Tuesday, January 27, 2015

Views from the Hot Seat...: An Attempt at Flattery

Views from the Hot Seat...: An Attempt at Flattery: In tribute to my good friend Dick Farrell, columnist for The Bargain Hunter and retired editor of The Times-Reporter , I am attempting to e...

Monday, January 19, 2015

An Attempt at Flattery

In tribute to my good friend Dick Farrell, columnist for The Bargain Hunter and retired editor of The Times-Reporter, I am attempting to emulate his writing style where he offers insight on a few topics each week, a style I thoroughly enjoy reading.

*I am confused by the constantly varying numbers reflecting unemployment throughout our country--one report indicates that the numbers are up, another that they are declining. Yet other reports state that the economy is rebounding, but conflicting views differ on that as well. Given this confusion, I have a question: How much of the unemployment statistics are reflective of those who have failed drug tests or have been let go because of a problem with attendance? Just the other day as I sat at the traffic light in downtown New Philadelphia, the local Mancan hiring agency had five job openings plastered on their windows, positions they evidently were having a hard time filling. When I pick up The Times-Reporter, The Bargain Hunter, and The Canton Repository, I daily see job openings available. While I understand that a select population exists that is not qualified for or interested in certain positions, I cannot help but believe that jobs are out there if someone is willing to work. I have talked to several friends in hiring positions expressing that they, too, are frustrated by an ever-increasing workforce pool that really does not want to work. An investigative look at those percentages would provide an enlightening perspective. Until then, I will remain skeptical about feeling great sympathy for those unable to find work.

*As indicated in a recent article in The Times-Reporter, the debate over improving the quality of Dover High School is still an issue. Without duplicating the divide, I would like to share my story. Twenty-two years ago I was hired at Dover; until that time, I had taught in two other local districts. Within a year of my hiring, I began to experience headaches, constant noserunning, sneezing, . . . you get the picture. At the advice of my family physician, I visited an ear/nose/throat specialist who determined after giving me the sample testing that I was allergic to dogs, cats, grass, trees,  . . . pretty much a whole slew of allergies. I questioned that diagnosis because I was mowing five lawns, had frequently been outside on a regular basis, had pets, and had never been allergic to anything in my life. Nonetheless, I ultimately accepted his diagnosis and thus began weekly shots that lasted for several years and shifts between Claritin and other allergy aids that really did not work overly well. Sparing additional details, I can safely say that my situation showed little if any improvement. However, when I retired in June 2013, my problems disappeared. Every fall and spring prior to my retirement, I had faced the same issues. But, Fall 2013, Spring 2014, and Fall 2014 brought different results: My supposed "allergies" were gone! The only difference in my life was that I was no longer in Dover High School. I suppose one could argue that it was merely coincidence, which I believed the first fall I was out, but after now having gone through three seasons, I can confidently state that the air quality in that building was a significant contributor to my problems. No, I cannot prove it, but if my anecdotal evidence is sufficient, I will calmly attest that the air quality in that building is causing problems for more people than just me. Again, it would be interesting to hear if anyone else has had a similar experience. As I wrote this paragraph, I wondered if anybody was thinking he's just a sissy who's complaining about his runny nose . . . whatever . . . I stand by my experience.

*As I teach my college classes, I find it necessary to work with kids on their understanding of how grammar can tie-in with their writing. Reading paper after paper and sentence after sentence that follows the same repetitive pattern can be somewhat monotonous for any reader; thus, the challenge becomes trying to get students to understand how they can control the language through use of sentence variety. I can teach them those specifics, but I contend that if students would read quality writing such as that found in Sports Illustrated or Time, for example, they would see what effective writing actually looks like.

*For parents who are interested in helping their kids prepare for college writing, allow me to offer two key points: (1) Learn how to understand arguments and how to argue effectively--this can be accomplished in many ways but one is to read the columns of syndicated writers such as Cal Thomas, Gene Lyons, Kathleen Parker, and many others whose works are found in our local paper. It is not important that the readers agree with the writers; what is important is to see how those writers have structured and supported their arguments; that is what college freshman writing is all about: understanding arguments. (2) As alluded to previously, learn to control the language. All those grammar/usage classes taken throughout students' education are important. As the old Midas Muffler commercials used to say, "Pay me now, or pay me later." Later is when students get to college and have to prove that they belong at the college level. When kids receive low scores or do not return to school, one of the causes is that they simply cannot handle the expectation of writing well . . . something to think about, Mom and Dad.

Ok, Mr. Farrell, that completes my version of your favorite style. While it pales in comparison, take it as a compliment--your writing style has been welcomed by many, in particular this boy.

Friday, January 9, 2015

Thursday, January 8, 2015

If There Is No Change, There Is No Change . . .

For months, I have sat on the sidelines and heard the Common Core debate, shaking my head in amazement and bewilderment about what has gradually evolved into a political issue. From my seat, I have heard and read others persistently saying that "Obama did this" and "it's just another example of politicians ruining things." To understand my confusion, please read as I offer an insight that few others can share.

Let me begin by stating this point: For years, I have listened while others have criticized today's education, students, and teachers. What I have heard is that kids do not know much, that they cannot do much math, and that their writing skills are terrible. In short, frequently, I hear how education is bad today and the reasons usually are pointed in the teachers' direction. So, attempting to use a bit of logical reasoning, if employers and other adults are saying the current educational system does not work, perhaps we should advocate for a change. Given that logic, readers might agree that establishing a common set of basic standards that all kids are to be taught may be a beginning point for improving students' learning: a "common core."

Another overlooked point is this: What has been taught across the country certainly has varied from state to state, district to district, school to school, and even building to building. As a result, in my high school teaching years, it was not unusual for kids to transfer in from other school districts (perhaps due to parental moves, open enrollment, or expulsion from other schools) who even though they had been enrolled in similar classes were considerably behind (or occasionally ahead of) what we were doing not only in my class but in various ones across the curriculum. In short, no commonality existed. Today's Common Core standards in English and math are an attempt to address that.

To further solidify my claim, I must also share a vital piece of information. Approximately six years ago, I was invited to attend a meeting (along with approximately twenty other English teachers from throughout the state) that was held at the Ohio School of the Deaf in Columbus. The meeting's purpose was to begin discussing the establishment of a "common" set of standards to improve our students' learning. At that meeting, we were clearly informed that this was a directive of the Ohio Department of Education (the department that was conducting this particular meeting) and that it was not a political issue. I paid attention during that meeting, so trust me when I say that the issues discussed had nothing to do with outside political influence. Thus, when I read of various legislators attempting to convince Ohio citizens that this is political onslaught, when I read the literature of opponents (who amusingly had a misspelled word in their literature that they distributed!), and when I read letters to the editor or blogs that criticize the core, I realize how powerful the loudest voice in the room can be. Again, I repeat: I was at the first meeting regarding the core--it had nothing to do with political agendas. It was and continues to be an attempt to improve education!

Without a doubt, a few readers may stop reading right this instant and say something negative about me, the writer, because they do not agree with me. Ok, I get that, but let's again talk about logic, not emotion. Many who complain about education today, I am afraid, are under the fantasy belief that they were great students taught by great teachers so they received great educations. I am not directing any disrespect toward the teaching, but I am pointing out that perhaps we all were not all as effective students as we like to remember ourselves being, a point I have addressed in other blog entries. We have all heard the oft-repeated cry of "it's a changing world" to the point where we tire of hearing it. Additionally, many will say that "we ought to go back to when schools taught only the basics." My friends, somewhere in there the basics have been misguided, for what reasons I can only speculate. Again, my point: The Common Core is an attempt to equalize education for students in English and math--what is the problem with addressing a weakness? If math and English are not currently considered weaknesses for graduates, then why do complaints from employers and other adults continue? Should we address the issue, or should we bury our heads and act like we should continue doing what we "have always done"? Again, please consider my logic--throw the emotion out the door and think about solutions . . . anybody can complain, but what is the best way to improve our kids' learning? Any legitimate suggestions jump to your minds?

 I entitled this entry "If there is no change, there is no change" as a thought-provoker. I could tell you that I created those words from the top of my head, but I confess to stealing them from a poem I read long ago, one with simple words and striking power. The "core" reflects this logic: like practically everything (including the Browns, Cavs, and Indians), we all want improvement--education is in the same boat. If we are going to continue progressing as a society, we need to identify problem areas, assess them, and provide solutions. Of course, not everyone is going to agree with the solutions-- human nature at its finest--but, at the least, solutions are being advanced. Simply retreating to the "way we used to do them" is not a feasible option in most situations. In this case, I do not see retreating as productive. I do believe in the Common Core because I understand its roots. Obviously, change is not easy and usually it is not immediately productive, but in the long term change is sorely needed. My hope is that in addition to softening the emotion, we allow the new standards to become implemented, to be taught, to be allowed to prosper. I have to believe we are intelligent enough to understand that logic.