Right Wing Nation

from Andrew Bolt. African leaders confirm: concern for the human rights of blacks is a white thing.

Jonah Goldberg laments that Rome is filming no new seasons. I think that’s a good thing.

Don’t misunderstand me: Rome was one of the highest quality shows on television. And those who disliked it because of the adult content, like Jonah’s correspondent, well, all I can say is if they had read Cicero or Suetonius, they wouldn’t complain about Rome. I’m glad they won’t film more seasons because the second season wasn’t as good as the first, and because, well, where would they take the story?

Understand the second season was, for television, excellent. It just wasn’t as excellent as the first. During the first season, I thought it brilliant that the writers took two characters briefly mentioned once in Caesar’s histories (Lucius Vorenus and Titus Pullo), created stories for them, and wove their stories among historical material. It made Rome distinct from, say, I, Claudius or another historical drama by adding the perspective of the common Roman. And in the first season, the balance between historical and fictional was perfect: The first season was a historical drama with fictionalized elements.

The writers lost that balance in the second season, which was more a fictional drama with historical elements. Lucius Vorenus’s and Titus Pullo’s storylines diverged from the historical story and became subplots, and at least it felt like their stories were given more weight than the history. While the first season was about Julius Caesar and the historical characters that surrounded him, the second season was about Lucius Vorenus and Titus Pullo, with Octavian and Mark Antony as historical characters in the background.

The first season covered a much shorter time period than did the second, and this created a problem that the writers did not resolve. Although there were a few time gaps in the first season, they were short enough that the writers could present the episodes as if they were continuous. But the second season covered a much longer time period and some of the gaps in the storyline were years, yet the writers saw no need to try to convey this. The result, even for those of us who know the history, was that from time to time, the story seemed jarring until you thought, “Oh, but ten years has passed.” The problem is (read through the discussion boards on the HBO site–there was one thread complaining about changing the actor for Octavian, but of course they had to, since he was much older) that you needed to know the history to realize that time had passed because the writers made no attempt to convey it. At times, the historical elements of the story seemed rushed–such as the last two episodes–because the timing was never communicated well by the writers.

Yes, they diverged from history–though far less than movies and TV usually do. Some were justifiable, and if anything, made the story more interesting, such a beefing up Atia and Servilia to make them major characters. Others were annoying, such as the incest between Octavian and Octavia in the first season, or turning Octavian into the Marquis de Sade in the second. Others, such as the creation of Timon’s character, worked well in the first season, but seemed gratuitous and unconnected in the second.

Overall, however, only the most pedantic history nut could object to the series.

The problem with doing more seasons is what they would do and where they would take the story. Augustus reigned for 41 years, but what events during his reign would a third season cover? And given that he reigned over a largely peaceful and prosperous empire, it would be difficult to pick a storyline that would be dramatically satisfying.

A third season could, of course, skip ahead to Tiberius (uneventful and dramatically dull), Claudius (except that’s been done), Caligula, or Nero, or even further. But that would entail all new characters, which viewers would not like. And I don’t think HBO or the BBC could resist the temptation to degrade the series into one bloody, sex-ridden scandal after another. If they wanted to jump ahead, they would be well advised to make a distinct break with Rome, by calling it something else.

It’s a good thing they won’t, because the second season was noticably weaker than the first, and any additional seasons would likewise be weaker than the second. That’s my suspicion, anyway.

This is disturbing:

A father-of-two hanged himself live over the internet in Britain’s first ‘cyber suicide’.

Kevin Whitrick, 42, took his life after being goaded by dozens of chatroom users from across the world who initially believed he was play acting.

But as they watched in horror, Mr Whitrick climbed onto a chair, smashed through a ceiling and then hanged himself with a piece of rope.

I don’t know which is more disturbing, that he hanged himself online, or that his audience cheered him on.

Another user who did not wish to be named said: “When Kevin stepped off the chair and was left dangling, the mood in the chatroom changed and people began to realise what they had just seen.

I suppose it’s something that these amoral morons were horrified when they realized what they’d seen was real, but what kind of sick SOB would be entertained by watching “simulated” suicide? Of course, if you call it “performance art,” then you can get a grant to hang yourself in Times Square. All the cultural elite with tastefully applaud as you swing from the rope, you’d get live coverage on NPR, and a multi-page glowing review in the NYT.

Comment or trackback, as long as you link to here.

Professor W. Stephen Wilson did an interesting cursory study (the PDF is here). Professor Wilson is a math professor at Johns Hopkins. He obtained the SATM scores for his Calculus I for the Biological and Social Sciences students in 1989 and 2006, and gave his 2006 students the same final exam he gave his 1989 students. The percentage of the students taking the class was essentially the same in both semesters, as were the SATM scores (although the number of students applying and accepted to Johns Hopkins had increased from 1989 to 2006 by roughly 146%).

The final exam scores were significantly lower in 2006 than 1989:

The 2006 Calculus I class took the same 77-point final exam as the 1989 class. The content of the Calculus I course has not changed, and, mathematically, using the old exam was completely appropriate.

The scores on the final exam were markedly different. The average of the 1989 scores was 48.4, with a standard deviation of 14.4, while the 2006 class average was 42.5, with a standard deviation of 11.3. The 5.9 point decrease in the average is a 12.2% decline. Daniel Naiman also ran the Wilcoxon test of significance on these two distributions and found a p-value of .001 for the two-sided test. [The p-value of less than 0.05 tells us that the difference is statistically significant, that is that it is not due to random variation.]

Here is a histogram of both semester scores showing the distribution:

He compares this difference to a similar difference in SATM scores to make his point:

How significant is this change educationally? Contemplate a similar drop in SATM scores. SATM scores range from 200 to 800. If there had been a 12.2% drop over the 17 years from the recentered SATM score of 662.3, the 2006 class would have an average SATM score of 605.9 (= 662.3 - .122 x (662.3 - 200)).

But the interesting thing (to me, at any rate) is that the SATM scores did not drop from 1989 to 2006:

The average SATM score for the 1989 Calculus I class was 662.6 with a standard deviation of 6.8. For the 2006 Calculus I class it was 664.9, with a standard deviation of 6.3. In the mid-1990s, SATM scores were “recentered,” [Rec07]. After recentering the 1989 class’s SATM scores, the new average was 662.3, with a standard deviation of 6.5.

Professor Wilson discusses the possible causes for this discrepancy, but what interests me is that the calculus final exam scores dropped significantly while the SATM scores did not. The distinction between the two exams Professor Wilson focuses on is that the SATM allows the use of calculators while the course final exam does not. I’m not sure this factor all by itself can account for this difference, because using calculators on exams is like looking things up on an open book exam: You lose what you gain because of wasted time.

How similar is the calculus content on the SATM and the content of the final exam? The SATM is a more comprehensive exam, and cannot devote as many questions to calculus. A fairer comparison (if it were possible) would be to somehow score the calculus questions on the SATM and compare those scores to the final exam scores.

Yet this decrease in final exam scores should have been reflected to some extent in the SATM scores. I have to wonder if this “recentering” of scores is somehow responsible for this. Of this topic, Diane Ravitch says:

For many years the College Board insisted that the Scholastic Assessment Test was “an unchanging standard.” But no more. The latest SAT scores, released last week, are the first to be graded on a new curve–one that destroy’s the test’s “unchanging standard.”

Two years ago, the College Board–decided to “recenter” the scores by arbitrarily declaring that the 1990 scores on both the verbal and mathematical portions of the test would serve as the new average. The fairly robust math score of 475 was transformed overnight to a 500, and the anemic verbal score of 424 also was lifted to 500. With the stroke of a pen, extremely poor performance on the verbal portion of the test was turned into the new norm.

So “recentering” the scores was inflating them. This would at least partially explain why the SATM scores did not decrease while the final exam scores did.

Still, university faculty, secondary school faculty, parents, and yes, College Board should be concerned about this difference. Somebody should research this, find out if it is a national trend, and if so, try to correct it.

because you’re not going to expect this. I like both Betsy Newmark and the Anchoress, but, well, let’s tackle Newmark first:

When College Board announced that they were adding a writing component to the SATs, critics alleged that there was no way to legitimately grade the writing of that many essays each year and that the test would devolve down into writing formulaic essays. Well, now an MIT professor has written a paper outlining what students need to do to game the test and present the illusion of good writing.

I have no debate with this. Anything that encourages the mindless five-paragraph essay (which I spent many hours railing against when I coordinated that ESL writing program) earns my ire. And I used to be a certified GED essay grader and have also graded essays for ETS; I know all about idiotic, formulaic, content-free writing.

But this is nonsense:

Here is an example from the paper to demonstrate how the student can get the facts wrong but still impress enough to get them a good grade.

And the Anchoress says much the same nonsense:

Good writing skills go hand-in-hand with good reading skills, and with critical thinking.

In an ideal world, yes–though in the real world, no (there are plenty of excellent writers with foggy brains who spout nonsense). In fact, her teacher friend, or rather those she was talking about, were correct:

Because essays are subjective, we’re not supposed to consider content in the grading

Exactly so. Determining the validity of the content of a history paper is the sole domain of the history professor. Writing assessment must assess only writing skills, or it’s not writing assessment. If the topic were an essay for a history exam, then absolutely, content is vital. But it isn’t a history exam (or a philosophy exam, or any topic exam): It’s the writing component of the SAT. It’s sole purpose is to rate writing proficiency.

Also, students are given a topic, which introduces yet another reason content cannot be used to rate writing proficiency on the SAT. What do you do with the student who shows an excellent grasp of history but cannot write his way out of a paper bag and the student who knows little history but is an excellent writer? If you’re evaluating writing proficiency, the better writer gets a higher assessment than the poorer writer, regardless of his grasp of history.

But then we have this:

I know this is true because a teacher pal of mine shared this story with me.

Well no, you don’t know anything, except that a person told you a story. Anecdotal evidence is an oxymoron.

Rather, students are being taught “to the test,” and for that, neither thinking nor information need be clear.

Well no, that’s nonsense. Teachers aren’t teaching content in class, so to make up for it, they’re drilling students before tests. Teaching the content is teaching to the test.

This whole issue is first old, old, old news, and second, it’s a non-issue. If you want student writing to be assessed on content as well as form and rhetoric, then mandate area exams for topics. Otherwise, it’s not going to happen–because you’ll no longer be evaluating writing skills.

There’s always Herwig’s. I give them major thumbs-up for the food.

A year ago today, I posted this rather sad bit of news:

State College has no steakhouse—and no, Outback doesn’t count. Let me rephrase that. State College has one restaurant that bills itself as a steakhouse, Down Under Steak House at Toftrees. We’ll see. We’re going there tonight for my birthday dinner.

It’s the only place in town I’ve found that has ribeyes on the menu. Did you catch that?

Well, there’s Kelly’s Steak and Seafood, which bills itself as a steakhouse. It’s not. They only have three or four steaks on the menu, though the prime rib there is top notch. But that’s why I’m skeptical about the Down Under.

Like I said, we’ll see.

This is where I’d prefer to go for my birthday dinner:

T-Bone Porterhouse Sirloin for Two Sirloin for Three Chunks of Sirloin Filet    Super    Petite Rib Eye    Center cut only New York Strip Gypsy Steak Kabob    Served flaming

24 oz. 28 oz. 36 oz. 52 oz. 16 oz.   11 oz. 7 oz. 18 oz.   16 oz. 10 oz.

But that’s over 500 miles away, and choices for serious carnivores here are oddly limited. There’s Kelly’s, and while it really does serve very good food, it ain’t a steakhouse (though the prime rib seriously rocks the house). There’s the Down Under Steak House, which again isn’t, where we went last year only to find they had just taken the ribeye off the menu (like I said, it isn’t a steakhouse if it doesn’t serve ribeye). I was more inclined to try it until we ate Thanksgiving dinner at Toftrees, and if that was a valid indicator, they’re highly overrated.

There’s Alto, where we haven’t yet eaten, but Italian isn’t my first choice for a birthday meal, it’s chi-chi California pinkie-up pseudo-Italian like Faccia Luna (which everybody here loves for some odd reason–they’re impressed that they make their own pasta, like I could care less about that instead of the quality of the food) and I’m suspicious of an Italian restaurant that can’t spell “gnocchi.” I’ve heard good things about Finelli’s, but that’s a 40-minute drive from here, though you can tell by the menu it’s a real Italian restaurant, and not some “Italian bistro” restaurant.

I’d like to try Duffy’s in Boalsburg. It reminds me of the Wayside Inn in Middletown, Virginia. We were going to try it last Memorial Day when we were at the Memorial Day celebration in Boalsburg, but it didn’t happen.

We’ll see. Definitely not the Outback, though (Mr. NYC Educator will be glad to hear that.)

Comment or trackback, as long as you link to here.

An update on that Charleston poll:

And Pajamas Media finally decided to add Fred to their poll:

Interesting.

I thought this was about Battlestar Galactica. After all, the title is “I Can’t Wait Until 2008″ and it links to a video.

Thanks a lot, Hugh. I’ll be in therapy for at least ten years after that.

I saw a news blurb on TV yesterday that said the illiteracy rate was higher in DC than the rest of the nation. Then today, I saw this:

Yesterday, DC Public Schools announced “major” changes to their high school curriculum. At a time when high schools across the country are focusing on improving rigor, offering college credits through early colleges, and holding schools accountable for preparing today’s students for tomorrow’s jobs, DCPS has decided to take a slightly different tact — devalue high school by letting students choose a four or five year track for completion.

Brilliant. One has to wonder if the administrators of the public schools share that unusually high illiteracy rate with the rest of DC.

The Carnival of Education is posted.

Comment or trackback, as long as you link to here.

I saw this on Photon Courier:

But parents are not simply shirking their own responsibility, they are encouraging kids not to take any. “There is a tutor culture [of] parents who don’t let their children fail once in a while. They’re scared it’ll look bad on their record,” says Caleb Rossiter, a professor at American University, who has noticed this trend even on the college level. This semester, he gave a failing grade to a lackadaisical student. The girl’s mother, a lawyer, immediately phoned: “She said, ‘We want to challenge this grade. My daughter can’t afford to flunk.’” When Mr. Rossiter declined to change the girl’s grade, the family asked about finding a tutor. “I said, ‘I am her tutor,’” he laughs. “I have office hours. You’re paying $40,000 a year, and yet your daughter has never once come to see me.”

You’ll find that overall, there is a lot less hand-wringing about helping students at the university than the secondary school. Students are taking their first steps as adults, after all.

You get the full spectrum. Extremely bright students who work hard. Extremely bright students who don’t work much. Extremely bright students who don’t work at all or come to class, and feel that they’re entitled to an A. You get their fairly dim counterparts. And you get the counterparts from the middle of the intelligence range, students who aren’t the brightest bulbs in the chandelier, but aren’t at the low end, either.

My least favorite students–and that’s the understatement of the decade–are the extremely bright students who do nothing and don’t come to class, then invariably complain about their grade and demand that you change it. You can spot them the first week of classes: They’re the ones with the Attitude (that capitalization was intentional), crossing their arms and rolling their eyes. You usually don’t see them after the third week of classes, which is a Good Thing (that capitalization was also intentional).

I feel sorry for the dimmest students, no matter how hard they work. They just don’t belong there, and no matter what they do, they’re going to fail. I don’t let them drop by the side of the road. I do as much for them as any of my students. But semester after semester, it just gets sad. I often wonder why they’re on campus (then, I think of the disasters in the first round of American Idol auditions, and understand that nobody has ever sat them down and tried to guide them into something they could do).

My favorite students are the average to not too far above average intelligence students who are motivated and work their butts off. I’ll do anything to help those students succeed. They know they’re not at the top of the intelligence curve, they know what they want, and they’re willing to work extremely hard to get it. They were the reason I went to that classroom day after day.

These are the students that in many classes fall through the cracks. Many faculty tend to focus on the brightest students and teach to them. The result is that the average, motivated student has to work harder than he should. Most of these students won’t go to graduate or professional school, but they will carry that motivation and work ethic out into the world when they leave the university, and I feel obligated to do what I can to help.

These are the students who come to office hours, and not just before an exam or assignment due date. They have no sense of entitlement, and even when they don’t understand something fairly basic, they really want to understand. So here are some ways I’ve helped them.

Never discuss other students with students

Make no remarks about other students, even in passing. And certainly never make remarks about any student’s intelligence, be it one specific student or the whole class. It’s disrespectful, it’s unprofessional, and it’s disrespectful.

Do refer to problems students are having, and do so frequently. Make it known that if one or two students are having a specific problem, the odds are that many more are as well.

And while I’m on the topic, never discount or dismiss a student’s question, no matter how stupid it is (and of course there are stupid questions–we hear them all the time). Answer all questions clearly, plainly, and respectfully.

Students who aren’t bright know it. They don’t need you to remind them.

Office hours are paramount

It depends on the department, but most require expect ask faculty to hold 2-3 office hours a week. Expand them to 4 hours a week. And if students show up right at the end of office hours, don’t look at your watch and say, “Sorry! Come back next time!” Welcome them in, and work with them as long as they need.

That shouldn’t need saying, but believe me, it does.

Pay close attention to the problems your students have

Use your students’ problems to diagnose what you’re doing. If your students are having trouble understanding, say, Chi-square, ask yourself how you could address it in class to better help them understand. If something works in office hours, start using it in class.

Listen closely to your students when they explain what they don’t understand. Sometimes, what they don’t understand is more fundamental than they realize–or you would realize if you just answered the question. If that’s the case, address the fundamental problem, then work your way back to the original question.

One thing needs to be said. Every teacher’s private hell is when he can’t comprehend why the students doesn’t understand. It happens. Sometimes, you can eventually get over the problem by using a shotgun approach and just randomly trying different explanations. Other times, you can’t. But never assume that’s the situation you’re dealing with unless you have evidence. Probe. Ask. Dig.

Cover high school if you have to

More and more over the last ten years, students have been having problems because they lacked basic math skills. The real problem wasn’t that they couldn’t understand what a NPV was, but that they didn’t have the basic math skills and understanding to understand it.

If that’s the problem, then you have to become a remedial math teacher (or whatever). If your students lack the algebraic skills necessary to learn in your class, you have to teach them those skills. I have had to stop and quickly run through the basic order of precedence because of course Excel does the same, and students won’t know how to do it in class if they don’t understand it in the first place.

And yes, it is your job. It’s certainly also the job of the teachers they had before, but that’s past, and they’re your students now (and if you need to be angry, then be angry at the school system, not the student). Do what you have to do.

Collaborative office hours

If you have several students who want to see you, don’t see them one at a time (unless, of course, the students would prefer to see you alone). My office hours were one big party, with the howling wolf candy dish full of Hershey’s Kisses, M&Ms, Snickers bars, and of course, a big jar of cashews. I’d have them all into the office and encourage them, as I addressed questions, to interrupt with either questions or solutions. You’d be surprised how much insight students have into other students’ heads.

Sometimes, they’ll surprise you by coming up with the best explanation you’ve encountered. Other times, they’ll suddenly put their finger right on the core problem when you didn’t see it.

A secondary advantage is that students appreciate a personable, friendly faculty member who shows that he cares about them and wants them to succeed. Having everybody into the office for office hours and encouraging them to participate sends that message.

Guide!

Student participation and cooperation in office hours works so well because you are there to guide them. I’m a big fan of collaborative and cooperative work in class, provided that it’s applying something they’ve learned and not “discovering” it on their own, but provide guidance.

Students at the top of the intelligence curve don’t do badly with unguided collaborative work. Students at the center and below are not going to gain much unless you are there to guide the collaboration. If you assign group work, don’t sit at your desk and watch them. Migrate from group to group, listen, and respond. If they’re on the wrong track, guide them back.

The problem is that while extremely bright students can usually perceive when they are on the right track, most other students cannot. That’s why you’re there. If you’re doing collaborative work, it should be a lot of work for you. If it isn’t, you’re wasting your and their time.

Hold help sessions

Reserve a room and hold help sessions. How often depends on how much your students are struggling. But you shouldn’t just have help sessions only right before exams or project due dates, because doing so reduces the help session to a practice session for that exam or project.

Hold those help sessions before exams, too. Just call them something else, like exam practice sessions.

Teach to the middle

Yeah, I know, this is going to make people howl, but I’m talking about the university. Students at the low end of the curve are going to either flunk out or drop out. Also, if you’re teaching a grad school seminar, this obviously doesn’t apply.

You (should) want as many of your students as possible to succeed, and in order to accomplish that, you have to teach to the center. When you craft your classroom rhetoric–not what you teach, but how you present what you teach–think of the center, and not the high end of the curve. As those bright students progress through their classes, they’ll get plenty of chances to be the center of attention.

Give your class continuity

Start every class by recalling something you learned earlier that relates in some way to what you’re going to introduce. Provide overt connections; don’t rely on students to make them. As you introduce new material, keep referring back to relevant concepts they’ve already learned. Your presentation of the material should be recursive, repeatedly referring back to previous concepts and using them to explain current ones.

By doing so, you provide your class with continuity and cohesiveness, you reinforce earlier concepts, and you make learning new concepts easier.

Always work from the familiar to the unfamiliar

When I reworked the materials, one of the things I changed first was the pattern used for introducing new material. Yes, it’s a business class, and yes, eventually we’ll get to the business. But you can’t assume that a classroom of freshmen know what NPV is, much less how to calculate it.

Teaching stats provides an excellent example of my point. When introducing descriptive stats, use grades, grade scales, and grade curves. Students are intimately familiar with all of those contexts, so use them. It’s much easier to explain standard deviations in terms of exam scores than revenue stability.

Once students understand the concept, then move outward to the unfamiliar. But always provide familiar contexts when explaining new concepts. Always.

Never suppress students from asking questions or challenging you

If you teach in primary or secondary school, at least the first part of this shouldn’t be news, but you’d be surprised how many university faculty discourage questions in one way or another. Some do it by setting up a highly rigid class format. Some do it by maintaining an overly formal, distant relationship with their students (remember, I said professional, not unfriendly or distant). Some mow down students when they ask questions in class. But however they do it, the result is less learning than could have been.

Make sure students know you want to hear their questions, whenever they have them. Undergrads, freshmen particularly, find the university classroom intimidating, and you need to do whatever you can to relieve that.

Also, make sure students know they can challenge you. Students respect professors who not only respect them, their learning, and their opinions, but encourage discussion and yes, even dissent. Let’s face it. If you’re so insecure about your own knowledge of the topic, you shouldn’t be teaching it.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. Treat your students with respect, and they’ll treat each other and you with respect.

Never lie to your students

If you don’t know the answer to a question, say that you don’t know. Tell the students you’ll research it and get back to them–then research it, and give them an answer. Never try to weasel your way out of a question you can’t answer. Students always know you’re lying. Always.

I’ve seen faculty members who didn’t know the exam date give a date off the top of their heads–the wrong date–when students asked when the exam was. The result of that particular stunt can only be described as disastrous.

Carry office hours and help sessions into class

Helping students is a learning process. You learn what works and what doesn’t, and with what types of students. Just because you understood a particular example or definition doesn’t mean your students will; use them, and not your own experience, to judge how comprehensible your classroom (and office hours) rhetoric is. Don’t view office hours and help sessions as “class for dummies,” but take what you learned and apply it in your classroom. The more you teach, the more you learn from students, and the more of that knowledge you can apply to make your teaching more effective.

Use the explanations, examples, and definitions that worked best with students in the middle of the curve. That way, you’ll get the maximal comprehension.

If students still need help, give it to them

University faculty are salaried employees. We get a specific salary, with no overtime, no calculation of hours, and no sick leave. We are expected to do however much work it takes to get the job done (and thankfully, the academy has so far rejected the “union mentality” as unprofessional). We do not get extra pay for service to the university, the department, the school, or helping students.

If you have students who come to class, work their butts off, come to office hours, and are still struggling, set up additional hours to help them–even if they are students at the low end who will probably drop out before the end of the year. It’s why you’re getting paid, after all. I’ve had students I had into the office after class every day, on top of office hours, because they needed it.

Give frequent assessments

Assessments are more than just grades. Assessments let students know how well they understand the material. Yes, students will often groan, but assess them as frequently as you can, and get them graded and back to them in very short order.

Students often think they understand something when they do not. Frequent assessments make it obvious to students that, in fact, they do not understand, and encourage them to get help.

Don’t handhold, but . . .

Freshmen, and to a lesser extent, sophomores aren’t upperclassmen. Upperclassmen know how the university works, and tend to be jaded. Freshmen and sophomores, especially freshmen, have been plunked down in a completely different learning environment from what they’re used to. The classes often number in the hundreds. They don’t go to class every day, or see the professor every day. They often (more often these days) have to deal with a sudden, marked increase in class work and reading assignments.

Freshmen are unsure of themselves or what’s going on. They need to be eased into the university classroom.

Do everything you can to show your students you care. Students aren’t idiots. They know you’re human, and you have bad days. But always be personable, friendly, welcoming, respectful, and yes, professional. If students know you care, they’re more likely to come to you for help when they need it. If they know you want them to ask questions, they’re more likely to come to you for help. If they know you graciously and professionally respond to challenged and never lie to them, they’re more likely to come to you for help.

I’ll leave you with this thought: You’re not being paid to teach classes. You’re being paid to do everything you can to help your students learn. If helping your students isn’t “in your job description,” you have no business being allowed anywhere near a classroom.

The nutty SF Board of Supervisors took time out from passing bills proclaiming solidarity with head-chopping terrorists to fight a true enemy: Plastic bags!

Legislation to require the use of compostable or recyclable bags by grocery stores in San Francisco was expanded Thursday to cover large pharmacy chains operating in the city.

Extending the reach of a grocery bag ordinance introduced by one of her colleagues, District 2 Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier won approval of an amendment Thursday to cover drugstores as well, saying she wanted to eliminate most of the 180 million plastic bags distributed annually in the city by markets, pharmacies and other businesses.

Awful! But wait:

At the meeting Thursday, District 4 Supervisor Ed Jew said he opposes the legislation because any added costs it imposes on grocers and drugstores would be passed along to consumers.

“Many people in my district can’t believe we are spending so much time talking about plastic bags,” he added.

Stop the presses! There are rational human beings in SF!

And in other Bay Area news of moonbattery:

Last year, the University of California announced that it was going to build a new athletic training facility next to Memorial Stadium at the eastern edge of the Berkeley campus. Unfortunately, in order to build the facility as planned, the University must remove several oak trees that are currently growing on the site.

For reasons that are not entirely clear, local activists have seized on the fate of the “Memorial Oak Grove” as the cause du jour, and a vigorous campaign has been launched to stop the project and save the trees. To that end, protesters have been actually living in the trees since December of 2006, alternating in shifts every few days or weeks. The controversy has received an inordinate amount of media coverage.

Having spent many years in Bloomington, I am quite familiar with moonbattus treesquattus, commonly known as the tree-sitting varietal of envirowackjob moonbat. They usually take moonbatty names, like Tracy “Dolphin” McNeely, who was one of the Bloomington nutjobs’ heroes after perching in a tree to stop low-income housing from being built (trees are so much more important than people, particularly in Bloomington, where there are so damned many trees you could cut every other one down and nobody would notice). However, as far as I know, they never decided to hug trees naked in Bloomington.

They did at Berkeley (and no, the link isn’t work safe). And if you think this is a joke, the TreeSpirit Project website is here.

I’m starting to think maybe there should be a law against going to college before you turn thirty.

Jules Crittenden proposes Moron Offsets–and gives a long list of candidates.

Thanks to Don Surber for pointing out this poll (still open):

Hmmmm . . .

It’s unlikely that you’ll find yourself in southern Indiana. Most of it is accessible only from two-lane state highways, and these days, nobody goes anywhere unless there’s an exit off an interstate. That’s really too bad, because southern Indiana is beautiful, and there are some great places to eat there.

If you’re down by Amish country in Daviess, Martin, and Orange counties, head down through Loogootee (that’s pronounced luh-GOH-tee, not lu-GU-tee) toward Washington (watch for buggies). Halfway between the two is a small town (population: 368) named Montgomery. Montgomery is home to the Gasthof Amish Village, where you can buy quilts and furniture (yes, of course, it’s authentic). There is also a restaurant there, with amazing food (make sure you do not miss the pie), open seven days a week. Because of Amish religious restrictions, Mennonites staff the restaurant (you can tell, you know, by the clothing, particularly the style of cap women wear). Astoundingly great food.

Should you find yourself in Dubois county further to the south, head to Jasper, home of the largest gun club in the state of Indiana (also home to the largest car dealership in the state of Indiana, Uebelhor Motors–pronounced EE-bel-hor,), and a city by the standards of that part of Indiana (population: 12,000). If you’re there in the first week of August, go to the Strassenfest. While you’re there, you might want to check out St. Joseph’s, one of the three large Catholic churches in Jasper; it was built on a foundation of four huge trees, one at each corner. Jasper is a beautiful town, sparkling clean (not that I want to promote stereotypes or anything), with lovely homes. Do not leave without a trip to the Jasper City Bakery, at least for a loaf of the rye. When you get hungry, turn toward Ferdinand from downtown Jasper, and on your left is the Schnitzelbank (or the Schnitz, as the locals call it). The decor is pure kitsch, but the food is remarkable. I always get the sauerbraten, and the German fries are just like we ate at home (anywhere you stop to eat in that part of Indiana is likely to have both American fries and German fries on the menu; American fries are fried potatoes, and German fries are fried potatoes with lots of onions in them).

Speaking of German fries, fried in general, and Dubois county, the best fried chicken in the world is in Ireland, just down the road from Jasper, at the Chicken Place (really). The German fries are as good as those at the Schnitz, and the German potato salad is even better. Being Germans, they serve beer in ridiculously large quantities. Try it in a schooner.

Mathies (no website) in Dubois (population: 1600), halfway between Jasper and French Lick, also has great fried chicken and steaks. They also serve beer in ridiculously large vessels.

The Benedictine Archabbey at St. Meinrad, south of Jasper, is worth the trip to see the church alone (try to stay for Mass; hearing the monks sing Gregorian chants is a heavenly experience). The archabbey is self-supporting, and the monks used to make and sell a huge variety of regional German sausages and cheeses. I am sad to report that they no longer do. If you go to the archabbey, be aware that many groups (even Protestants) from around the state go there for retreats, and you likely won’t be the only visitors.

We used to eat at the Villager in French Lick (actually it’s in West Baden, but only locals know the difference) partly because it was one of only three local restaurants (except for the hotel), partly because it was the best of the three, and partly because my parents were good friends of the owners. They always did have good, homestyle food there, but I can’t vouch for it because I haven’t eaten there in . . . oh . . . over thirty years. But it is still there.

If you like the outdoors, visit Patoka Lake, about halfway between French Lick and Jasper (it’s visible on the map below). Our farm (well, we sold it) was right on Patoka, lakeside property. Next to the Patoka Lake is Tillery Hill, one of the most popular destinations for hunters in deer season. Both the French Lick and West Baden hotels have been renovated, and are open. I haven’t seen the renovated French Lick hotel (it never went out of business like the West Baden hotel did), but the West Baden hotel is something to see. And if you’re into that sort of thing, there’s a casino there.

If you’re interested in visiting the area, click on the small map below to get the large readable one (the red stars mark Montgomery and Jasper). Be aware that the terrain is very hilly, and the roads are curvy and tend to be narrow–and locals drive 70 on them (just in case you wonder why people are whizzing past you when you’re driving 30).

Comment or trackback, as long as you link to here.

Comment or trackback, as long as you link to here.

How do I now? Because he said this:

I think I need to reach for the duct tape and wrap my head, because if I see one more editorial calling for someone to figure out what practices help schools succeed, my head is going to explode.

And the duct tape meme is Beck’s. Read the whole thing: We know what works!

Yesterday on a tip from Rory (by the way, if you didn’t hop over there and read his article, you really should do it now to see what an insufferable bozo Superintendent RainSpirit is), I saw that Superintendent SnowJob claimed that he had eradicated the white/minority (or should that be non-minority/minority, or perhaps privileged/minority?) achievement gap in Madison’s schools, and being the skeptical sort (particularly when it comes to Wisconsin and education), I hopped over to the state ed site and found the data, just to check, mind.

To refresh your memory, this is what I found:

Or for more “visual” learning types:

Not being the sort to toss around value judgments–because that would be judgmental, and I am never judgmental–I suggested that perhaps Superintendent SnowGlobe stop smoking whatever it is he’s smoking and take a refresher course in third-grade arithmetic (there was another suggestion, but for the life of me, I can’t remember what it was).

This morning, I realized that my thinking had been sorrowfully linear, and I fear not very nuanced, because after all, it’s quite possible that there is no achievement gap in Superintendent RainGoddess’s perception of reality. So I sought to discover Pope Superintendent RainTree’s perception of reality, in order to discover the root cause of why he would have made such a claim (other than trying to get a little press and more money, that is).

I rejected the patriarchal, thrusting, penis-waving, serial-raping rational weltanschauung I so lamentably held, and got in touch with my inner Mother Earth Goddess and that matriarchal, nurturing, feelings-based, victimized, non-linear mode of thought. And when I finally had become one in spirit with my Inner Lesbian Earth Goddess, I realized that perhaps what Superintendent RainGaia had meant to say was that compared to the state of Wisconsin, he had singlehandedly (apparently with some divine inspiration) closed the gap. So back to the site I went, in search of the demographic data for the whole state of Wisconsin (same year, same grade level, same reading proficiency score):

See? I was right, and so was Superintendent Snowjob! Just look at the chart:

Er, wait. It looks like my Inner Treehugger led me astray somehow (funny that–I wonder why?) Still being in touch with my Inner She Yoga Guru, I again searched for the greater truth of Superintendent RainSpew’s narrative, and realized (again rejecting that penis-thrusting linear thinking for more nurturing nuanced thinking feeling), I had an aha! experience while singing a rousing chorus of We Shall Overcome! and wishing that I had a vagina so I could “dialogue” with it, you know, like in the Vagina Monologues (yes, I could “dialogue” with my penis, but that would be rude and patriarchal and linear, and who talks to his penis, anyway?)

“I know!” I thought felt, “Our Divine Lordship Superintendent SnowBunny has closed the achievement gap in retention!” (Yes, it did occur to me that “achievement” and “retention” are two different though related things, and that Our Good Superintendent should have said “retention gap,” but that’s perilously close to thinking linearly, and we need nuanced thinking feeling.) So I looked up Madison’s retention rate data (here for all grades, 2003-2004) and found this:

Or for the numerically-challenged:

Hmmmm. That can’t be it, can it? Notably fewer white privileged students were held back retained than minority students oppressed students the victims of our racist, classist, patriarchal, institutionalized oppression.

This Inner Earth Mother stuff just wasn’t working, so I got back in touch with my Inner Duke Lacrosse Player, ditched the nurturing feelings, and went back to thinking. And I think I was on the right track yesterday.

Put the crack pipe down now, Superintendent RainSpout, and back away from the drugs, slowly. When you get out of rehab, you’re going on lithium and doing a stint in Miss Apple’s third-grade math class.

Oh. And this guy is on the same drugs.

There has been much ballyhooing and moaning and sobbing and blubbering lately about this:

BOSTON (Reuters) - Harvard University’s undergraduate tuition will rise 3.9 percent next year to $31,456, increasing at a pace nearly double the U.S. rate of inflation, a Harvard statement showed on Wednesday.

The total cost of tuition, room, board and student services fees at the Ivy League school will rise 4.5 percent in the 2007 academic year to $45,620, Harvard said.

The total cost for a year at the oldest U.S. institution of higher learning is almost double the average undergraduate tuition at a private U.S college, according to figures compiled by the U.S. Department of Education.

So? It’s Harvard, not Bumwad Community College. If you can’t afford it, go someplace else. Oh but wait. You probably can afford it:

More than two-thirds of Harvard’s entering class receives financial aid including scholarships and loans, while more than half qualify for scholarship assistance and an average total aid package of close to $34,000.

That brings the average cost of a Harvard tuition down to about $12,000, the Cambridge, Massachusetts university said.

I doubt you can find a state-supported school that offers financial aid to two-thirds of its entering freshmen. But from all the blubbering, you’d think people are entitled to go to Harvard (instead of Bumwad Community College) if they want.

Harvard gave no reason for the higher tuition.

Good for Harvard. They owe nobody an explanation. Harvard is a private school. They can charge whatever they like. Certainly, they can price themselves out of the market, but they have quite a way to go before that happens.

What a lot of whiny drivel.

Ken sent me these data. Observe:

And for chart fans:

Disclaimer: The raw reading score is meaningless to me. However, I think the contrast is fascinating. Draw your own conclusions.

On the dependably nutty Slate magazine: The Hostile New Age Takeover of Yoga. No, I’m not making this up–go see for yourself. Why make anything up? These nutcases parody themselves. Slate is an endless source of amusing moonbattery.

Oh, I love the subtitle: “There’s nothing worse than narcissism posing as humility.” What could be more narcissistic than squatting in an incense-filled room contemplating the waves of chi energy emanating from your belly-button chakra as you search for self-enlightenment?

AUM!

Now, where did I put that patchouli . . .

Update: Link corrected (thanks, Rory).

I saw this over on Rory’s site:

Today, [Superintendent] Rainwater said, no statistical achievement gap exists between the 25,000 white and minority students in Madison’s schools.

Given the apparent inability of Wisconsin’s educrats to interpret data (see here and here), I thought I’d check for myself–after all, that’s quite a claim the superintendent is making. It took a few minutes to find the data (they aren’t on the download page with the other data, but with the reports), but find it, I did–and these are Wisconsin’s data (which no doubt explains why the data for each group don’t add up to 100%):

Let’s look at Superintendent Rainwater’s statement again:

Today, [Superintendent] Rainwater said, no statistical achievement gap exists between the 25,000 white and minority students in Madison’s schools.

And let’s compare it with the data. Only 54% of the black students are proficient or above. Only 55% of the Hispanic students are proficient and above. And only 91% of the white students are proficient or above.

See? No achievement gap!

And for those who really love charts (since the data didn’t add up to 100%, I subtracted % proficient+ from 100 to get % proficient-):

So unless Superintendent Rainwater has some special definition of "statistical achievement gap" or "minority students," I’d say he needs to put down the bong and retake third-grade arithmetic (and perhaps Wisconsin might stop hiring educrats named Rainwater, Dolphin, or SpiritWomon). Of course, that’s a friendly suggestion, and not a value judgment. I would never make a value judgment. That would be judgmental.

Thanks to Ms. Cornelius, I saw this:

Yesterday, the St. Louis City Public Schools was officially stripped of its accreditation and placed under the control of the state.

But it gets . . . interesting:

St. Louis school students ended their five-day sit-in at City Hall this afternoon after announcing they would take their concerns to Jefferson City this week.

Is it not, uh, telling that the students were having a sit-in for five days instead of being in class? You don’t think there could be a relationship between students’ having a sit-in instead of being in class and the city’s schools’ losing their accreditation, do you?

Ms. Cornelius has this to say:

Some teachers and adults supported the sit-in, apparently as clueless as the students themelves about the fact that the STATE Board of education, not the mayor of St. Louis, makes decisions about accreditation.

But if you’re passing joints and singing kumbayah at a sit-in instead of going to class–or if you’re a teacher and you encourage your students to pass joints and sing kumbayah at a sit-in instead of going to class–why would you know anything except all the words to Imagine?

Interestingly, the sit-in ended before this week’s spring break holiday from classes.

I believe this is known as being “socially aware.” So to speak.

Jules Crittenden is insensitive–entertainingly so.

Comment or trackback, as long as you link to here.

Free Born John says from across the pond:

300 the movie continues its surge at the box office:

… the battle epic “300″ took the No. 1 spot for the second-straight weekend with $31.2 million, according to studio estimates Sunday.

The Warner Bros. movie, the story of vastly outnumbered Spartans defending against Persian invaders, shot past the $100 million mark after just a week in theaters, bringing its total to $127.5 million.

Note to British film industry - make a fucking action film.

Is it just me, or is it hard to wrap your brain around the concept of a British action film? The closest thing I can think of is MI-5 (Spooks in the UK), and by “action film” standards (or in this case, “action TV” standards), it’s pretty tame. In fact, that’s the only British show I can think of in which I’ve seen an armed law enforcement officer — I mean, I like Waking the Dead, but cops who are scared to death of guns? And when one of the characters gets killed, the show completely misses the point that had she been (ahem) armed as law enforcement officers are supposed to be, she would probably be (ahem) alive?

Good morning, Britain! And was your coma restful?

Jonah Goldberg:

Edwards is a saint when he drops out. Edwards is a saint when he doesn’t. I don’t have a major problem with the sentiments of either post taken individually, but taken together, we can now see that the intervals between self-contradictory statements by Sullivan has fallen to a mere 22 minutes. Pretty soon the ends of his sentences will contradict the beginnings.

The government encouraged them.

Susan Estrich remembers Cathy.

And I’m not exaggerating. You’ve been warned.

Why the death penalty needs to be expanded beyond murder.

Comment or trackback, as long as you link to here.

If you recall, I ran a statistical analysis of Wisconsin’s reading proficiency stats, and found that Madison’s Reading First schools could not validly claim that they had raised their proficiency levels. That analysis, of course, rested upon the assumption that Wisconsin had not changed their standards between 98-99 and 04-05, an assumption Ken DeRosa challenged:

As the NAEP data clearly shows, the Wisconsin’s proficiency exam standards did change between 1998 and 2005. NAEP scores declined slightly, while the Wisconsin scores magically skyrocketed. Suspiciously so.

So I went in search of the NAEP data. All I found were reports (though as SLOOOOOOW as the website was responsing, by the time I found the reports I had lost patience with finding raw data):

And the descriptive stats for the data Wisconsin reports:

Note that we’re dealing with two different variables here. The NAEP reports scores, while Wisconsin reported the percentage of students who scored in the different proficiency levels (I analyzed proficient and above). So these data are not directly comparable.

However, this discrepancy is troubling. It appears that Ken is right. The only way we can reconcile the drop in NAEP scores and the increase in proficiency levels in Wisconsin is to assume that they changed their standards (definitions of proficiency levels).

Unless Wisconsin has another explanation (and I cannot think of one), it appears that they fudged their data.

Comment or trackback, as long as you link to here.

Cathy Seipp has passed away.