top of a pretty impressive heap. Solid house in the suburbs, a dog who has yet to kill me, and food on the table. I was raised by parents who taught me to do more right than wrong and celebrate who I am all the time. I live in a time of miraculous technology and deepening understanding of the world. Heritage, and opportunity, culture, high and low. A car in every pot hole and a chicken in the garage fridge. We got this. And if I forget these gifts tomorrow, next week or next month, o reality, then I don't deserve any of it.

A Sparky post

I came home today in a foul mood. Between the COVID, the cold, the darkness settling early, the demands of the job, the myriad papers to deal with regarding this and that, I just wanted to curl up and kill everyone. A little depression. It happens.

Sparky came home a bit later and asked to be picked up. I held him for a while and it felt good. Eventually, as all good things must, it came to an end and I had to hand him off to do something less important. He was OK with that. He always is, good sport that Sparky.

Once I was done, I saw him give me the eye. He moved towards me, and I, to him. He saw my willingness to engage and he moved towards the living room and Captain James Tiberius Kirk. A few years ago, under circumstances which I neither care to divulge nor remember, we found ourselves owners of a poorly rendered Kirk stuffed toy. For a while, I propped it up over the in-wall air conditioner claiming "it just materialized there one day." Eventually, for lack of a more suitable alternative, Sparky decided to give it a taste. And it stuck. Now, many chomps later, Kirk has been the go-to toy for both Sparky and Princess, providing minutes of joy as they fight over him, rip him to shreds and do all the things that the aliens in the alpha quadrant failed to do to him, and all the females in the beta quadrant succeeded at.

But I digress.

Sparly leapt at the doll and grabbed it with what's left of his teeth. He had one removed because he wanted to prove that the tooth fairy was a dog, or because it was infected. I forget which. He growled. He thrashed. He did his best imitation of a dog with all of its teeth, growling and thrashing. He made it clear, through a series of grunts and growls that I was to fight his for this toy and make sure that he won. He mumbled something about Wookies ripping arms off so I decided to let him win.

That lasted for half an hour. I crawled on the floor. I wrestled with him. I even, dar I say it, tussled with him. Yes, tussling was known to have occurred! There was some scrapping and egos were bruised. Any time I walked away, reassuring him that he had successfully defended his owenership of said doll, he growled, insisting that I return to challenge him and, no doubt, lose yet again. So I did. I crawled, I growled, I grabbed. I put my fingers in mortal danger, my toes at eternal risk. I went there, oh yes, I did. There was a place to where I went! Going there was an option I exercised on more than one occasion. Dagnabit and such.

In fact, I could not leave the room without his whining and bellyaching about how I was leaving him alone, game unresolved. "Unresolved?" I queried. "You bit my hand and threatened the well being of my nose -- I concede! Kirk is your bee-atch! I shan't challenge you any further!" He was unfzed. No fazing was had by him. Fazeless he remained as he growled and whined and insisted that I appraoch, for he had mastered Kirk and who was I to breathe his air when he had attained those lofty heights and even worse, who was I to reject the challenge? So I assumed my position, facing the impossible headlong and continued the siege. I fought him, tooth and follicle. He threatened and I cowered hoping that each parry would be the last. Always disappointed.

Then Julie walked in with a bowl of beans. I repeat "beans." I just want to make that clear. We're talking beans. Frijoles Negros. Sparky went over to the sofa and inquired, regarding said beans. Julie offered them and Sparky jumped up, onto the sofa to indulge. I waited. Eventually, I growled. "I have your Kirk," I yelled. "This is your toy, your object of growlage" I insisted.

Sparky looked at me. He did not move.

"What the hell are you doing?" He said calmly. "I'm eating some goddam beans. Would you grow up?"

Oh, say...

 Next in the series. If you were following then this would be as easy as, um, pie. I sent this out to my students. We'll see if they get it.

-----------

I just threw this list together. See if you can figure out what all the words on the list have in common. They are listed in no particular order -- I just wrote them down as I thought of them.

Love

Oat

Rust

Able

Rack

Lick

Hair

Hick

Hill

Hat

Hasten

Hart

Hum

Hunk

Hive

Hump

Lean

Lass

Lose

Raze

Lout

Limb

Ripple

Row

How

Hew

Over

Up

At

I don't know if this exists anywhere online, but try to figure it out without looking for the answer on the web. 

Divided we stand

 Sorry for an unpopular or uncomfortable post, but I gotta speak what's left of my mind.

I'll just start by saying that you don't know how I voted. I'm pretty darned sure of that. Heck, I'm not even sure how I voted. Probably by mail, but possibly female also. The details are cloudy; ask again later.

But now that the election is over (though sans fat lady, because of the practice of not body shaming anyone, who can be sure?) politicians everywhere are calling for unity.

I don't know what unity is and I sense that it is impossible.

Democrats and republicans have, if you boil it down, 2 different underlying views of the role of government. There are opposing notions of the US's position on the world stage and the diplomatic moves that we should be taking. If we all could find a way to agree, we wouldn't have the system that we have -- we simply see the structure, function and position of government and the country differently from each other.

Then the calls come for unity. But even if I am willing to accept person A or B as the president and I will do my best not to spit every time his name is mentioned, I still, on a deep and philosophical level, disagree with policies, practices or positions that person A or B champions. We cannot be unified because we are, at the deepest level, still divided. Are we supposed to act unified in some public forum for the sake of appearances? Or is the call for unity a call for "you lost, now compromise your values - I won so I don't have to compromise mine!"

I remember very little from Social Studies class in grades 6-8, but I recall that I was taught that the responsibility of the majority is to protect the right of the minority to disagree. If enough people find the disagreement position persuasive, then it will eventually become the majority, and will have to protect the new minority's position. Unity is NOT to goal -- partisanship is not only inevitable but necessary. What are we expecting other people to do -- abandon their beliefs? Suddenly concede that because a majority feels a certain way, it is meaningless to feel stridently otherwise?

Yes, I know, a house divided will not stand and all that, but a house built on a foundation of resentment and superficiality will collapse at the first breeze. I won't ask anyone to defend, support or condone moves that I feel, at my core, are abhorrent and destructive. I won't ask for unity. I'll ask for respectful division as protected by the laws of legal expression and the democratic process. Don't ask me for anything different.

Class where? For?

 

News has come out that Pfizer has a potential Covid vaccine, one which is 90% effective. If we assume that this 90% is enough to embolden those vaccinated, we are on the cusp of some sort of progress back to “normal.” But will we ever actually go back to the way things were before last March? In some ways, maybe, but the pandemic has fueled innovation and driven technology while making us reevaluate how we live and I think that in some ways, we will not take steps back. Companies will allow more workers to stay home and work virtually. Contactless check-out lines in supermarkets will become the standard. Restaurants that introduced delivery will not stop delivering. People who have concerns about their health will take more opportunity to wear masks, stay distant and not shake hands or hug. Telemedicine, once offered cannot be taken away. The same holds true in education.

Schools, like it or not (speaking as a teacher) have been operating on a distance model either entirely or in concert with live classes. Teachers who are in school buildings are still, simultaneously, teaching students who are at home. Whether or not a teacher thinks that the “Zoom” class is as effective or personal as a live class, it is an option that it will be hard to deny. Snow days, students who are a little sick but want to listen in, or who are on vacation but don’t want to miss content will be able to join their classes. Though this was available before Covid-19, it was rarely used. Students out for extended periods sometimes had a friend Face-time them in but the teacher, even if aware, made no accommodation for that mode of learning. Only schools that specialized in this method of delivery offered it. But now, I foresee that all changing.

I anticipate not only students’ opting to stay home more and yet still wanting to be “in-class” and teachers confronted with poor weather or personal demands not wanting to miss a full day’s salary teaching remotely. If we think that the platform is an effective mode of instruction, so much so that we continue to use it AT ALL after a vaccine appears, then we should be leveraging its advantages, the primary one being that we are free of geographical constraints. Colleges offering all their classes digitally (synchronous and not) have students going to Hawaii or elsewhere, figuring “I can attend the classes from anywhere, so why should I be where the weather isn’t perfect?”

Private schools, then, need not limit themselves when recruiting to students in their vicinity! A private school can offer an experience as academically rich to a student in a small town who, otherwise, would either have to move to take advantage of what the school has to offer, or would be out of luck, having to be satisfied by a (possibly less rigorous or specialized) public school. Students from anywhere can learn from the caliber of teachers that normally would be out of reach, or cover material and curricula that would never find its way to a building in every physical corner of the world.

True, the “campus experience” would be missing if the student was confined to a Zoom classroom, but the extra-curriculars (at least ones that can’t include a virtual participant as easily as a classroom can) are only one dimension of the time in school. Homeschooled students miss the same opportunities and have found ways to supplement their classes with trips or meetings that supplement the intellectual part of their daily lives. If we truly value the academics in our schools and the teachers are already making alterations to include the resident students who choose to be on Zoom, then offering that option to outsiders adds no additional prep work or financial investment. The trade-off for the student could be a reduction in tuition as the students gets only a part of the overall experience. Would there be some missed socializing? Yes. But there would also be some otherwise missed acculturation. A student who would not expect to have access to a religious school because of the lack of one in a community could become part of the intensive religious education that another community has to offer.  Affiliations via other facets of culture can be explored and a student can find himself virtually surrounded in both classrooms and informal meetings by likeminded students and faculty. Additionally, students whose families move would not need to abandon their social niche – they could finish their schooling in the school at which they began it.

This would change recruiting models, increasing certain aspects of competition, but it would increase opportunity in all directions. Marketing would shift as would economics since local students might opt for the same on-line experience, but class sizes and staffing could also be reconsidered with the school offering entire Zoom classes populated only by virtual students. Local, smaller communities could have students who band together and rent a local room and attend class as a group, creating a satellite campus in areas in which any particular style, mode or approach towards education would never have been available.

Unless we ditch virtual learning and assume that everything will truly go back to the status quo ante, we will continue to incorporate these parallel modalities of instruction. Once we are doing that, we should look ahead to see how we can parlay these innovations into a new model and eventually standard of educational offerings.

FE? FU!

 

So I was sitting down and tucking in to my dinner of cottage cheese and almonds, or as I like to call it, "sadness" and I figured I would review the health benefits of said food. I was sure that I was getting enough protein and even a smattering of fat, but I was curious about the amount of iron because I'm still working on growing a solid exoskeleton so I need to keep track of stuff, you know.

I looked at the almonds...1 milligram of iron in 28 nuts (or 1/28th of a milligram per nut, for those fans of fractions, or "franctions" as I like to call them) which accounts for 6% of what some fat cat in congress decided I need to eat each and every day. Politics...amirite?

Then I looked at the cottage cheese label (Friendship, 2%, small curd because I can't handle the big curds). Here's what I noticed when it comes to iron:

Yep, that's right -- zero milligrams in a half-cup serving. But don't worry, that 0 mg is 2% of the recommended daily allowance.

Let's review, shall we?

One milligram is 6% but zero milligrams is 2%. This, clearly, is why I failed math all those times I tried to not fail math.

And theoretically, while I only get 2% by eating half a cup, the zero milligrams I could get if I choose to eat a full cup would add up to 4%. If I eat 25 cups of cottage cheese, then I will get zero milligrams of iron that will be 100% of my daily allowance! The possibilities are endless. In fact, I can choose to eat all sorts of other things that also have zero milligrams of iron, and get my daily allowance that way, right? I'm hoping this works for other nutrients as well. Vitamins more honored in the breach than the observance, indeed.

Not letting the dog lie

 

He's a liar. I love him so much, but Sparky is just not being fair or telling the truth.

You might have read his most recent claims about us here and I want to defend myself and explain a few things.

First, we let him sleep on the bed, so much so that he often pushes me off the edge of my side and he takes my blanket. I do nothing about it because, well, frankly, I'm scared of him. Sometimes I wake in the middle of the night and he's sitting there, watching me, glint in his eye. I mean, he's cute and all but I wonder if he's planning something.

I often ask him in the morning if he wants to go out. He growls at me and snaps. He likes to sleep late so I let him and he gets let out on his schedule. He goes out and uses the facilities and I wait for him to come back in on his schedule. If he wants to hang out, I let him. Then when he comes in (on days when I'm home) we sit together on the sofa or I make a little bed for him in a sunbeam so he can relax.

I try to ask him throughout the day if he wants to go out (I don't want any accidents in the house!) but usually he just sits there like a lump, rejecting the offer unless he hears a squirrel, a dog, a delicious child or a particularly noisy leaf outside. Then he runs to the door and I run after him to open it up. If I could teach him to open it, I would but 'til then, I'm the doorman.

He also does not eat his food so much. Part of this is my fault. When I eat (because of my low-carb diet) I focus on fats and proteins. Sparky thinks that there are two food groups -- fats and proteins so he constantly asks for my food and I indulge him. I eat chicken, he eats chicken. I eat hamburger, he eats hamburger. I eat eggs, he eats eggs. I eat fish, he eats fish. Bottom line is that he eats my dinner at larger volumes than I get to. But I spoil him because I'm afraid that the sentence will read "I eat my own food and he eats my face while I sleep."

But we also fill his bowl with one food that he is willing to eat. But he doesn't just walk over to the bowl and eat -- he plays this game where he sits in the middle of the room until someone gets between him and his bowl. Then he runs to the bowl and growls, "defending" it. Weird, right. But if you walk away to let him eat, he won't eat. You have to return to his bowl and pretend to block his access and he growls and snaps louder and louder. Eventually, he starts to eat, once he feels that he has "earned" it through showing how brave he is. I get a headache from the noise and find it very inconvenient, but if this is what gets Sparky to eat, nothing is too good for him. But anything he says about not feeding him simply untrue. He will look at me while he is still chewing the last bite of cheese and make a face that says "you never give me anything!" Hello! You are still eating what I just gave you, Sparky! 

He is like a boy dog version of a teenaged drama queen. So please, don't believe him. We treat him very nicely and he has anger issues. Thanks for your understanding.

two tired

I got a flat tire yesterday.

Thank you for your sympathy. Fortunately, the weather was nice and there was ample room for me to put on the spare so I spent 20 minutes in the evening air and moved on with my life. Just slower and more carefully.

This isn't the first time I have gotten a flat. This particular car seems to have a tendency to invite flats. Behavior that other cars laugh off, ours takes personally. I know, it isn't the car, but the tire, right? So the tire should stand up to how the road rages, but I think that the car is insulting the tires, making them more likely to be deflated.

So a few years ago, I came out of a gas station and had to merge onto the highway. I didn't quite clear the curb so I popped 2 tires -- both on the passenger side. I found my way to the local branded tire place and waited and waited, and then paid and paid. I shelled out money for 2 new tires and made sure to get the warranty because, you know, tires.

Yesterday, after putting on the donut (and before driving away) I called said tire store to invoke the warranty. 

"Come on in," they said, "and we'll take a look." So I did. And they did.

I was told that this tire was not one that was covered. Strange, I thought...this is the same place on the car -- front right. Why wouldn't the tire be the same? I got lucky, though. He checked in the computer and found an earlier incident which required that this tire be changed so I was covered, just not because of the more recent incident. While I'm happy that I will get a slight discount on the replacement tire, I'm confused. Why wouldn;t the tire be covered based on what happened more recently?

Then I saw it -- and a conspiracy theory was born. And I thought, what better place to post a conspiracy theory than on my blog? So here it is.

When they replaced both passenger side tires, they also rotated them figuring "if this is where this guy gets flats, he is likely to get another flat in these tires and we will have to keep servicing him on the cheap! We should move the tires around so he won't be covered!" And that's what they did. they moved the new tires to the driver's side (I have yet to confirm this by looking at the serial numbers as I'm afraid that this might destroy a perfectly unreasonable conspiracy theory) and moved the driver's side tires into the passenger spot.

The joke was on them, though, because an even earlier incident had forced them to replace the driver's side tire, so they still had to honor the warranty! This is a hollow victory and I'm still going to be out another hundred bucks (plus time, energy and my dread as I drive on the donut), but at a certain point in life, I celebrate the hollow victories also.

Stop depresses

 

I'm not going to feel bad. Understand that. I am a mean old man and I lack certain sympathy for those situations which seem to reflect things that really aren't that bad.

In this part of the world, we are subject to limitations on our behavior because of the current pandemic. Masks, distance and a reduction of social contact. Word has gone out from some quarters that we need to be especially concerned about our young people and the sense of despair and depression that these limitations will engender. 

Oh, boo hoo.

Am I being callous? Maybe. Are there those already saddled with depression whose feelings this will exacerbate? No doubt. But they need not be isolated in any extreme way and their needs do not need to be ignored because of the current rules about school, religious outings and personal contact.

And I hate to turn into the old man who starts sentences with phrases like "when I was a boy" but, Hell, when I was a boy, we survived without the constant contact with peers afforded by technology. If you lived someplace distant from your friends, then from the time you left school to the time you returned to it, you simply didn't have contact with your friends. I also had significantly fewer TV channels, little to no internet or equivalent and much more rudimentary electronics to amuse me. And yet somehow I emerged with only the garden variety of emotional trauma.

Have we raised our children to be so dependent on interpersonal contact that they can't adjust to standing a few feet apart, not having sleepovers or (heaven forbid) spending time with their own family or reading a book? Are they starting so debilitated as to suffer incredible harm if we tell them to sit outside and a bit away from others instead of in the basement, sprawled out with legs intertwined? Can they not adjust to the new normal of wearing a mask and being aware of their bodies during the day that they must cry themselves to sleep at the loss of I don't even know what?

Some break the rules. Some also break other rules and we come down on them when appropriate in ways that are appropriate because we have these rules to maintain social order and well-being. If that means that a kid can't spend his sabbath afternoon playing basketball with his friends and maybe has to stay inside holding a conversation with a parent, then so be it.

Those who are in that exceptional category and do need to have clinical issues should have them addressed, but that is not the rule, so let's start expecting that our children are less fragile and explain to them that they are doing their part to protect lives.

And if WE can't follow the rules because we find them unfair, illogical or onerous, then we have no one to blame but ourselves when the laws become mandate and absolute. And we are probably the ones who have been poor role models and poor parents so we can't expect any better from our children.

A moment of strength-ness

 

Post Neilah thoughts, Yom Kippur, 5781

I, too often, sit through pre-Neilah speeches that aim to frighten me, to tell me that this is a last chance and I have to rush to catch God before the gates close or else I'm out of luck. Last chances and all that. This year, I was possessed of a different message, one of reassurance and one that carried me through Neilah better than I had in the past.

I was thinking about a weird verse which reads (and I don't have citations handy -- I just finished breaking my fast so cut me some New Year's slack...TIA) that the sound of the Shofar, at the giving of the Torah "halach v'chazek" went and got stronger. It is often pointed out that a note blown in a shofar weakens over time. Just ask anyone who has sustained a note extra long. But the miraculous sounds at Sinai somehow got stronger and louder over time. Strange idea, that time brings about strength. And here we are -- 24 hours into a 25 hour fast, stomachs starting to make themselves known, headaches threatening (or worse) and our attention flagging. Will we ever make it through?

God says "yes."

He says we are a treasured nation (am segulah, though segulah also seems to refer to good fortune) and we have learned how to get stronger as the game goes on. Let's think about it.

Hashem took us out of Egypt when we were at a spiritual depth. He could have floated us right to the promised land, boom. But no, he decided, they aren't ready. They need time. He gave us the opportunity soon after, but we proved we weren't ready. He threw obstacles, wars, plagues, hunger and random grumblings. We weren't ready. But 40 years later, we stood on the edge, toughened by the adversity of the desert experience and solidified in our faith. We were ready.

After the incident of the Golden Calf, Hashem could have decided to forgive us -- we had learned our lesson, and given Moshe the second set of tablets. No, he decided, they aren't ready. Forty days later (on Yom Kippur, by the way) our repentance was complete and we were forgiven because after that time, we were ready, stronger as a people.

And each year, when we reach the depths of our spiritual journey, our batteries depleted and our spirits lowest. We Ask God for forgiveness. "No," he says, "you aren't ready." We take forty days and we pray, and we think, and we, miraculously, get stronger. Then, finally, at the end of day 40, when stand on the edge, ready to enter the promised land of forgiveness. We have the final prayer, Neilah, when we lace up and get ready to cross the river on a spiritually recharged high. We are ready. It took all these days, prayers, rituals and introspection, but instead of getting tired, instead of diminishing, we got stronger. As a people and as individuals, we are all ready.

Then, we move right into Ma'ariv, from strength to strength, mitzvah to mitzvah, riding that high. We set up our sukkah and try to remain on that height and be ready so that next year, we can be in Jerusalem. 

Stay strong, people. We have crossed into a state of cleanliness. Stay strong and let's see if we can make it last.

Pop Goes the Culture

 

Here's the thing about culture -- it is shared. It is a set of values, experiences, signifiers and preferences that are common among a group. Yes, that's an off-the-cuff definition so excuse me if I missed something, but it isn't a bad start. The bottom line is that a culture is a unifying force that defines an in-group (and the out-group) by virtue of common qualities or ideas. Each of us is a member of many, many cultures simultaneously, some defined geographically, some via heritage or parentage, and some based in some other feature. I'm here to point out that one dimension which has historically defined a culture has disappeared so we need to start considering the implications, including the dissolution of the peer-group culture heretofore defined by that dimension.

I recall those halcyon days of college when all of us would assemble in a room and talk about, you know, stuff. Eventually, the topic of television would come up and we would compare notes on favorite memories and shows. Inevitably, people would start talking about "Saturday morning cartoons." Thing is, as an observant Jew, I didn't watch television on Saturday (the sabbath) so I couldn't relate to that subculture. Television, a central player in mass media in the days of my youth, helped separate us into various factions. It allowed us to see shows and movies that others had similar access to, and what each of us chose to watch became a variable which determined our place in and out of various groups.

Sadly, that boat has sailed. Television is no longer the great unifier that it was. With the advent of cable, the audience became fractured. Now with the internet and streaming services there is simply too much content from which to choose, so it is tougher to find the common ground that helps us label ourselves as members of a culture. Yes, we are "in" with others who have watched a specific show or movie, but the mass group who shared a trend is gone. And new material develops and disappears so quickly that it becomes difficult to figure out with whom we ally before that moment is gone.

The young people are driven by social media platforms and trends (personages, practices and presentations) that cycle quickly. It is hard for a non-young person to keep up with the various changes, but I have seen that even the youth, itself, is highly fragmented because each small group follows whom it follows and cannot then also follow the myriad other names and faces which supposedly have large audiences. There is simply no time. But because one can "follow" people without paying any attention and follow ones that might be (conceptually or in some other way, mutually exclusive), the celebrities of this new "popular culture" are fictions of the click. They don't really have large audiences, just the echoes of a passing interest immortalized by a digital fan base that is probably mostly absent at any given moment.

So what are we left with? The plethora of channels of content has made for a series of cultures of one. We are more isolated even though nominally, we belong to the same "group." Our "friends" and our "influencers" are no more than pixels as we slowly lose the ability, opportunity or interest in sharing with others, in our quest to experience for ourselves something new and different.

Driving Dogs

 Sparky gave me a hard time today.

I got him into the car -- dogs love to go into the car, and he tried to move into the driver's seat. I mean, does he want me to sit on his lap? Or more ludicrous, does he actually want to drive? Dogs can't drive and I told him so. It's like a thing people know. It is laughable except, apparently, not to dogs because most dogs can't laugh.

He insisted otherwise which is just like Sparky. He insists that he can drive, and better than I can. Then he insults my family and I am no longer laughing. I could say unflattering things about his lack of known parentage (and, according to the vet I paid, his inability to be anyone else's parentage, ifyouknowwhati mean) but I don't. Instead, I play the trump card:

"Sure, you can drive -- if I can see your license."

He hates that. I mean, where would he keep his license? He knows I know and I know that he knows that I know. But, bottom line, that dog won't drive.

Flip side? I sleep with one eye open because he is in a decidedly bad mood now. He threatened to expose me as a word I won't say, on his blog, but I refuse to be cowed by a dog.

Expert Teas

 I really like Earl Grey. I find the citrus aroma to be enticing and the flavor to be really delicious. But I stumbled on a web site on which some self proclaimed expert spoke of how horrible Earl Grey was to an actual tea purist.

So here's the thing -- tastes vary. One man's meat is another man's dairy, or something like that. What I like you might think is horrible. You'd be wrong, but we allow that. I'm not saying that my opinions are necessarily correct, but I could be saying that, and you'd be wrong if you disagree.

Superman, if I recall correctly, had X-Ray vision. That's a good kind of vision if you need to find your lost baseball which has been lodged in a small animal's rib cage, but not so useful if you want to imagine what a particular house will look like if you paint the walls a shade of blue right beyond robin's egg. Having the skill doesn't confer authority. In fact, right now, my foot hurts.

You weren't expecting that. Admit it. ADMIT IT! I knew it.

So I was wondering -- "wouldn't it be awesome if I had Superman around right now so he could take a look at my foot and tell me if I have the dreaded foot disease or just something more run of the mill, like a foot condition." Would I need a prescription? Is there a co-pay? Should I make my shoes tighter or (dare I say it) Luthor?

But here's the thing -- just because he can see into my foot (lucky him...I have extremely attractive foot bones) doesn't mean he knows what he is looking at. Consider that for a moment. He's Superman. He is a "super" man, but that doesn't mean he is an educated man. Is the ability to see through things a sign of being super? What we can do doesn't mean that we understand what we have done. Superman is no more than Victor Frankenstein with good hair even though I have no proof that Victor didn't have good hair. Celebrities, athletes and even politicians can read books and have opinions but that doesn't make them experts. 

So let's be careful what we ask for. If we hope Superman will show up he might only be able to fly fast and yet not know what is needed at any moment.

How to read a poem

 

I was asked by a former student (we’ll call him Circus Maximus) for advice on the reading and understanding of poetry. As an English teacher, it is assumed that I understand things like poems, if not poems, themselves. This couldn’t be farther from the truth. English teachers know how to have opinions without understanding, and how to sell those opinions as convincing interpretations imbued with supposed authority.

But I digress.

First we have to assume that a poem CAN BE UNDERSTOOD. This is not so obvious. Sometimes, poems are an expression of the unexpressable, the internal vocabulary failing to find form in the limited real. You might be able to get close to understanding but emotion is elusive, a message may get muddled. Good God but I love alliteration.

So once we get past the concern that a poem may be a private exercise and a reader might never get down to what it really was intended to convey, we still have to worry that the reader's own biases will do more than their fair share of creating meaning. When we read the websites claiming to have "the" meaning of a poem, we are reading the opinion of some professor or grad student and why do we think that having read other things confers on any other person the authority to divine all meaning of all text?

Sure, some are experts because they have experience with other similar work, or with other works by the same author, but that doesn't automatically make them "right." So let's take their opinions with the commensurate salt. And maybe paprika.

And yes, I recommend reading what other people have said. Any other people. Teachers, students, woodland creatures. All of it, or at least a goodly amount. You will ultimately decide that you agree with one, another, all, none or some combination of the voices out there as you add your own. It's all good, Jerry.

OK, now we have to confront the poem, itself. I will lay out the steps I give to my student. I present these in no particular order besides the right one:

1. The meaning of the words

2. The use of the words (considering many contexts)

3. The words as parts of phrases

4. The phrases as figures of speech

5. Identify the poetic forms and devices

6. Try to piece together the specific meaning of the poem, accounting for 1-5 (plus outside factors and variables)

7. Try to get a sense of the themes and possible deeper references and meanings of the poem beyond the surface (what is the poem about vs. what does the poem say)

Repeat. And remember, talking it out -- arguing with others going through the same process is essential. Understanding is both personal and communal. You can't be right unless you have told someone else he is wrong! Amirite? Damn right I am.

When you are done with all of these steps, pause, grow as a person, as a reader and thinker. Many years later (or the next day, read it again. Prepare to be wrong. I'm not saying it has ever happened to me, but I hear it is a thing. Supplement your reading with an understanding of the author, the time, the words as they were and as they sound and then be ready to throw all of this out if the moment demands it. A poem can be simple and straightforward, or labyrinthine and obscure. Or both. And that's OK!

You can leave a poem being confused, or convinced that everyone else is wrong. You can leave not getting how or why the supposed experts got to the readings they did, unable to work backwards and see what they saw. It is a poem, not IKEA directions. Parts and directions are often missing in a poem. Start with poems that make sense. Build your strength and get better at the "easy" ones and then start chipping away at the others. Some will never make sense to you (and probably don't to most people, but we are all too proud to admit it). Try writing some poetry. It will be bad, but it will help you understand the the thoughts and motivations, the methods and practices of the writer.

In time, you will figure something out. It might be that you don't see why poetry is necessary, good or not criminal. That's also OK. Enough for now.

A Passover thought. Yes. In August.

 I was looking at the Chabad website this evening and saw a brief thought about the relationship between teacher and student, and it closed with the following statement:

"A real teacher is one who goes to the student, awakens the student, and demands, “Why don’t you bother me, my student? Ask me! Speak to me!”"

It makes an important point -- a teacher's job should be to inspire questions. When we have to guess at what students need to know we miss stuff, so the most important skill we can teach is critical thinking empowered by critical questioning.

It called to mind the idea of the 4 sons related at the Passover Seder. There are these 4 sons -- the wise one, the evil one, the simple one and the one "she'eino yode'a lish'ol." This is often translated as "the one who does not know how to ask" or even "one who does not know to ask."

These are nice translations but I think that they miss a more important point. I think that this son is the one who does not know that he is allowed to ask. He assumes that religion has to be taken as unquestioned dogma. He sits back, expecting to be told what to do, never understanding that challenging, raising objections and then listening to explanations and answers is a vital part of the teaching and learning process. The mother is instructed, in response: "At p'tach lo" you (female) open up for him. But open what? Open the floor for questions. Teach him to open his mouth and ask! The entire seder is driven by the concept of "so that the children should ask." The goal isn't to sit there and watch the world go by, but become an active participant.

Free Hate

Welcome to the month of Av, please reduce your happiness.

The month of Av on the Jewish calendar holds a day of deep despair -- the ninth of Av, on which we commemorate the destructions of the two temples in Jerusalem. It is a day marked by fasting, mourning practices and prayer which highlights loss and suffering. The lesson we try to impart is often rooted in a talmudic teaching (in Tractate Yoma, 9b) that the second temple was destroyed because of Sin'at Chinam. This is commonly translated as "baseless hatred."

This leaves a gaping logical hole or two:

1. Do I really have baseless hatred for anyone? Am I apologizing for a mode of human behavior that really is never present?

2. Am I saying that hatred that has a basis in reality is acceptable?

In my searches I have found that many rabbinic and lay voices have wrestled with this idea of baseless hatred. Some have called it "causeless" while others have explained it as disproportionate. I would like to advance a slightly different take on the phrase and the concept. The Hebrew word is "chinam". It doesn't mean "baseless" at least not generally; it means "free." There are uses of it pointing to "for no reason" or even "without a connection to truth" such as in Proverbs 24, but it also means "no strings attached" as one would free a slave (Ex. 21:2), and I like to think of it the way it is used in the Oral Law, as a reference to a guard who is not paid for his service. He gets nothing from or for what he does.

Chinam, it seems, points to not gaining an advantage. I am unpaid. I receive no benefits beyond that moment's label. When I hate, what do I really gain other than a fleeting second of righteous indignation and smug superiority? The kind of hate that got people in trouble was the kind that, ultimately, served no purpose. 

You took my parking space so I hate you. 

Does that hate get me a parking space? 

No. 

Does it help me in my day-to-day life in any way? 

No. 

But is it baseless? 

No -- I wanted and even needed a parking space. 

Is it "free"? Yes. I get nothing from the feeling. Neither I nor my situation is bettered. I am not paid in any sense by this feeling. No gain, no gain.

Are there other kinds of hatred? Sure -- ones that can produce a positive result for me. We emulate Hashem and he hates certain behaviors (Deut 12 and 16). By hating them, exercising justice against them and avoiding performing those behaviors, we can gain a benefit of spiritual improvement. This is not baseless or free hate. Even in the Ethics of the Fathers (1:10), we are advised to "hate" the idleness that rulership brings -- we are supposed to hate gaining advantage through the work of others or at the expense of others as this is not a true advantage. So we hate sin, or we hate the idea of gaining nothing through our actions (in a circular sense, we hate the kind of hate that is for free).

If we want to bring about the third temple -- if we want truly to improve ourselves, then we should be focusing on removing all the hatreds we feel even if we think we have just cause for them, as hatred of people and hatred of situations and things gets us nothing other than more hatred. We can identify specific actions and hate them so that we can do better, but if there is no real benefit, and our hatred is truly "free" then it can't be part of how we see the world.

Dan, Zero, Law, One

And this is why we should be in favor of more spontaneous and unintentional reading.

I found myself with nothing to read today and a few minutes in which not to read it so I started looking at the back of a bottle of household cleanser. The product in question was and is Lysol Bleach Multi-Purpose Cleaner. It has foaming action which is really exciting. It also kills 99.9 percent of viruses and bacteria. It seems to me that if you go that far in your formulation, spend the money and kill the other .1 percent.

Anyway, I saw the following statement on the back of the bottle:

"It is a violation of Federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling."

That got my attention.

First off, what kind of contentious debate on the senate floor precipitated the passage of the Federal law regarding Lysol? Were there amendments and riders? A filibuster or some back room deals? Where is the scathing expose which blows the lid off of this process? Inquiring minds and all that.

Then I got nervous. I read through the rest of the instructions and it all seemed to make sense, but, heck, what if I use it in a way that is "inconsistent" with the labeling? What does that even mean? The instructions say to turn the nozzle counter clockwise, but what if I turn it clockwise? Will the door be immediately kicked in and dozens of sun-glasses wearing G-men will come busting in, securing the premises and marching me out in front of reporters. 

"An anonymous tip," they'll say. "A true American, doing his civic duty and letting us know that someone used this product in a way inconsistent with its labeling. God bless the tipster who is helping us get this filth off the streets and away from our children. We are one clockwise turn from absolute anarchy. Chalk one up for the good guys."

And then, I can never vote :(

I let my imagination go even further. I pictured the defendant rising as the charges are read.

"Your honor, the defendant brutally killed everyone after embezzling funds and running a Ponzi scheme! So we are looking at multiple charges of murder-one, theft, racketeering and fraud. He is horrible -- he even tortured an animal!"

"Tortured you say?"

"Yes, your honor. He sprayed Lysol on the cat!"

"Well then, that's inconsistent with the labeling! Please amend the indictment to include a federal charge of Using Lysol the Wrong Way."

The label, by the way, also brags of the "Whitening Power" which has, I believe, recently been ruled unconstitutional by the High Court.

Fair warning, people. Don't be drawn in by the foaming action. And stop reading the labels.

School Like That

I hate to harp on issues related to education but it is the only instrument I know how to play so, harp, I shall. In the midst of the pandemic (heretofore to be referred to as “the pandemic”) school administrators around the country, and probably in its middle, are wrestling with the model for schooling come late August – in person, with or without masks, plexiglass shields, swords of omens or albatrosses, or distance (Zoom or a competitor or generic equivalent, depending on the prescribing doctor) learning with students in a galaxy, far, far away. Or some sort of centaur like hybrid, exploiting the absolute worst of each delivery context so as to completely baffle social scientists in the year 3000.

As of my last check, many colleges and at least two large public school districts have opted for fully distance learning, at least at the outset. I sense that something along these lines will trickle and ripple across the country and, in light of a recurve-in-nation, require that we work from home in the next school year. As such, we spring plan F into action. By the way, “Plan F” is “FREAK OUT.”

If I learned anything from my experience using distance learning for the final 3 and a half months of the school year then I’m the only one. And though we have received praise from stakeholders regarding how we weathered that storm, the impetus is now to do better than just plain great. We must enter an era of miracles, just to survive. As per my earlier posts (tell your friends!) things like assessment, informal conversations, sidebars, bodily engagement and other pedagogical bits and pieces are done for. It is time for a reinvention, and this has me worried. It isn’t that I can’t reinvent myself -- I have been 3 different people already this morning; it is that the direction of reinvention is troubling. 

The Zoom model is forcing a major change in the approach to teaching. That might be OK on its own, but it doesn’t stop there. The method now becomes the driving force behind the choice of content instead of being a medium through which desired content is delivered. We have to tailor what we teach, not just how we teach it, to accommodate this new mode. That de-emphasizes current curriculum.

I get a weekly summary of education articles written up by Kim Marshall (The Marshall Memo – if you are in education, get it). This week there was this quote (and I include the Memo’s citation): 

                “I have taken good online classes and bad online classes. What determines their quality has little to do with the format itself and everything to do with the teacher’s pedagogy, their grasp of the technology, and their ability to design a course around that.” -- Shalon van Tine (University of Maryland) in “The Bias Against Online Teaching” in The Chronicle of Higher Education, July 10, 2020 (Vol. 66, #33, p. 14)

To my eyes what this is saying is that the “good course” according to the writer is tied into how a class is designed to accommodate the delivery method. Now, on one hand, sure, this makes sense. If I know I’m lecturing, I have to select content that will survive and be vital via lecture. But I also know that I have the option NOT to lecture. I can design a course, on a macro level, to work through many delivery models, supplementing that lecture with other delivery channels to ensure that the whole of the important information gets through. If the technology becomes the one and only, then the course design has to start (and, on some level, end) with that awareness. This then becomes really troubling as many teachers would agree to the proposition that designing a course around anything other than curricular goals in terms of content acquisition and skills performance is to subsume content to delivery. Reinvention, it seems, requires tearing down old curricula and rebuilding the entirety of the educational system, all driven by the new technology of delivery. It is now less important “what I have to teach” or “what the student has to be able to do” because neither of those (in the traditional sense) might be compatible with or demonstrable through the technology, and that technology is one thing I cannot change. And if I want to switch things up, I have to do so within the confines of that technology – third party apps etc. all have to work within the strictures of the distance model. I can’t mix and match to leverage the strengths of each. 

This is, as we say in the teacher world, scary. I mean, maybe other people say that, too, but so what? Teachers say it. 

As a complementary note, please recognize the position established about the potential for success in the Distance Classroom in another quote from the same issue of the Memo:

               “There’s a limit to how good a lesson can be when you’re trying to interact with your students through a keyhole in the door.” -- Doug Lemov, quoted in “The Worst Is Yet to Come” by Robert Pondiscio in Education Week, June 10, 2020.

This expert seems to be saying that no matter how “good” the class, the inherent limitations of the electronic forum will adversely affect the ultimate quality of the lesson. One would assume that the author of the former quote would advise the author of this latter one to design a different lesson recognizing that the technology affords a keyhole and he has to learn to deal with that. 

So let’s all go out there and reinvent who we are, how we deal with students, how we assess performance and how we decide on what we teach, keeping in mind a new set of limitations regarding the potential for success in how we will be able to teach which will drive an absolute upheaval and revolution in the entire educational system in this country. August is a few scant weeks away and we have no option of getting this wrong. 

Should make for an interesting summer.

The speech I would give if I were president

My fellow Americans,

We are currently in a battle with an unseen foe, an enemy who is small yet formidable and who has already caused serious damage to our way of life, our livlihood and our lives. This enemy is a virus -- the COVID 19 virus. We have been beaten and bloodied but we are not out of it yet. We can fight back and recover. But this wil include accepting some hard truths. You can choose to believe them or not -- no one can convince you if you want to see that this whole pandemic is the conspiracy of some shadowy group. To people who feel that way, there is nothing I can say other than that I wish you health, on all levels.

Things will never be back to normal. Even if we develop a vaccine, there will always be a cloud of fear. Vaccines are not all 100% effective and sometimes bring in their own concerns, breeding their own potentials for harm. But they are our best hope for resuming some semblance of normalcy in our daily practices. Many eminent researchers continue to work towards that goal of a shot, pill or spray which will help our bodies fight off the coronavirus. This will not eliminate the disease. Mutations and variant strains will make this a constant battle, like the one our scientists wage against the flu, year in, year out. We cannot win, but we will not lose. If we battle to a draw in every encounter, lives will be saved. We can hope for treatments, not just for each symptom but for the effects of the virus as it ravages the bodies of our citizens. I'm no doctor but I try to surround myself with experts who can give me an unvarnished view of the impact COVID is having on us and the impact we can have on it in return. ANd, yes, the reports are mixed. We learn more daily and are, no doubt, making errors along the way -- errors that we won't realize until we learn something new down the line. Meanwhile, we have to trust in our experts and do the best we can.

We cannot shut down society and lock everyone in his or her house for a month, waiting for all traces of the disease to run their course and, lacking any new victims, to die out. This is impractical and would destroy our and every other country. People need to go out -- essential workers in many fields need to go to places of work, to help others, to continue to make the products that are what keep this country going. Shutting down in-place is a lovely fantasy but an absolute impossibility. So we rely on common sense and we make sacrifices, daily, because we see a greater good.

That this virus exists and has a substantial negative impact on the human body is known. That some can fight it off, and in some, it appears as little more than a bad cold is also true, but, and I speak with all candor here, I don't know in what category I fall. Do I carry antibodies, and will I continue to do so? And do they stop infection or reinfection? Am I one who can power through two days of coughing and some chills, or am I one who will end up on a ventilator? Am I one who will show no symptoms, or am I incredibly sensitive to infection? I also don't know in what category my children fall, or my aunts and uncles. Or my friends of all ages. And the possibility is that I pose more harm to others than to myself. So common sense dictates that I should adopt tha attitude William Shakespeare put in the mouth of Laertes in his play, Hamlet: "Best safety lies in fear."

Fear does not mean that we cower in the corner. Fear does not mean that we live our lives in solitary. Fear is what heekps us from running onto the highway with our eyes closed. Fear is why reminds us to buckle up tightly before the roller coaster starts. Fear can't make us stay inside, but it can help us control our behaviors outside. And yes, we should fear -- a healthy, life protecting fear. But we don't have to carry epipens or pepper spray because we fear COVID. We don't have to wear sunscreen and floppy hats or reflecting strips. Our fear won't push us to boil our water or wear a disguise. All our fear should do is respect that a simple piece of cloth over the nose and mouth (like a scarf that we wear in the face of the blustery cold) and a little bit of space can make a huge impact on reducing cases of coronavirus. Is it fool proof? Of course not. But it is one of the few things that is actually under our direct control. If you choose to wear a mask you WILL make a positive difference. And if you choose not to social distance, you are making a statement about putting your sensibility above that of everyone around you. You are deciding their fate for them and speaking not as the president, but as a regular citizen, that's selfish and unfair of you. For shame.

There is much more to be studied and, no doubt, we will discover more about this disease and future ones which will no doubt, continue to emerge, but for right now, discretion is the better part of valor. Some people have no choice but to continue going to work so they must follow guidelines, but for the rest of us, the choice to stay in a bit more, uncomfortable and boring as it sounds, or to eat at home, or buy only necessities, stifling as that will be, is a choice to stop the virus. The choice to wear a mask, to stay a few feet away, to wash your hands is a choice to be part of a battle that we must win. And make no mistake -- if you insist on doing otherwise, you are also making a choice, one which could have dire consequences on people you don't even know but who have every right to live their lives in health, not in the wake of your selfish infection. Please, make the right choice, for you, your family and everyone around you.

God bless you and may God bless the United States of America

Hearts of Stone

4AM thoughts.

I was watching the Zoom of my mom's funeral. That's not so much a thought as a fact but just hear me out. I was watching and also looking at the surrounding graves. I noticed on a stone a heart made of rocks.

"Weird," I thought. "I know my kids (and nieces and nephews) had made a heart of stones on the tombstone after my dad passed -- is that his stone? Wouldn't they have moved the stone to put mom in?" Befuddled I was. That comes after a-fuddled and then there is c-fuddled. But I'm the middle child, so b-fuddled it is.

Then I saw that the name on the stone was not my dad's. "Even weirder," thought I. "I'm pretty sure I remember my dad's name, and upon last visit, there were no other hearts made from stones on other graves." My fuddlement jumped exponentially (which, literally means "like Montreal"). Next, the camera panned back and I saw my dad's stone which had, indeed been removed. It was standing up, slouching really, on the side, leaning against a wall, waiting to be acknowledged, like me at a party.

Initially, I was annoyed.

The fact that "I" is my brother's initial makes that sentence funny. To me. At 4AM. After watching a funeral.

Anyhoo, I was miffed you might say. The heart thing was a Rosen bit! I have the pictures to prove it. How dare someone else co-opt our show of stone-play based affection!

But then I played it out.

Maybe someone came by and saw the heart on my dad's tomb stone. Maybe that person was inspired to demonstrate love and care in similar fashion. Maybe, the love that that person felt hadn't known how to be expressed and maybe, just maybe, it was the act of people in my family, driven by and inspired by my parents and their love, which gave someone else the idea to show how he or she felt. Maybe, my parents are still helping increase love in the world and helping people show that they care. And that's not something to be annoyed, miffed, or even befuddled by.

That's something to be proud of.

Idol thoughts

Today's wandering wondering has to do with the topic of idolatry. I mean, why is it such a forbidden thing? I'm not saying that I have a current hankering for some bow down action, but what is it about idolatry that is so bad? Then I run into a news article which states that the state of Virginia will be removing the statues of General Robert E. Lee (the "E." is included so as not to confuse him with other Robert Lees who were in SAG). Many people are against this removal because Lee was, in their eyes, a great man. And I think that if you discussed his record with a bunch of people who were versed in the art of strategery many would praise his thinking and approach to the craft of warfare. Qua general, he might have been incredible. He probably was also nice to his mother. He might be worthy of admiration for his loyalty to a cause and his service to his government. There could be many ways in which his actions and behaviors could be applauded. He is a hero to many, in fact. That he aligned himself with a losing side, one which championed and defended an institution of slavery which subjugated an entire class of people, taints anything he could be adored for. And this is the problem. When we try to reduce complex people or ideas and put them above questioning because they are literally on a pedestal, we run the risk of ignoring deep flaws. Hero worship (heck, anything worship) limits its user's scope regarding the object of adoration to a particular dimension or aspect of existence. We can't see (and are trained not to look for) any problems when we idolize. We make the football player, the talk show host, the religious figurehead our hero until we can no longer ignore criminal activity. ANd then our world comes crashing down. Our judgment is suspect. Our cynicism flourishes. When God, then, forbids idolatry, God is forbidding our tendency to ignore what is bad. God is saying "don't ever stop investigating or asking questions." Why is idolatry so horrible? Because it puts blinders on us and strips us of rational thought, lowering us to the level of the animal who cannot think. It is scary not being able to rely absolutely on those we raise up. It is heart wrenching to know that anyone and everyone (from Mother Teresa to Oprah to Ron Darling, not of Peter Pan fame) has secrets, skeletons, and probably, secret skeletons, and with enough digging, will be found to be imperfect. Now, there's nothing wrong with being imperfect. Some of my best friends are imperfect, and we can recognize, leverage and rise above the imperfections we own and improve our world. But we can't idolize because that means forgetting about imperfection, and that's dangerous.

Snow more days

It is May and in the spring, a young man's fancy turns to thoughts of distance learning and its impact on the traditional school year. Also, the fact that some models are showing a snow storm in part of the northeast for this weekend has me thinking about stuff like snow.

Some journalist said what 50 people before him had said (just without the millions of followers), that with the advent of widespread distance learning, there will no longer be any need for snow days. I'd like to take this opportunity to head this little foolishness off at the pass and destroy it so that no one else mentions it, even as a joke. I'll focus on high school education, but I won;t limit myself to any particular texture of snow.

1. If it snows so much that we can't drive, then there will be much shoveling to be done and we rely on roving bands of young people to save that particular day. Force them into classes and then it gets dark, stuff freezes up and my back hurts. Why are you trying to make my back hurt?

2. A snow storm brings with it the chance for black outs. Covering required information when there are students who lack the personal technological infrastructure at every drop of a hat will cause knowledge and achievement gaps.

3. A snow day or two is a welcome break. It is a celebration of childhood and freedom. To co-opt it and jam education down its fun little throat is mean spirited and cruel. Even administrators and teachers want to eat marshmallows, build a snowman and daydrink. Don't take that away from us.

4. This is the real one -- the logistics and administration of the day, coupled with inherent curricular obstacles make the notion of effective distance education unlikely even when the implementation is anticipated by weeks and there is planning. Without that, as in the case of a storm, education is impossible via technology.

I'll discuss #4 (as I think the others are self-explanatory) by creating a scenario.

Monday and Tuesday during the first week in February were routine enough. The second semester was well underway -- long term assignments had been assigned and classes had jelled to the point that the teacher knew a lot about every student. But by Tuesday, students checking weather apps knew that something was brewing. They kept asking "Do you think we'll have school tomorrow" as weather forecasts drew from 10 different models and predicted everything from a coating to up to 2 feet of wind driven snow. The most popular guess was 12-14 inches, with heaviest snow beginning at 7AM. The principal of the private HS, as was his practice, didn't sleep overnight. At the close of Tuesday's school day, he reminded students to take books home "just in case" but there was so much uncertainty and students sprinted for the buses more concerned with getting home now than worry about getting to school tomorrow. So he didn't sleep. He watched the weather channel, the news channel, ESPN, and then the weather again. He drank soda to stay awake and started looking for closure guidance by 3 AM. At 4, with no snow falling but in an abundance of caution, the superintendent called a snow day so the principal followed suit. He started making phone calls and the contingency plan was sprung into action.

Teachers were called, the emergency "snow day schedule" was invoked (it had taken hours, but a class schedule had been prefigured to ensure that classes that should meet, met, at a time that was responsible and for a length that was reasonable) so students received emails, texts and direct messages across a variety of social platforms.

At 9:30, as per the schedule, the principal's office sent out an email announcing a school-wide online meeting (the money spent for a business account on the platform, to allow so many sub-accounts, such large meetings and other perks seemed well worth the sizable investment). Seventy-five percent of the student body showed up for announcements and reminders. Class sessions begin shortly thereafter.

In each class, most students showed up mostly on time. Technological and personal glitches (wi-fi problems, hardware problems, home space availability, ambient distractions, family commitments) abounded. Teachers could not just pick up what they had been doing on Monday and Tuesday -- curricula had been designed for and implemented in person so the lectures, discussions, group presentations, review sessions and such didn't all translate directly onto the digital model. Tests could not be given. Homework could not be collected nor could it be assigned. Stand-alone, discrete content was covered but students didn't feel accountable. Teachers noted a lack of involvement and attention and traditional classroom management methods were ineffective. Classes that had been in the middle of group work, Socratic circles and other student-centered lessons turned into simple lectures so that teachers could present foundational information. Students who didn't take home books or material had to find on-line equivalents or hope that they could catch up upon returning to the building. Teachers had been advised to have extra classes prepared to be inserted at any moment but that meant that the content couldn't be based in the curriculum -- how could any teacher design a class that could work in November or March equally seamlessly? Some teachers broke out the bells and whistles and used third party apps to mix up class presentation and while most worked admirably, they served more to entertain than to enforce curricular lessons. The day was one more of warehousing and of discrete, extra-curricular discussions and content. There was some review which ended up being monopolized by the couple of students who wanted to take advantage of the chance to ask questions. Classes were shorter than traditional ones and students didn't necessarily show up on time for a variety of reasons ranging from the reasonable to the ridiculous.

By the time Thursday rolled around and most students were able to get to school (those in northern and western suburbs stayed home as their districts still canceled) Wednesday's classes were forgotten. Teacher's reviewed the Tuesday work and moved forward. There was no time in the schedule to add in assessments to make sure that the Wednesday work was done, let alone done well. What was left was resentment -- by teachers who spent their day trying to be something different from what they were trained to be and by students who felt that they were subject to busy-work. Administratively, all of the impact of a missed day had to be accounted for -- rescheduling of events and tests still had to be done and teachers had to figure out how to cover the actual curricular content with fewer days, and they hadn't had a day off to rework their plans. Sure, the school could brag that it had a plan in place and it could tell parents that it made the most of every class day, but was it really effective education? Was it worth the headache? No one on the front line seemed to think so.

My assessment? Distance education cannot be slapped on a traditional structure. Even on its own it is (IMHO) suspect, but this isn't on its own. This is changing horses midstream and the new horse isn't even a horse. It is swarm of angry bees and you owe it $20. Leave snow days alone. Account for them when designing the calendar (even in May) and let's focus our money, attention and effort on real issues in education.

Twenty-one and over and over

So most of another week has gone by and online learning chugs ahead. Three plus weeks and I have learned so much about why they are going to learn so little. Here are some notes as this chunk of time comes mercifully to a close.

So far we have been told to reduce the workload on students (after initially being told to ramp it up) and to abandon the notion of traditional assessments and grades (after initially being told that grades and assessments would continue). Now we are all about engagement and connection, so the student who sits quietly, or who turns his video or audio off runs the risk of being penalized for being himself. Grading based on involvement (even tacit engagement) is not only flawed, but inconsistent with the grades earned over the balance of the year. And trying to assess if a student should change placements is even more difficult.

Loud classes get louder as all volume is normalized -- there are no whispered conversations and I can't yell over people. Encouraging a classroom debate is difficult because people have trouble hearing each other, or if there is any lag, they step on each other and points don't get across. Forcing a mute can crush the spirits of students; there are no subtle methods of correcting over-exuberance.
Distracted classes get more distracted as the requirement to look at at least one screen is a real stumbling block, but even moreso, being surrounded by the trappings on one's home field, including family, is too much temptation. We can't make them sit at a desk in a secluded, quiet room. They don't all have that capacity.
Quiet classes get quieter. This puts more pressure on me to fill the space with talking and this leads to more lecturing. Then the cycle increases -- the more I am willing to talk and not abide empty spaces, the less likely a quiet class is to interject and pick up the conversation. Part of this is compounded by the call for "flipped" classrooms, in which the students are given a video to watch during off hours (something we may or may not be supposed to be doing) so that class time can be used for practice or demonstration of something or discussing. But this just ends up becoming an asynchronous lecture during which students can't ask questions. And if the practice is online, questions are equally difficult to ask so the entire process gets thrown back markedly.

Lecture during synchronous meetings ends up winning the day because silence cannot be supplemented by body language or physical proximity. There can be no "side conversations." A teacher must continually prove that he is watching all students or else they try stuff and it is tougher to be that hawk, knowing what every kid is up to at all times (a skill necessary for managing a live classroom).

Presentations are harder to give feedback on, and can't command other students' attention in the same way. They take more time and are more prone to tech issues. They also don't assess understanding in the same way as traditional assessments. I haven't tried "break out rooms" because, for one thing, I'm not sure that I can maintain a view of all other students when I'm sequestered with one small group.

How much time am I spending? Ultimately, more but that might be because I'm in a happy rut. I have to create new assessments and retool how I schedule and implement each class. Plus, the use of multiple formative assessments means more grading and a different mode of feedback. Turning every half conversation into an email or text-based message increases lag time and makes it harder for a student to revise and review and then resubmit. If I can stand over a student, point out a mistake, and then have the student fix it in writing in a matter of seconds and have me look again, then that is much faster than reviewing an email submission, trying to communicate an idea in writing, send that back, then have the student rework something in my absence and send it back. Repeat. A much longer process.

It is harder to monitor their secondary screen practices. They are gaming and interacting with others and there is very little way I can check. I am, effectively, taking attendance repeatedly, seeing who is leaving, coming back in (wrestling with technology vs. not really caring), turning video or audio off and on. Trying to maintain a flow is really tough.

Don't get me wrong -- through it all, I'm getting the hang of this, at least a little. My students are getting work, doing work, and engaging with me. But it is different, and as much as I think I am making it work in a limited fashion, I am not being as effective as I could be in a traditional classroom and I don't think I ever could be.

What I miss

I miss sunshine
I miss wishing I could go home
I miss handing people things
I miss baseball
I miss being able to go
I miss the cycle of a day
I miss the cycle of the week
I miss missing those I love
I miss seeing those I love
I miss looking forward to needing and getting
I miss counting the clouds
I miss shaking hands
I miss not worrying about each breath
I miss buying what I want
I miss not being afraid the world
I miss not being angry at people for living

Let's talk about tests, baby

Still considering the notion of assessments, both formative and summative, in the world of online classes. I think it meet to start assembling a list of pros and cons, limitations and opportunities. Maybe that will help me devise some method of testing which I would see as honest, fair, useful and full of integrity. You know, educationally sound.

First -- memorization is out as a skill. I can't test it. I can't monitor students in real time to be sure that they aren't relying on some other resources. I know everyone loves to promote higher order thinking skills but lower order thinking skills are still vital and are much more difficult to test virtually.
Second -- synchronous testing (much like synchronous classes, according to many experts) is difficult and probably a waste of time. Getting everyone the test and having all be able to access it in the same way at the same time, and take it and submit it on the same schedule seems daunting (ignoring the issue of the administration of that test and the possibility of cheating)
Third -- many would say to co-opt the strengths of online learning by allowing students to collaborate and create. This is nice except it invokes questions of personal responsibility for a grade (and monitoring participation in group work and allocating fair grades, which is already, even in person, a problem) and, in my humble opinion, it ignores a truth that the future will not be all about collaboration. Even in the workplace of the future, individuals will have to be able to perform on their own.

Exit tickets -- they aren't always relevant. If we are doing Kahoot presentations by 4 students per day, what does another student have to email me? A question that someone used? Who remembers that? Also, any ticket will only show that a student was paying attention at one moment. And how many times do I have to repeat announcements and assignments and students still don't get them. Then they ask "can you post that to Haiku" or whatever other HW platform we use. So simply saying, with 3 minutes to go "before you leave, send me an email with ______" is doomed. And, best case, it means I have to plow through 75 emails to see if they are "good" -- what is the standard for successfully completing this? Is it "done or not done" with the grade being a pass/fail?


There are three modes I am starting with for assessing and I have jotted some notes under each one discussing the problems and limitations associated with it:

1. Timed, written responses (short answer, multiple choice or essay/paragraph)

1a. Enforcing a timing is possible using a third party product that opens and closes the assessment on a fixed schedule, but because of the possibility of "extra time" separate assessments would have to be made for each student to accommodate needs.

1b. Even in a timed situation, it is impossible, remotely, to ensure test integrity

1c. Responses are all written and have to be submitted electronically (typing is a skill not every student has or is comfortable with). Students who struggle with written communication will be disadvantaged by the demanded form of response.

1d. The long form of this (the "paper") stays valid but is not complemented by other assessments which address aspects that a paper cannot account for.

2. Responses to direct questioning (which assesses both knowledge and attention)

2a. Not every student is comfortable answering questions on the spot, participating in conversation, formulating spoken word answers. To shift demands and require that students become something different from what they are (in a classroom that has tried to value who they are now instead of demanding such change) undermines the teacher-student trust-relationship and asks for something unfairly.

2b. Not every student can pay attention via computer in the way that we want to ensure. The distractions and demands are very different. We cannot command, nor can we expect to command, the kind of focus that having students in our classroom allows for.

3. Presentation (individual or group) - a recap of knowledge or a demonstration of ability

3a. Ignoring the problems of group work interpersonally, the technological demands present a problem for some students.

3b. The presentations (technologically) are limited and rarely seamless, wasting time. Even in best cases the time it takes to go through presentations of any sort eats up class time.

3c. It is impossible to monitor both the content and other students in the class unless another level of assessment is added in which then has to be monitored/graded.

Tomorrow, I'm planning to throw this quandary to my 12th graders and solicit insights, maybe hear what other teachers have done, or see what students would respect. I'm also asking other professionals and posting messages on the relevant web forums. More updates as events warrant.

Practical Magic

So I am still intent on making this work, this whole teaching from home thing. I'm still running into issues (and I am psychologically dismayed that my homespace now requires that I adopt my work persona...I had hoped that never the twain shall meet) which I will catalog but I also want to keep track of what I am doing (other than feeling nauseated from looking at a screen for so long)

First, problems:

I still am using a single laptop for my Zoom meetings. I don't have 2 screens and I don't intend to install a second screen so that I can do what I should be able to do without any computer -- teach a class. That would be TOO much technology. I try not to have to use my phone at the same time, but I know that one of my teaching tools requires that students use their computers and their phones at the same time. This poses its own problems.

My internet connection is being strained. With me on Zoom (and other things), my wife on Zoom or the internet, my kids streaming TV shows (and sometimes, their school lectures) I am really pushing it and I get the messages on my computer telling me that this is a problem. My connection lags, and trying to RDP into work to get those files while also working on my own connection is not working so well. I know of students who have no camera on their computers, or their cameras are broken. This is not a made up excuse -- I know it to be true. Not everyone can afford a shareable high-speed internet connection. Some students need to turn off video to save bandwidth. Keeping their attention is getting tougher and tougher and they are getting better at setting up convincing virtual backgrounds to fool me into thinking that they are there and paying attention. This requires more energy from me, verbally. I can't walk around and use my body language to fill the gaps -- silence means nothing is happening. That demands a lot more from me, to fill the gaps.

I have my 12th grade class presenting videos and memes that they have found with certain topics -- this class is on humor so our sources are multifarious and all viable. They are 12th graders, though, and are already somewhat "checked out" of the high school experience. Those who are engaged normally are doing a great job. Some who are quiet continue to be, and many are just not in the game. They have too much fun with cross-conversations and I spend too much time chasing noise until I mute them all and show a video, with no way of knowing if they care at all.

My 10th grade is setting up Kahoots, short quizzes that they make and share with the others. I can't "grade" these quizzes as I would my own, so I need to keep track of who has done it and give credit for that. We (in order to be fair and ensure that all did the work) have to see each person's kahoot -- in a class of 25 that can take many class-hours and an be tedious and/or boring. The technology isn't so seamless so students still have to learn how to share screens, balance 2 screens (on to host or see the questions, and a phone to answer) recognize limitations of hardware (what you can do on a phone, you can't do on a computer and vice versa) and resolve error messages (all assuming the internet infrastructure in their neighborhood and home holds steady). They haven't gotten burned out on it yet, so we will keep on reviewing them and then getting to actual discussion about our text. But simply introducing new third party apps everyday requires that I achieve mastery quickly, and that I find a reason to use these in a pedagogically organic and responsible way and for the most part, I haven't.

This brings up a point about assessments. I have to replace my timed, structure summative assessments (in class essays, short answer timed reading quizzes, vocab quizzes based on memorization) with more frequent assignments. I wouldn't call these formative because they aren't being used during instruction to help build knowledge. My structure is still "teach, then test" and if that has to change to accommodate this new reality, then so be it, but I need to be shown how so I can build a new curriculum with a new paradigm in mind. These short assignments need to be read, responded to and "graded" (whatever that means). This takes more hours than my traditional modes of assessment, and increased assignments compounds this. The spontaneous "pulling a kid aside and pointing something out quickly and moving on" has to be replaced with a formal email, detailing in writing, not speech, what needs to be addressed. Exit tickets also require my review -- and what counts for a "good" vs. just a "done" assignment? The students are craving grades, asking if and how I will be grading anything they do. This brings up a question of student expectation.

I can learn to change. it takes me time, but, for myself, I can change how I do things and such. But asking students to change from an educational structure which has defined them for 10 years is difficult. They don't see a big picture -- they see their scores, grades and standard methods of measuring their success. And I don't just mean for the sake of college applications -- they have internalized the lesson we have been trying to get across to them -- that our grading can be used as a reflective tool to help them see how well they are advancing through the educational ranks. And now we have to ditch these measures and reassure them that they are getting smarter without some external device like a test? That demands more of them than of us!

Some students have handed things in late, claiming technical issues or emotional ones (a student is quarantined away from her family and is having a very hard time). Attendance is still almost impossible to take. With students shifting position on the screen, entering and exiting and not always having (being able to have) cameras running, it seems a waste of energy.

I am going to have to change the parameters for my research project, recognizing that students have not already, and will not be able to get to their local library. I will have to make all resources required digital (which I find abhorrent as students still don't have a sense of what online is trustworthy and what is not, nor do they understand that not everything is available in digital form). This will reinforce their false notion that online research is good enough, and this makes me sad. The hard part has always been convincing teenagers (who, clearly, already know everything) that there is more to find than just websites (and they don't know what a "website" is as opposed to anything else -- it isn't a discrete entity/object, so they don't know that they can assess it on its own merits.

I am using the AP Classroom to create short quizzes and assign them to the AP students but the test bank is limited, the explanations are scant and the students can't seem to care as much as if there is face to face accountability. That continues to be a problem -- they just don't care as much and would rather use class time to have any social interaction rather than be forced to focus on academics.

I try not to get frustrated with all of them, their technical naivete, their disinterest in schooling. I try to deal with having to sit and stare at a screen for hours on end, reading emails as homework instead of working with a pen and paper. I try to wrap my head around the concept of grading and testing as they (don't) apply to this new system. I end up really tired.

Notes from the undergrounded

I am still learning this whole video teaching thing and in some ways, it can do the job, but there are other areas in which it is deficient. I have seen contradictory information about scheduling learning times vs. allowing students to connect at their own pace, about assigning fixed work and lots of it vs. assigning significantly less and very different work and other basic educational (and paradigmatic) binaries. I don't know where I stand or where others will tell me to stand, but I want to keep track of my learning curve on this, so bear with me. You are in quarantine. What other choice do you have?

We are using Zoom and it is not horrible. But, and I have tried to pass these concerns along, there are glitches.

Sharing screens and limiting who can annotate is tough. The white board app initially refused to appear when I said that only I could write on it, and for other annotation tools, I believe that permissions are all or nothing.

People still get muted for no reason and unmuting them doesn't always work. I, on the whole, prefer to keep students unmuted -- the ability for them to interject, or add something without having to raise a hand and wait to be called on more closely mirrors how I run my classroom. Unfortunately, incidental noise can hurt our ability to hear other people who are talking. One student shifting his computer on his desk, or putting his phone down on his bed can take over a room and it isn't always easy to spot the source of noise and mute selectively.

Attendance is spotty at best -- students come in and out, so keeping track of them after initial attendance has been taken is very difficult.

On my screen (and I only have 1 computer to work on) I can't see 49 people on gallery view. That option is greyed out for me. I see up so 20 or so in gallery view -- sometimes when I have over 16 people present, I only see those 16 (with no "second page"). And because students keep moving in and out, and talking moves a student to the forefront, I lose track of students.

Students are supposed to have their cameras (and microphones) on -- unless I mute them. Here are some excuses which I have heard:

a. I am on a desktop so I have no camera installed
b. my camera (my software) is broken
c. I am in a room with others and it is noisy so I am staying muted
d. My room is dark so you can't see anything


Keeping students attentive and or focused in really tough. We are encouraging them to have access to other screens so they often are fixated on those other screens. Even if they have the video room open on a single, primary screen, they can have it minimized and be doing other things on their primary screen and yet appear to be paying attention. I have students who access on their phones and then say that they can't get chat messages, or open linked websites while maintaining presence in the video component. One had to exit and start up (and join via) a computer. This adds to instructional time. It is also harder to make sure students are progressing through assigned work. I have more students do the whole "wait...what are we doing now?" thing repeatedly, or ask questions just answered because they weren't fully paying attention or the audio didn't make someone else's question easy to hear. [if any teacher gets fooled by a virtual background picture/gif of a student, then that teacher deserves no mercy, but the students are trying to fool us and with people in and out, they can fool us because we can't check consistently]

There is pressure to use outside, third party add-ins. These are not resources that I use on a day-to-day basis when I teach so jumping in to the video-mode AND having to integrate unfamiliar technologies is doubly daunting. As a note, understand that I don't use those other options because I am a technophobe, but because they don't arise organically in my teaching method. This is asking for major shifts in how I approach the classroom. As a parallel, students do not seem comfortable with chat boxes alongside video teaching. I tried adding in a third-party component today and the students found it glitchy and hard to work and incorporate into the classroom. We will keep trying tomorrow and see if this can flip the source of content to students and if it can change the nature of assessments.

I am trying to keep my video room open as a drop in center, but to do so means keeping it in the background (with my camera off so that no one accidentally sees my reaction to stupid memes). But the room closes automatically after 40 minutes of inactivity.

This is not homeschooling. In homeschooling, a student doesn't wander into the wrong room.