Views from the Hot Seat...: Difficult Times Ahead?

Views from the Hot Seat...: Difficult Times Ahead?: How do we plug the drain?   I am not referencing plumbing or politics. Instead, I am referring to two key areas, both of which cannot l...

Difficult Times Ahead?

How do we plug the drain?

 

I am not referencing plumbing or politics. Instead, I am referring to two key areas, both of which cannot live without the other: middle/high school sports and officials. Both appear to be suffering, and I fear that unless the problems are soon rectified, interscholastic athletics as we know them today will be drastically altered in the near future. Trust me, I am not enjoying my commentary on these matters because I hold school competition quite dear to my heart. After spending pretty much a lifetime being involved as either a player, coach, or a referee, I find it quite difficult to turn my back and take a nonchalant attitude toward what I see brewing. Here is the two-pronged dilemma:

 

#1: Decreasing Youth Participation and #2 Decreasing numbers of officials.

 

#1: I am increasingly concerned as I view basketball box scores and talk with coaches about numbers of students unwilling to continue their participation in competitive school athletics. What began alarming me a few years ago was when I noticed that various schools could no longer field girls' junior varsity teams. This past fall I was further incensed when one local school district was not certain if it would have enough kids to even present a boys' varsity team; fortunately, a team was gathered and is competing this winter. Like many, though, my question is Why? How can an area like our Valley, one that is rich in basketball tradition and success, be faced with this lack of interest? Allow me to theorize possible causes:

     A. The standard line, of course, is that kids are different today, not willing to accept a commitment and live by it. Definitely, that plays a role but certainly is not the only reason. Kids dedicate themselves to so many different activities, so the commitment argument has merit, but much more contributes to this issue.

     B.  Travel teams and youth organized sports definitely play roles. For whatever reason, the brainwashing that kids must participate on organized teams as young as possible has been allowed to grow . . .and fester. While I suppose if I were a parent of a kid whom I envisioned was going to be a star, I would probably want him/her to continue to improve. However, the racket of travel teams has typically evolved into a cash cow for the organizers, regardless of the sport. In fact, this weekend over 4000 youths participated in Canton, Ohio, for the World Youth Football Championships . . .chi ching . . .I hear the cash registers from here! However, recognize that the kids who dominate most travel teams are the ones whose parents can afford it, with occasional exceptions. The downside, of course, is if kids are in organized, coached sports at a young age, the risk increases that the kids simply tire of sports, coaches, and competition as they often realize that their skill levels frequently equate to "average" as they grow. Additionally, kids who simply had not physically developed at young ages face an almost hidden rejection, thus losing interest. Again, this is not the whole issue, but it has to be part of it.

     C.  Parental pressure on both kids and coaches can destroy kids' enthusiasm for school sports. If parents continue to  criticize kids' performances and coaches' perceived slights, most kids will not want to subject themselves to that personal embarrassment. Parents may rationalize it by claiming that they are merely trying to encourage their kids, but I seriously doubt if most kids see it the same way.

     D.  Coaches' increasing demands in multiple sports put kids in awkward situations; for example, if the coach in one sport demands increased off-season time while another coach is doing the same, kids frequently say their lives will be easier if not trying to balance those two or three sports. Believe me, I understand why coaches do that--to be successful in an environment where the competition is getting better requires other coaches to do the same. However, every now and then kids will say they are quitting one sport to focus on another. Coupled with the number of "skills academies" that continuously surface, kids often envision glimpses of themselves as standout collegiate and even professional players--whether it is legit or not. Perhaps another part of the equation is that coaches themselves put pressure on kids and may not appreciate that they are even doing it.
     E.  Pay-to-Play is often cited as a major deterrent to kids' participation; I have trouble buying that school of thought in this era where we buy kids expensive cell phones, pay elevated prices for AAU, JO, and private instruction--seems like an excuse to me, yet it may also play a limited role in lack of numbers.

     F.  Losing is contagious, and, frequently, if kids have been exposed to much losing, a heightened awareness that sports = losing may begin to override the fun and benefits of being on a middle/high school team. If losing becomes the norm, it takes a special kid and a special coach to override that equation. To best understand, refer above to letter A--accepting that commitment may go against many kids' determination to overcome such an obstacle.

 

Here's the deal: several schools in our valley today are struggling to get kids to remain involved. What must be attacked is the reason why. In solving any problem, of course, we seldom look in the mirror. Perhaps piecing together a puzzle of the causes may help lead to a solution. While this may have already happened (I hope so), perhaps affected schools could begin a collaboration with parents to seek input on what can be done to alleviate the problem. If not, I fear that schools will be dropping various sports in the near future . . . so get ready for the screams to begin then!

 

#2: The average age of officials in all sports in Ohio athletics today is 52, an alarming number. Typical officiating classes for incoming officials in our area have fewer than 5 participants, and that is in a good year. Bottom line is that individuals do not want to officiate. Reasons why are certainly varied, but I am convinced that most adults find it easier to be critical of officials than to make themselves get involved in the game. Running the risk of "back in the day" stories, I make my point. When I was in college, I took a coaching basketball class as a freshman; included in that curriculum was a presentation by an official who laid out the process for becoming a referee. I was interested in it, pursued it, and soon became a rookie official. Arriving at that destination was not easy, however, because I had to study the rule book "inside and out," learn the rules, and master--as much as possible--the details associated with officiating. Simply stated, it was not an easy task, but what I truly learned was how much about the game that I did not know or had not even considered. It was a humbling experience, believe me, but as the years went by, I found my confidence increasing, my understanding growing, and my enjoyment surpassing any expectations I had. In short, I loved it--the camaraderie with fellow officials, coaches, and players only re-enforced that I wanted to be involved with kids and sports for my career. Also, the money was not over-the-top, but I rarely felt I was underpaid; for me, the benefits far outweighed the negatives.

 

My point in telling my story is that I was not afraid to accept a new challenge, even one that put me in the firing line of coaches and fans. The truth is those experiences helped me when I did become a coach . . .no regrets. Using my experience as my litmus test, I struggle with why young people--specifically former athletes--will not accept the challenge of contributing to the preservation of youth sports. Maybe it is because they are reluctant to endure the antics of fans and coaches, maybe it is because they feel it is an infringement on their time, maybe they do not think the money is worth their time, or maybe they just feel they are above it. Regardless of the reasoning, middle/high school sports are at a critical juncture: if new officials do not emerge and "pay their dues," we should not be alarmed when games are cancelled due to no officials being available or only one official does the game because no one else is available. While the problem is growing, I am convinced most fans either disregard it or are not even aware of its severity. My appeal is to those former high school athletes who still have an interest in sports: you need money, you like competition, you want to stay in shape, you want a challenge--Get Involved! Without your taking the plunge, the future is looking quite murky.

 

High school sports are a key lifeline of a community--we cannot take them for granted. Periodically, I hear people talking about how so many others just don't care about a variety of issues, such as reading a newspaper or taking the initiative to vote; perhaps, though, if our beloved sports begin getting impacted, our attention may be slapped, and we may appreciate the beauty of middle/high school athletics!

 

I Plead Ignorance

I am a bit perplexed today as I continue my quest to fully understand the political maneuverings of the times. As we all know, after much partisanship posturing, a new Supreme Court Justice has been seated . . . hooray. Like so many, I have no definitive knowledge whether the Democrats staged a last-minute sabotage or the Republicans pulled a fast one--I know what I read and what I hear. I suppose that is the beauty of not being affiliated with either party because my vision is not warped by party allegiance, so I can attempt to view issues through a clear glass . . . sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn't. On Sunday evening's 60 Minutes, as I watched Senators Susan Collins and Heidi Heitkamp explain their respective votes for and against the nominee in question, I was convinced that both clearly, intelligently, and logically explained their reasoning--both had definitely done their homework and voted their conscience. I applauded both for their careful consideration and, from my seat, relatively unbiased choices. Regardless of which way the overall vote went, chaos was going and will continue to emerge . . . the can of worms has been opened.

 

With all that said, though, I am not sure that I understand a term that has been debated for and argued against. Until I have a clear understanding of this powerful word, I will remain skeptical of just exactly what is motivating this fight among political opponents:

 

                                                                     What is a Conservative?

 

 Constantly, I have been bombarded with this term. Statements such as "Finally we are guaranteed a Conservative Supreme Court for many years," "No more of these damn liberal rulings," . . . are two personal ones I have heard in the last four days. However, when I asked a Conservative friend to tell me what a Conservative is, the response was "I don't know, but I am one." My counter response was "What the hell do you mean?" The conversation ended.

 

Allow me to think aloud for a few moments: Does being a Conservative mean that our country is perhaps headed to "a return to the good ol' days" where lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgenders no longer will have equal rights? Where attempts to balance racial equality will revert to yesteryear's standards? Where immigration will take a turn to "how it should be"? I am asking these questions--as stated in my title--because I am seriously ignorant of what "Conservative" means. My friends, I await clarification--please educate me.

 

On another political observation, we adults really have a way of screwing up situations, but I am not sure that we even know it. Because of my involvement with young people for a lifetime, I certainly would love to see the younger generation become immersed in knowledge and understanding of the political process. However, my observations are that so many just surrender and truly do not care. When they see a political establishment dominated primarily by seasoned politicians who are somewhat "long in the tooth," we would hope that the younger generation would recognize the respect those people deserve due to their longevity and devotion to the American cause. Unfortunately, what I suspect the young folks see is a bunch of decrepit old people--primarily white men--who ooze power and control and need to retire to the comfort of their home districts. In short, the constant bickering, accusations, and beat downs have done nothing to advance arguments; rather, they simply have turned off younger people, and, I suspect, many of the "not so young," as well.

 

Let's not kid ourselves: The more divided we are, the more divided we will remain. Waiting for a Wonder Woman or Superman candidate is getting harder with each passing day. As we continue to place blame on "the other side," the gap widens. As that fissure hardens, so many Americans of all ages are becoming less interested. For several years, I have advocated that the formation of a third political party holds the key for advancement, not merely survival of the political process.

 

I suppose it is a mute point: The younger generation doesn't really care . . . and it's our fault.

Our Voice Is Gone

The voice of the valley is gone . . . and I have lost another buddy.

 

Part of Tuesday evening, I attended calling hours at Dover's Toland-Herzig Funeral Home paying respects to the family of a good friend, Dick Farrell, who had lost his battle with Father Time. A sad occasion, of course, yet a celebration of a man who lived life his way, pedal to the metal with a soft underbelly that he was not afraid to show . . . if one knew him well.

 

In many ways, he was a man's man, a stereotypical ol' newspaper man who could smoke and drink with the best of  'em. He cherished interacting with others, loved conversation, held strong beliefs, possessed a humility allowing him "to agree to disagree" without affecting friendships, and remained loyal to his friends. Of course, he loved the newspaper business, but he recognized long ago that its future ran contrary to its past . . . to survive required a technological wizardry, and he was astute enough to plunge head on into learning the computer world.  

 

Saddened by the changing journalistic era, he understood--and reflected upon--how the world as he knew it was changing. Ultimately, he left the paid world of journalism and began writing his blogs, visible on Facebook and Twitter. While many of his generation despised those social media outlets, he embraced them, permitting him to offer his perspective of the world through a newer medium  . . . and for that so many of us are so grateful.

 

With that background now provided, allow me to describe the Dick Farrell I will remember:

 

I am pretty much a journalistic junkie who reads various papers and columnists. To this day, my favorite columnist is the long gone Southern humorist Lewis Grizzard. A weekly syndicated columnist, Lewis knew how to touch the common man. Often, he would make me laugh by writing a serious message while injecting Southern euphemisms into his work. I often told Dick that he was the Tuscarawas valley's version of Lewis. That would always force a smile and a laugh because Dick knew exactly what I meant: He was OUR voice of reason, common sense, and insight. Always aware that a newspaper's first job was to sell papers, he knew how to touch nerves with people. I suspect--in fact, I know--that he would play devil's advocate at times just to irritate people. His logic was that if they were irritated, at least they were reading his material. Translated, they were buying the paper!

 

Dick loved controversy because in his business that is what sells. I have to think that of all his columns--I should interject that I would love to see a publication produced that contained all his editorials over the years--he was most proud of his annual advice to parents of Little Leaguers. Every spring he would print it as his editorial, forcing parents to face their flaws in their ever-present attempt to make their kids stars . . . he humbled us all. Much to my pleasure, that exact column was framed and displayed in the funeral home. To me, it brought a tear because that was Dick, a guy who was getting his final say on the way out.

 

While I could share many stories, two will suffice to capture his charisma. A mutual friend and occasional golf partner, Max Nedele, shared this with me two years ago. Max made it clear that before he actually had met Dick, he had pretty much despised him because Dick used "to piss him off" with his editorials. A typical Tuscarawas County man, Max holds strong beliefs--where he got them is his business, but he rarely agreed with Dick. Upon meeting, working, and golfing with Dick for several years while both were in retirement, Max and his opinions gradually underwent a change. In short, he began to see a bigger picture, one that allowed him to understand a different perspective. As Dick's illnesses began to intensify, Max sat with me one afternoon on the Zoar Golf Club patio and shared that he loved Dick, that he was one of his best friends, and that he just could not stand to see Dick suffering the way that he was. If Dick were to hear that, of course, he would say, "Shut the hell up, Max, and quit whining around," and I feel certain that he would then wink at me. Their manly banter aside, the two cared for each other deeply, finding a friendship that was so meaningful to each . . . although they would never admit it to each other . . . man-code, you know.

 

My second story involves a recent summer evening I spent in the summer room of Dick and his wife Suzanne's home, visiting with the two of them. I was told later how much he enjoyed our interaction, but it was I who will cherish that memory. Our conversation was certainly friendly, humorous, and insightful as we discussed our lives, his family, his oxygen-deprived state, sports, golf, Max, politics, the newspaper business, and his distrust of Donald Trump. We laughed, commiserated, and griped--through our lives, the two of us certainly had a mutual respect for one another, although it was one that we simply never verbalized . . . man-code, you know. Bottom line, however, was that we both knew but did not want to admit that his time on earth was fading. When I prepared to leave, he walked to the garage with me, switching from his in-house oxygen tubes to his garage tubes, where we bid our farewells by shaking hands. My take was to tell him "to keep hanging in there" (a statement that seems so weak as I write today), and his words were his signature "God love ya." My truth is that when I drove away, I thought that might be the last time I would ever see him.  A few weeks thereafter, he was admitted to the Cleveland Clinic where he fought his battle until his demise. I never saw him again.

 

So, today, he is gone. I write this with absolutely no intent to provoke sympathy--my heavens, no. Rather, I write this as a tribute to a man I enjoyed tremendously, a writing voice I loved to read, and a personality that reflected his way, whether others agreed with him or not. I am going to miss him, but believe me when I think of Dick Farrell, a smile will cross my face. What better compliment could a man offer another . . . man-code, you know.

 

 

 



Making Sense of This Cluster

Language shapes our interpretation of messages.

 

If I call a person a freak, weirdo, or idiot, I have created an unflattering picture with negative connotations. Contrasting that, if I call that same person different, unique, or eccentric, I have created a picture that characterizes but does not necessarily belittle the individual. Regardless of what words I use, I am somehow influencing the message that is received.

 

I mention the above because I--like most of us in this country--am still trying to understand just what the hell is going on with the current immigration debate. Any time I am perplexed about an issue, I typically revert to my knowledge of fundamentals. While I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer, I am quite confident in my ability to break down issues  to their barest form, the fundamentals. Thus, as I try to make sense of what has occurred in the past few months, I find myself  reviewing what I teach in my Walsh University English 102 classes: the basics of rhetoric. Having said that, please come along with me for a quick reminder of the fundamentals of persuasion as I lead into my mindset of trying to understand this significant immigration issue!

 

First, it is always essential to understand the simplest definitions of key terms; in this case, the following must be understood:

*Rhetoric (Rhetorical Situations): Language (verbal and nonverbal) that is being used to persuade;

*Logos: Logic, strategies, and evidence that are being used to shape an argument;

*Pathos: Emotion that is being used to help influence an argument;

*Ethos: Credibility and trustworthiness of the person(s) presenting the argument.

 

Here is the situation, as most anyone who follows the news understands:

 

We have a serious immigration issue in our country; this cannot be disputed, regardless of whether various news reports downplay its severity or heighten its intensity. The problem exists. One needs to look no further than this summer's ICE arrests in our neighboring Stark County to recognize that illegal immigration is affecting Ohio. Even closer, one look at the Dover City Schools will attest that the school system is currently seeking answers--both academic and financial--of how to effectively manage the blending of ESL (English as a Second Language) students into the system without disrupting the quality of education and the taxpayers' pocketbooks. Make no mistake: the problem is here and apparently appears to be growing significantly by the month.

 

Nearly two months ago, a zero tolerance policy preventing parents (or guardians) from bringing their children into the United States was implemented by the President Trump administration (although the semantics of whether it was a law or a policy, begun by President Obama or President Trump remain subject of discussion for many). From that implementation, a significant citizen pushback ultimately led to a reversal of that zero policy (although many dispute that the pushback was the true reason for the reversal). So, as it stands today, families are painstakingly being reunited--somewhat successfully--as both parents and children are methodically being traced so reunification can occur. However, despite whatever has occurred, the problem of illegal immigration into our country remains. Little has been solved.

 

Understanding  this predicament is heartwrenching, of that we cannot argue. However, looking at the situation from a rhetorical perspective, perhaps we can have a more solid understanding of why I have labeled the immigration issue a "cluster."

 

Logos: This is the heart and soul of any argument--what logic, evidence, statistics, personal anecdotes, case history, . . . can be provided to support the persuaders' points? While I have clearly stated that I am not an ardent supporter of our President's character (to be explored under Ethos), I must admire him for having the tenacity to attack this problem. Despite many people's anger toward the family separation, I am still eagerly awaiting a feasible solution to the problem. What can we do to stop the overrunning influence of illegal immigrants? Yes, our country needs immigration; so many of the immigrants/refugees are hardworking, productive people who simply want to make a living and escape the dread their previous lives have presented. So, the argument of painting all of them "with the same brush" is foolish and is merely an example of hyperbole (exaggeration for effect) designed to stir the masses with anger and agreement with our country's leader. That exaggeration is simply ignored by me. I am confident that Case Farms, for example, would cease to be the business that it is without the immigrant labor. Of course, we like to think that such businesses are taking the jobs of homegrown Americans . . . truly laughable to me. So many of our American unemployed are that way because they simply have chosen not to work; therefore, this immigration argument must also present the side that immigration labor is essential to so much of our country, of which I have provided only a snapshot. However, the economic truth is that our country cannot afford the escalating costs of maintaining unfettered immigration. Simply put, our country's claim of welcoming diversity is being put to the test--something must be done because without a reasonable and fair alternative, our country as we know it could be bankrupted beyond our current beliefs. The logic clearly indicates that something must be done and done soon; without a fix, we are in deep trouble.

 

Pathos: The images that were presented on our nightly news, on our newspapers' front pages, on our magazines' covers, and on our social media websites are the reason the zero tolerance policy(?) was stopped. Any opportunity to tug at the heartstrings of people is an effective rhetorical device. Seeing and hearing small children and infants influence us, oftentimes in a way that allows us to forget the logic and focus on the emotion. As other examples, why do telethons invariably highlight a child confined to a wheelchair, news programs feature crying mothers sobbing over the loss of their children, or charity events call for increased financial contributions because "after all, it is for the kids"? All are designed to use emotion and vivid imagery to provoke a desired reaction. I clearly understand the power of visuals to persuade an argument, but the strength of an argument is not found in those strategies if the audience recognizes that the power of an argument is in the logic, not the emotion. On a simpler note, parents should imagine if we responded only to the pathos presented by our kids' logic rather than our more mature logic--the kids would get whatever they want whenever they want. Repeating my point, I am convinced that--in the public's eyes--the zero tolerance issue was tossed due to pathos, not necessarily logos.

 

Ethos: This point is central to any argument: if the person delivering the message cannot be trusted, is not seen as reliable and honorable, and has a track history of lying and bullying, why should we buy into the message? Of course, I can assume that most readers will understand that I am referencing our current President. As stated in a previous blog, I despise his character. Thus, his message gets garbled with me. Yes, I get the logic and I understand pathos's role, but the persistent changing of the President's mind, the documented history of lying, and the general lack of trust I have in him undermines his credibility. When he makes a statement, I simply cannot buy in--like the boy who cries wolf, the President has dragged me this direction before only to disappoint me (need I provide examples?). This is the crux of my dilemma: I recognize we are facing a serious problem, but I simply am shaken by the man leading the crusade. Please forget the Democratic vs. Republican drama that many fight . . . I am not involved in that catfight. This issue supersedes any of that nonsense--this drama is about solving a problem, one that presents a serious threat to our economy on so many levels. Allow me to go a step further; our media--many sources of which I do trust--have also done their share of undermining progress by choosing words such as "ripped the child from the mom's arms" instead of saying "removed the child from the mom's arms." Please recognize that certain agendas are being advanced depending on which source is being referenced. Again, the news source's credibility can be shaken by the implied bias that often surfaces--was the child ripped or removed from the mom? Yes, the word choice does make a difference, the source that reports it  makes a significant difference, but nothing is as influential as the person delivering the message.

 

One other point I must address in this lengthy blog today is a fallacy known as confirmation bias--reading and believing only that information supporting one's points of view. Most of us--including me--are guilty of this to a certain degree. As I have stated many times in previous blogs, to see a situation rationally requires us to look beyond our own perspectives and biases and attempt to develop an understanding of both sides of an issue. If all we see is our perspective, we are pigeonholing ourselves, and any open mindness is gone. Recently, I read a book recommended to me by a longtime friend. Through the book Secret Empires, I was challenged to see the Presidency and our country's legislators from the perspective of persistent corruption. I mention this only to make a point: I need to continually be exposed to thinking that forces me to develop a more thorough understanding.

 

Put it all together, my friends, and here is what I am seeing from my seat: To understand persuasion at any level and in any form, we must understand how language works and how arguments are manipulated. Merely listening to a loud voice is seldom an indicator of open-minded thinking; if we force ourselves to rationalize, to understand others' perspectives, and to recognize the power of language, we can intelligently understand what a sound argument looks like. Understanding divisive situations such as immigration demands that we educate ourselves beyond the simplistic.

 

Without close reading, listening, and thinking, we can often fall for anything.

Previous blog entries can be found at michaelagunther.blogspot.com.

Views from the Hot Seat...: Forever Young

Views from the Hot Seat...: Forever Young: "Why don't you write more frequently?" is a question I have been asked many times since I began writing this blog five years ...

Forever Young

"Why don't you write more frequently?" is a question I have been asked many times since I began writing this blog five years ago. My response is quite typical: I write when something moves me to do so. Oftentimes, I have no idea why certain thoughts infiltrate my thinking--today is one of those days.

 

For whatever reason, I miss my sister.

 

It's no special occasion such as a birthday, an anniversary, or a family event. I would assume it is related to something spiritual, perhaps, but I truly have no idea what that would be. Bottom line is that on this day, her image continues to appear in my mind. Because I best express myself through the written word, allow me a trip down memory lane where maybe I can make sense of my thoughts.

 

As I look back, my life has been a series of mostly positive events with a few negatives dropped in just to add a bit of flavor to my experiences. I find it easy to say that my upbringing was solid with strong parenting and loyal friends. However, having a sister who died at 32 in the prime of her life (with a family consisting of a son, a daughter, and a husband) was one of those moments that I guess I have never truly "come to grips with." Even today I sometimes find my voice cracking and tears forming when a conversation includes her name. Strangely, it does not hurt to talk of her; actually, I feel proud when I do so, but I still emotionally feel that connection. Even more odd is that we were not truly "blood" siblings; she was adopted as was I, both from different parents. However, that oddity is certainly irrelative when it comes to our emotional bond.

 

From the beginning, my sister Carol was better than I. She was a smarter student, a more quality person, and a more engaging personality. Filled with a freckled face, her smile was infectious, and her charm was so obvious. I suppose somewhere out there she had those who did not like her, but I seriously doubt that many exist. From her days of attending Dennison St. Mary's Elementary School to her time as a student at Indian Valley South and Akron University, she was a disciplined, dedicated student and friend. From a religious perspective, she was so devoted to the teachings of the Catholic Church from the time she was young. I, on the other hand, was not necessarily the opposite, but I was a bit more of a renegade than she. School for me consisted of being a smart ass, wishing I was outside playing sports rather than sitting in a classroom listening to a nun lecture me about why I needed to know this or that. Carol liked church; I did not. Having to sit still for an hour with neatly combed hair, a quiet mouth, and a rambunctious spirit did not add up to a pleasant experience. Getting my butt dragged out of church by my dad and getting spanked was pretty predictable; Carol, of course, did all the kneeling and praying as demanded by the old-school church. No, she was not the chosen one, but my orneriness certainly raised her status within the family. I am smiling as I write this--she was so good.

 

As her life unfolded, she did all the typical moves to ensure a level of popularity: cheerleader, band member (days I was subjected to her practicing her flute, which came after her clanging the cymbals!), track participant, student council representative, class officer, . . .--the picture is clear. Of course, she seemed to attract boyfriends, which I thought was pretty cool because they were athletes I looked up to. As high school wrapped up, she moved on to what was then Akron University. Naturally, she excelled, receiving a 4.0 practically every semester. In time, she married her high school sweetheart, Jay Huston, a man I admired then and still do today. In short, they were a perfect couple, although for the first few years of their married life they lived in Marietta as her husband completed his petroleum engineering degree while she worked as a secretary, often surviving on popcorn and water while they struggled to "make ends meet" in their rented trailer. Soon thereafter, though, they began a family, moving to a small plot of land outside Port Washington, Ohio, having a son, Jayson, and a few years later a daughter, Samantha. In short, the storybook small town love affair was well underway.

 

In time, her husband began climbing the oil/gas hierarchy leading them for a period of time to relocate to Texas where he assumed a significant leadership role within the Halliburton Company. Soon, though, they missed their roots and returned to Tuscarawas County, residing in Bolivar and then building their dream home on the outskirts of Dover. While here, she was a teacher at New Philadelphia High School as well as an adjunct professor at KSU Tuscarawas. Within this period, though, the dream bubble began to take on a different slant. During this return stretch to our county, she was diagnosed with esophageal cancer, one that ultimately took her life within fourteen months, leaving her husband with two kids, ages three and five. Sparing the details of those fourteen months is certainly deliberate; my point is not to invoke sympathy but to compliment her bravery, strength, and devotion.

 

You see, I learned so much from her that still influences me today. As I matured in my behavior and in my thinking, I realized what a special gift she was, While she was sick, I do not recall her complaining as we watched her body deteriorate. Instead, she was upbeat despite her fatal prognosis. Her children were always first, her thoughts of others exceeding her failing health. Like so many cancer victims, she had brief stretches where it appeared all was in remission only to be humbled by its dreaded return. Through it all, she demonstrated such courage that I so admired. In truth, at that point in life, I could not understand where that courage was coming from. She was fighting a battle we all strongly suspected she could not win, but she continued the fight. What mattered to her, I suspect, was that she was going to give it hell until the end . . . and that she did.

 

As so many of us know, when someone near to us passes away--particularly someone young--we are shellshocked, having little clue how to resume our normal lives. However, we also know that we do ultimately compose ourselves and return to an event-filled, new life. When Carol passed, I vividly remember my brother-in-law Jay comforting me by saying, "We don't have to understand life; we just have to live it." Simple words, of course, but they remain so reassuring to this day, and I oftentimes find myself repeating them to others when they, too, experience the passing of a loved one. Additionally, borrowing the words of Edgar Allan Poe, "No one ever dies as long as there is someone to remember," I have been blessed to confront deaths of friends and other family members with whatever strength is required, and I relate it to those two sayings.

 

Today, I miss my sister. In my mind's eye, she is still that curly-haired girl with freckles, a grin, and a motivation to be somebody special. Truly, she left her own legacy, spawning a beautiful daughter who looks so much like her, a son who loves adventure, and a husband who regrouped his life and married a charming, wonderful woman who met the challenge of raising Carol's two children and treating them as her own, an accomplishment I will never forget.

 

In a nutshell, I benefited so much from Carol's life, and, fortunately, I matured into someone who still is nowhere near her grace and class yet someone who was smart enough to learn from those better than I. So special she was, and she, of course, will always remain forever young (as my man Bob Dylan echoed) to me. 

Preparation for College: A Gap Year?

Over the years, I have found my perceptions of various issues have undergone transitions; what I used to believe often changed because of what I read, saw, or--most importantly--experienced. I suppose that is wisdom at work, but I occasionally look back, shake my head, and wonder just what the hell I was thinking. Such is the case when I view education; as a young teacher, I was naïve enough to believe that a kid's English understanding somehow had a direct correlation to the kid's spelling skills. In time, of course, I rationalized I was a strong speller so that equated with my English skills . . . foolish on my part, for sure. Somewhat embarrassing to admit that, but I was 22 . . . need I say more?

 

As the years passed, I became more educated, a bit more worldly, and certainly much more skilled and experienced in my craft. Because dealing with high school students was my priority, I slowly began to form qualified opinions; to me, those opinions were common sense, but I soon found that society stubbornly conflicted with my view that too many kids were going to college who had no business doing so. To reduce this introduction, let me leave it at this: Legislators and parents seemingly believed that a college education was the ticket to prosperity. Of course that option was a great one for so many kids, but what I was seeing indicated that kids were going to college because of outside pressure, the chance to continue with a sport, or peer pressure; decreasingly, I was seeing kids going on to school for what I would consider to be the right reason: pursuing an academic strength. Others may certainly contend that this train of thought was created by guidance counselors and teachers; I cannot completely overlook that belief, but I can strongly attest that every time the counselors were in my classroom, a heavy emphasis was placed on the importance of pursuing options not necessarily related to college. Translated, a heavy emphasis was placed on kids going to the Buckeye Career Center to learn a skill or joining the military; interestingly, so many kids seemingly turned a deaf ear to those options because college was going to be their path regardless if they had no idea what they wanted to study! "I'm going to college" was the common refrain. That, my friends, is where I am going with my thoughts today: So many (certainly not all!) of today's kids are not mature, driven, focused, or humble enough to begin college upon graduation from high school. That is where the discussion of a gap year comes into play.

 

I reference my introductory paragraph to make this point: when I was younger, I did not even know what a gap year was. Today I know it as a year after high school graduation when a kid explores life, works a job, realizes the limitations a high school diploma offers without accompanying skills, realizes the role discipline plays in becoming independent, and offers a kid a final chance to simply be a kid--define that last one any way you want. We all know that the world is changing; "back in the day," options for students graduating high school were actually pretty limited, particularly if one were a female: being a secretary, nurse, or teacher were popular options along with being a waitress or a barmaid. In short, female options were funneled in certain directions, frequently not requiring college degrees. As males, of course we had the options of working in the local clay plants, the steel mills, or various other companies that needed workers, or we could go to college. Contrast that "back in the day" climate with today's: not as many factories are functioning these days, so for many young graduates who see blue collar work as beneath them, they opt to begin progressing toward a degree. Thus, colleges are growing in numbers, but my question is this: Are they growing with quality or quantity?

 

Please allow me to share my experiences with the hope that readers understand why I support a gap year. As of now, I have tacked on five years of college teaching to my thirty-five years of high school experience--my hope is that fosters a bit of credibility for what I am saying. What I am seeing today is an onslaught of students who are not academically prepared or motivated to confront the college expectations. As a teacher of freshman English (certainly a subject that does not stimulate great drive for most!), I have seen, on a regular basis, students who are woefully ill-prepared to write, read, and research as they are expected to do the moment they set foot on a college campus. I could expand, but my point goes beyond that. I am convinced that so many kids would benefit from taking a year off after high school, facing the realities of life described in the preceding paragraph and then potentially discovering their interests and passions, which may lead to a more successful college experience. At the least, the maturity and thinking skills would be much more advanced than an eighteen-year-old kid who might still be dreaming of how great an athlete he or she was in high school!

 

I began my collegiate experience at seventeen, thinking I wanted to be a sportscaster--a dream, not a goal. At that time, a year at Kent State University cost approximately $6-7,000, as best I recollect. In truth, I paid for my entire education off what I made in the summers working at various factories and mowing several lawns, as well as having a work study job on campus. Hard to believe that  today when most kids at main campuses are flirting with the $20-40,000 numbers to complete one year. Student debt is off the charts and can certainly haunt students for decades because it does not go away until it is paid in full. Yet, kids borrow and borrow and borrow, not fully realizing the financial obligation they are incurring. Unfortunately, many of those kids who start college never finish (most recent statistics indicate that only 54.8% of students leave college with a diploma, as indicated by Bill Gates in 2017), being stuck with no degree and, perhaps more importantly, saddled with immense debt that frequently costs more than a monthly car payment or even a house payment . . . doesn't seem rational, does it? So, again I stress, why begin the financial obligation path if a kid has limited interest in a particular major . . .it doesn't make sense to me.  

 

These days I opt to encourage many kids (certainly not all) to take time and explore their options beyond immediately jumping from high school to college. I understand that bragging rights are associated with walking across the high school stage to receive a diploma when students can boast that they are attending Miami, Akron, Walsh, Bowling Green, Ohio State, Cincinnati . . ., but those bragging rights quickly fade into the mist when the kids hit college and realize they are overwhelmed with expectations. Today, unfortunately, college students are confronting a rash of self-esteem issues as well as nervous breakdowns, reaching unprecedented levels requiring universities to increase their counselor numbers, as reported in a recent Time Magazine investigation entitled "Depression on Campus." I contend that perhaps one of the contributing reasons is related to kids not being emotionally ready for the challenge college curriculums present. Yes, many other factors are involved as well, but this forcefeed into college cannot be ignored.

 

Previously, I mentioned I wanted to be a sportscaster; embarrassingly, my only motivation was that I liked sports--great criteria for making a lifetime decision . . . oh my. Bottom line was that I was so immature and uninformed in my thinking; however, because the cost was so low, I could still make my way through while I decided what I truly wanted to do--kids today are easily adding another year's $20-40,000 costs onto their debt . . . far different from my costs, for sure. We (our society) expect kids to make a decision by age eighteen about what they want to do for the rest of their lives; in a world with so many opportunities (far beyond what I had), I do not know how they can do it. Their experiences are so limited and are so often guided by hovering adults that those kids can easily be overwhelmed. It's a different world.

 

With the consideration of a gap year, perhaps the maturity, the quality, and the focus of students facing uncertainty about their futures would make a "gap" a viable alternative. Confronting the non-academic world at eighteen may be a far better teacher than any lesson learned in a college classroom. Seeing the realities of what is out there and what they want to do may go a long way in allowing students to approach a college education with a renewed dedication to academic goals. Most importantly, perhaps, students will have a more realistic grasp and appreciation for the value of money!

 

Previous blog entries may be found at michaelagunther.blogspot.com

The Broken Window Theory . . . Still Alive Today?

Long, long ago in a land far away (actually it was in the 1970s at Kent State University), I sat in a sociology classroom and heard a professor explain the "broken window theory." For whatever reason, I understood that concept, but it was not until I began teaching that I clearly appreciated the message behind the thought. Given today's uncertain times within schools and the disturbing trend of shootings, I am reminded of the power of a broken window.

 

Please allow me to explain: The "broken window theory" essentially capsulizes why communities deteriorate. In neighborhoods that are declining, abandoned structures begin to appear. At first, they  are merely empty. In time, however, frustration and despair often enter the picture and soon thereafter, locals--whether for fun or for sheer vandalism--break a window, and, quickly, more windows are shattered, leaving once abandoned buildings/homes to become true eyesores. In time, graffiti may be painted on the walls, weeds sprout, and ultimately the surrounding areas begin to also sink into disrepair. Before long, the deterioration continues, oftentimes encompassing sites in proximity to the buildings/homes. Soon, a truly dilapidated neighborhood appears . . . and it all begins with a broken window.

 

A theorist I am not, but I am one who analyzes by making causal links. If a dramatic effect occurs (such as a school shooting), my belief is that one cause is too simple to blame. Rather, the causes so frequently can be traced to a series of linked patterns, beginning with something--using my previous explanation--as simple as a broken window. No argument, of course, is remotely persuasive unless logic can be provided to support it. This is where my observations begin to surface.

 

Within a school, regulations are set to protect the whole as well as the individual. Often, of course, modifications need to be made to change with the times and also with unique situations. However, I repeat that the rules are set to benefit the whole. For example, schools were mostly united by a dress code, one that controlled how kids dressed, how they presented themselves on a daily basis, and how they represented the school's values. At the same time, teachers/administrators were expected to maintain a professional appearance that indicated they were the leaders and were to be treated as such. In time, however, student dress codes began to be modified, "changing with the times," if you will. T-shirts with potentially offensive material, pants with holes, shoes/sandals not made for walking stairways, shorts, yoga pants, and facial hair on males all began to appear as well as hair colors and styles deemed popular. Before long, schools found themselves on the defensive; when the dress code was enforced, the barrage of parental complaints began to surface, and organized resistance sometimes became a factor. So, because taxpayers at public schools--in a financial sense--hold the trump card, school administrators and school board members began to feel the pinch and, subsequently, digging in and taking a stand became a not-so-popular approach resulting in the dress code dying a slow death. At the same time, teachers began to sense the relaxed standards and also began "dressing down," switching from shirts/ties to golf shirts and occasional jeans, supporting their stance by saying "how I dress has no impact on kids' learning." Additionally, teachers began realizing that administrators were facing an uphill battle, so those teachers frequently became quite lax in enforcing the students' dress code rules. The window had been broken. When more serious issues arose, the links could often be traced to a gradual reduction in accountability.

 

I could go on, but my sense is that my first point is understood. The old adage of "give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile" can easily be applied, but my belief is that when we as leaders and parents surrender, we make a situation tolerable in the short run but often quite troublesome in the long run. The links begin to add and often multiply. Certainly, I am not naïve about rules occasionally being bent and our remaining stuck in the 1960s--please remember that I was a part of raising two daughters and I have taught for many years, so I have a basic understanding of the challenges of living in an ever-changing world. However, when tragedy occurs, we look for reasons. From my seat, the reasons are usually clearly linked even though we frequently do not want to hear those explanations.

 

Last week following the dreaded Parkland, Florida, shootings, I altered my class plans for Friday and explained to my English 102 students at Walsh University that I wanted to hear their voices concerning what was happening in our society that would lead to such a tragedy. For the most part, my students were quite open and frank in their words. What I heard was this:

 

*Video games are extremely destructive to young minds; when exposed to the common theme of violence and killing, the mind becomes numb to their reality. Allowing kids to be babysat by video games and television is a pattern that ultimately can lead to negative consequences.

*Parents' attempts to become friends with their kids frequently result in just the opposite; kids see that friendship as a means to get away with practically anything they want.

*Our society is slowly being overrun by feelings of hate and disrespect, being fueled by our country's President and his subtle/not-so-subtle putdowns of others.

*Social media's role is all-encompassing; the opportunity to cyberbully appears to have no bounds.

*Parents' working and social lives often leave sparse time for parents-teenagers to interact.

*We are often afraid to report what we see or hear because of retaliation fear.
 

In a nutshell, that is what I heard . . . none of it was new or surprising to me. However, when I asked if any of the foregoing had applied to their upbringing, not a hand was raised . . . and that is my major point: We frequently do not see any faults in ourselves or in our upbringing . . .it's always someone or something else. Please do not interpret my words today as being critical of all parents and situations--of course that is not my belief. My contention, though, is that we often fail to see what serious impacts can result when we fail to acknowledge the broken window that can serve as a link to further negatives.

 

If I were a betting man, I would guess that most employers, teachers, coaches, and police officers would argue that being unaccountable for an individual's actions is one of the central issues that they see on a daily basis. "Being late to work was not my fault, making an errant pass was not my fault, back talking was not my fault because so-and-so deserved it," . . . the list could go on. As adults, we hold the cards; we dictate what is permitted and what is inexcusable. Starting at a young age, kids learn their parameters; if the parameters get consistently stretched, then the original rules no longer apply. Before long, the previously existing guardrails are thrown aside, frequently resulting in devastating consequences. Specifically, accountability for our actions suffers--particularly with children--culminating in a sense of entitlement: "I've gotten away with it before, so I expect to do so again!"

 

So, why are we shocked when tragedy strikes within a school? We can easily blame the lack of gun controls in our society, but with slight exception, I see that merely as a talking point. The reason can often--not always--be traced to what the shooter experienced growing up. As stated, my contention is that we as adults, teachers, parents, and coaches periodically fail to consistently fight the battle that needs to be fought with our kids. Perhaps the reason is because we grow tired of doing so, but the responsibilities of parenting and teaching are so vast; in truth, our parental lives often pass before us without our even realizing that our self-satisfaction has been put on hold for many years. When we accept the role of parenting and leading children, we must also accept the duties that go with it--and sometimes that means we are not overly popular with our kids--whether we like it or not.

 

Yes, I am so disturbed by the increasing violence within schools; more succinctly, I am pissed. So many kids are lonely, abandoned, helpless, misguided, and the question is obviously "Why?" Think of the broken window . . . if we as adults choose to ignore subtle signs (links), we should not be shocked when tragedies occur. We live in a volatile society, one that in many ways is being fueled by hatred toward others or ourselves. Before we look at what is to be done regarding gun regulations, metal detectors, and arming teachers, perhaps we should look at ourselves, our demeanors, and our unspoken messages . . . maybe we will find a revealing answer.

 

The broken window can lead to gradual destruction and erosion . . . so can our refusal to conduct ourselves as responsible adults.

 

*Past blogs may be found at michaelagunther.blogspot.com
*Comments may be forwarded to mag.gunther@gmail.com

The Mysteries of '18

In the "For What It's Worth" department, I offer my thank yous and my fears for 2018!

 

Thank You,

 

*Jimmy Haslam. Surprising even myself, I never thought I would utter those words. However, on August 3, 2015, I wrote the following in my blog for that day:

           "I am wondering if the Browns could successfully build a winning franchise if they would just give a head coach  . . . four years to jell . . . but I believe that a 'building' culture must be allowed to materialize. When a city as starved as Cleveland suffers through another long year, the coaches take the criticism. For once, I would love to see the owner turn a deaf ear to fans, regardless of the season's victory totals and say, 'This coach is our man, and we are sticking with him.' Yep, Mr. Haslam is saying that today after a few days of training camp, but I hope he is still saying it in December . . . and meaning it." (Of course, at the end of the 2015 season, Coach Mike Pettine was fired.)

 

Mr. Haslam, thank you for giving Coach Jackson at least another year. Of course, I run the risk of being heartily laughed at next year, but I am confident in this man. Working with the number of young players and trying to succeed in an environment where optimism rapidly disappears at the first sign of weakness is not an easy challenge. As I have watched his press conferences, Jackson's frustration was certainly obvious, but he remained so optimistic despite those slinging arrows in his direction. I admire that quality--it is a sign of a true leader. Interestingly, team discord seemed minimal--talk to any coach who has ever been in similar situations to see if that is the norm . . . doubt if you will find that to be true. My assumption is that he is a terrific communicator, one I look forward to seeing one day enjoy the trials of his labor.

 

Again, Mr. Haslam, thank you for finally bringing in football people to direct your franchise--now get out of their way and let them do their jobs . . . please!!

 

Thank You,

 

*President Donald Trump. Again, a surprise to myself, but my reasoning is quite simple. The President has backed me into a corner and forced me to pay much more attention to the political world. Prior to his arrival, of course, I had read, but I had never really made understanding politics a priority. Today, my perspective is much more worldly and certainly much more informed. Without the President's puzzling character emerging, I doubt if I would have the same perspective. I remain a novice--not any kind of expert--but I am an informed novice!

 

Mr. Trump, I thank you for your approach to the North Korean situation; beyond dialogue and sanctions, I have no idea of what alternative approach could be utilized. When dealing with a man just like you, you have stood up to him. I am reminded of Mr. Jim Nixon, a longtime Dover High School educator, who once told me that, occasionally, in dealing with a kid the teacher might have to get to the kid's level: Sometimes the only person a psycho respects is another psycho is the exact wording. During my teaching career, I had a few of those situations. Likewise, our President is facing the same situation and has momentarily stared down the North Korean leader . . . similar to dealing with kids.

 

Mr. President, I thank you for whatever role you have played in assisting the stock market to blossom into out-of-this-world territory. It's making many people a slew of money; here's hoping, however, that while you are taking bows for the market's success that you are man enough to accept any blame if or when the bottom falls out . . .then I will see if you are growing in character and showing true leadership skills. 

 

Our President. I thank you for remaining a poster child in my classes. When we are discussing fallacies (flaws) of argument, my students are quick to identify the weaknesses of arguments presented by you. I certainly realize that my role in an English rhetoric class is to not discuss politics or influence students' opinions; however, when argument flaws such as dogmatism, character defamations, or stacking the deck (among others) are presented, my students have quickly brought up your name as someone who has built his reputation on doing so. I am impressed with their astuteness, but I am also painfully aware that it is a rare occasion where I have encountered much enthusiasm on campus for your presidency. Yet, your rhetorical missteps are certainly teaching points, which I do appreciate.

 

Thank You,

 

*High School Athletic Coaches. The day-to-day headaches and stress levels of working with kids are overwhelmed by the satisfaction of seeing kids achieve, whether that be in the win column or just simply be exceeding their own expectations. My wife and I continue to enjoy watching high school sports and taking in the entire experience of the games, the cheerleaders, the dance teams, the bands, and, most of all, the enthusiasm. Behind those successes are the coaches, the leaders. Frustrating at times, of course, but the satisfaction of building relationships far exceeds the occasional out-of-control parent who once played the sport and, therefore, is a self-proclaimed expert. My contention after watching parents for a lifetime is that the most effective parents are the ones who enjoy their kids' performances and stay out of the picture. If disagreeing, ask a few of those kids about their parents' behavior--most will tell you that their folks are embarrassing . . . and trust me the other kids know it as well. Thank you, coaches, for what you do behind the scenes . . . it's so vital to kids' lives whether others truly appreciate it or not.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

I'm Afraid . . .

 

*America, that when bipartisan committees have the opportunity to meet with the President, that the people in the room do not hear the same message. Here's hoping that attendees at these meetings do not allow their attention to drift so that they all can legitimately say exactly what words and messages were used . . . might help in establishing credibility with the American people!

 

*America, that we are going to end up in a war with North Korea. Our macho side, of course, believes that "we will teach them a lesson, one they will never forget." I hope we are intelligent enough to realize that in today's world, that thought is quite naïve in many ways. American support appears to be on the decline, so what the future holds regarding support from other countries remains to be seen. I fear the consequences of lost lives and economic instability, particularly when being threatened by nuclear weaponry.

 

*America, that our country will continue to be split simply due to our populace's failure to understand, consider, and appreciate others' perspectives. I have said it numerous times in my blogs that I am not a supporter of Donald Trump because I despise his character. Others have told me that he is exactly the tough man we need at this time regardless of character and that I am a snowflake for not supporting his approach. However, I continue to read and listen as I try to develop an academic understanding of why our country is split; from my seat, it goes far beyond the Hillary Clinton excuse--somewhere along the way we have been infiltrated with bizarre beliefs that have shifted our rationale. Somewhere along the line many of us have become susceptible to alternative views that are so extreme that we believe them because we do not want to study/read/research whether those views are accurate or not. For brevity, I merely point to campaign rhetoric that shamed candidates or the dreaded accusations that then-President Obama was not born an American citizen. In short, perception is reality, the same as it has always been. If the loudest voice in the room (or whatever news source we prefer) says it and it is repeated often enough, we have a strong tendency to believe it.

 

*America, my fear is that we have become far too eager to accept what we hear rather than what is accurate. In doing so, the expression "fake news" has blossomed in a serious attempt to discredit practically anything that goes against the ruling party. Sorry, I cannot disregard The New York Times, The Washington Post, or The Wall Street Journal; from my seat, they remain credible, reliable sources. Opponents will point to occasional reporting errors; I would consider those limited examples to be mistakes, not a calculated approach. If we do not place trust in historically regarded press integrity, then what do we have? Chaos? Again, I fear where our refusal to consider investigative reporting is taking us; if all the press is corrupt, then why and how have many political figures been caught lying? The answers remain to be seen, of course.

 

From my perspective, 2018 holds mysteries. I suppose this writing may generate opposition; as always, at the least, I would hope it creates thought and consideration. That is exactly what I hope happens; I have been surprised to learn in my many blogs that the number of private messages I receive far exceeds the public responses. Certainly, I understand that because exposing personal opinions runs the risk of alienating others whose opinions differ. However, I am "throwing my thoughts out there"with the idea that dialogue is the key . . . whether we agree or not!

 

My previous blogs may be found at michaelagunther.blogspot. com.