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.

 

 

A Revelation (redux)

 What follows is a reprint from nearly three years ago; considering that November is National Adoption Awareness Month, I am reposting with the hope that my readers may find it of interest.

Paul Fromm

St. Ann's Hospital for Women
Columbus, Ohio

September 10, 1955

 

Do you know that guy? He's a handsome dude; colorful--sometimes a bit off-color; some like him, some don't; some think he's wrapped pretty solidly, others think the "butter dun slid off his biscuits."  Again, do you know him?
 

The answer is that boy--with the exception of the "handsome dude" comment--is me, Mike Gunther.  I am an adopted child.  In February 1956, my parents chose me to be their son. Two years previously they had chosen my soon-to-be sister from the same hospital/orphanage to be their daughter. To many, I assume that revelation is somewhat of a shock . . . to this boy, that adoption was my life. 

 

At birth, I was given the name of Paul Fromm; anyone born prior to 1964 has the right to purchase for a nominal fee his or her original birth certificate, so after being married and realizing that my wife and I wanted to have children, we decided that it was in our best interests to try finding out my health history. Therefore, the documents I received from the State of Ohio were hoped to be helpful--they weren't, at least regarding my health history, which simply stated "Normal." What I did learn was that my mother's last name was Fromm and she lived in Columbus. My father's name was nowhere to be found. To inject a bit of humor into this conversation, whenever anyone would refer to me as a bastard--which certainly has happened in my teaching/coaching background--I would reply, "How did you know that?" It usually stopped the conversation immediately.  (Anyway, I apologize to anyone I may have offended with that last comment.) In simple terms, I have a mother's name, but I have no record of a father's name . . . and I really don't care about either one.

 

The question of whether to pursue my original birth parents has never been an overwhelming desire.  Yes, as an adult, I have been curious, but not enough to want to pursue a search. Nearly twenty years ago, when I was staying at a Columbus-area hotel for a weekend, I went through the phone book just to see; encountering a whole slew of Fromms, I closed the book and abandoned my search. Since that time, I have taken no steps to ever find out anything more. Again, yes, the curiosity is still there, but I really don't know what discovering my actual birth mother would achieve if I even knew other than to perhaps bring disappointment to another family, something I am not willing to do.

 

So, the issue is simple: Why am I even writing this? The answer is because it seems to me to be a topic others might want to read about . . . perhaps many readers have a similar background. With that said, let me share a few other tidbits about this situation. When I was probably six, I was in the backyard shooting baskets on my eight-foot basket when my parents called both my sister and me into the kitchen. I distinctly remember their formally seating us at the green kitchen table--which even had a pull-out tray, bigtime stuff!--and their telling us that they wanted to share something with us. Having no idea what this was about, my sister Carol and I sat there waiting . . . and they told us we were adopted--we both had different parents (Carol, FYI, was not my blood sister). A magical moment in retrospect, but at that time, I asked what that meant. My dad told us that they had gotten us in Columbus but they--Marge and Jack, my parents--were not our "real" parents. Carol and I looked at each other, said, "so," and then asked if we could go outside and play again. That was the impact the announcement had on us . . . nothing. The reasons were simple: We were loved, cared for, and encouraged--we didn't need anything else.

 

As my life unfolded, nothing changed. Yes, I had the proverbial shout-outs with my dad because my hair was too long (imagine that), I was lippy, and I didn't listen--with the exception of the hair, all the aforementioned were true. However, my mother soothed the waters, thus creating a happy home where being adopted meant absolutely nothing. A typical home in typical small-town America, Gnadenhutten provided a wonderful upbringing . . . safe, fun, and conservative. I suppose Peyton Place moments occurred, but growing up I had no knowledge of that side of life. What I did know is that I was secure with what I didn't know! We took care of our own little world, and that was enough for us. My friends and I were no altar boys, by any stretch--got caught doing stupid stunts . . . got away with far more than we should have . . . always knew right from wrong, whether we followed the proper path or not . . . tried to appear as innocent although anyone who really knew us understood we tried to get away with whatever we could--sound like kids today? In simple terms, my friends and I were ornery, but we were certainly respectful. The reason had so much to do with the way we were raised: I suppose we were afraid we would "get a paddlin'" when we got home, but, truthfully, I had already had enough of those to last a lifetime--I'm not so sure fear of my dad's scorn scared me that much. What really kept me in line was the anticipated disappointment my mother would point my way . . . no way did I want her to see me negatively . . . the ol' man, I guess he probably expected my behavior just because I was a boy. 

You see how it all comes together? No excuses offered--strong family, strong values, caring community--those were the keys. Oh yeah, we had our supposed heathens, but even those kids weren't bad--perhaps different circumstances influenced their lives, but they weren't bad kids. We all wanted attention, recognition, love . . . didn't matter what home we came from because at our core we had the same desires. (Here's a hint about a future blog:  Kids today aren't as different as we from our generation think.)

What that adoption did for me was give me a life, one I have cherished for a lifetime. As stated, I was and am not any kind of angelic figure . . . trust me on that. What I learned is that Paul Fromm is eternally grateful that he became Mike Gunther, the son of Jack and Marge and brother to Carol . . .it's a ride that I owe to them, my buddies, and my hometown . . . what a great way to live!

 





 

Donald Trump: The Reincarnation of Billy Martin?

Sitting at my computer desk trying to determine just what the hell is unfolding in our country at the moment, I am struck by the numerous similarities between President Trump and the legendary, swashbuckling former baseball player and manager, Billy Martin. For the younger crowd, Martin's name signifies a shrug and a "who's that?" response, but to the somewhat seasoned crowd and baseball fans, the name represents anti-establishment stances, controversy, arrogance, winning, and an everyone's picking on me mentality . . . but he was a fearless fighter who challenged anyone who interfered with him. Ironically, his numerous disputes created the persona that he was a tough guy, but so many of his fights ended up with his getting thumped. For those reasons and more, I sense a strong similarity with our president.

 

Growing up in a somewhat antiquated time that allowed me to get our primary news via The Daily Times, The Dover Reporter, or The Evening Chronicle and periodicals like Sports Illustrated and Sport with the occasional televised "Game of the Week,"  I was able to follow professional baseball mostly through the written word. Yes, I listened to the Indians games with the legendary Jimmy Dudley at the mike and the Reds games with Al Michaels, Marty Brenneman, and, of course, Joe Nuxhall calling the action, but my primary understanding came from sportswriters, those media members who created pictures with words and allowed readers to visualize what action had occurred. Of course, videos were rare, so my understanding was dependent on the writers' descriptions. In time, however, television's rise to prominence sprouted, so, eventually, I was able to actually view the various exploits of the baseball stars and, specifically, the numerous temper tantrums and press conferences of managers like Earl Weaver, Lou Pinella, and, of course, Billy Martin . . . and what tantrums they were. 

 

Of course, it goes without saying that the world I knew and the world I know are unlike in many ways. However, the spirit of humans really has not changed as much as we might like to believe. Larger-than-life personalities have always been present, but today's easy access to television, Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, . . . has allowed us to be more aware of people's deficiencies, creating a much more sensationalized and nit-picking public. Along with that, my friends, comes much more analyzing and/or dislike . . . just as most of America is doing today when discussing our political climate. I digress, I realize, but to make my point, the foregoing needed to be said.

 

Billy Martin was a master at creating distractions; he loved to keep his clubhouse on edge, recognizing that in a long 162-game season, players would be disgruntled with his decisions. Rather than be specific with his individual players, he created a climate where basically all the players hated him at various points. His philosophy focused on a shared hatred--hate me but pull together and win the damn games. On the outside, he was not an easy touch who soft pedaled his players; no, he stirred controversy to deflect the pressure to him rather than to his players' performance. Be not mistaken: he loved the limelight and wanted recognition and acknowledgement, and, on so many occasions, it worked to his advantage due to his aggressiveness and fearfulness. Similarly, President Trump appears to be in his element when he casually distracts the story of the day to another story of the day. On one hand, he thrives in creating his version of organized chaos, and I sense he silently chuckles to himself at the frenzy he often causes with his unpredictability. Just like Martin, he wants to color his way, not necessarily inside the lines.

 

Martin was an egomaniac; his most famous confrontation occurred when he challenged his Mr. September, Reggie Jackson, to a fight in the dugout. Jackson, as many remember, was a stout, well-muscled, home run hitting machine with a superstar ego. Although many smaller incidents led to Martin's dislike of Jackson, Jackson's "I'm the straw that stirs the drink" comment particularly irked his manager, ultimately culminating in a dugout skirmish viewed by millions. Martin was not going to allow anyone to show him up--particularly on national television--basically echoing our president's words, "I hit a point where I'll fight back, and it won't be pretty." I sense that most observers would agree with the belief that President Trump has an oversized ego that has allowed him to push and maneuver most everybody out of his way for the better part of his life. In today's political world, he is facing the same battles, but I sense that he will back down from no one, whether he is right or wrong. Stubbornness has a way of creating controversy --both Martin and our president would understand that, I presume.

 

Baseball managers are accustomed to being in control of players and situations; they operate with the idea that their philosophy is what got them to their major league positions and that is what will keep them there. Any interference from general managers, sportswriters, fans, or owners is generally seen as an attempt to undermine that philosophy. Therefore, it is not unusual for those same managers to have short careers. Most notably, Martin feuded with the legendary Charlie Finley and George Steinbrenner, then owners of the Oakland A's and the New York Yankees respectively, ultimately resulting in his firings on several occasions. To coin a phrase, he "did not like anyone else playing in his sandbox." President Trump seems to reflect that same approach; he has been obviously successful in his corporate world and typically could confront and defeat those nasty underminers who challenged his philosophy. The major contrast, though, was that he controlled the sandbox and really had to answer only to himself. In that sense, he has pretty much always had more power than Martin, but the similarity is obvious: neither were overly tolerant of dissenters, as evidenced by Mr. Trump (or his corporations as he often equivocates)  having been sued over 3,500 times including 98 times regarding golf courses he has purchased. 

 

Interestingly, Martin was extremely popular in the baseball world with a strong base of devoted followers simply because he was a change agent. Owners brought him in for one reason: change the culture. For short bursts, he did just that. In time, however, his act got old, his antics grew wearisome, and his controversies became old news, eventually leading to his ouster from Major League Baseball. Similarly, President Trump campaigned as being a change agent for our country, appealing to educated and well-read Midwesterners, Southern evangelicals, rednecks, and numerous other classifications of people throughout our country. His act worked, and as we know he is our president. Many sense, however, that his antics are growing increasingly wearisome and his controversies seem to be never ending. How this soap opera will end remains to be seen, but Americans certainly cannot ignore his presence. Like Martin, his swashbuckling personality is always in the forefront.

 

Martin was viewed by his managerial peers with "backdoor" respect because he was not immune to challenging those same peers, occasionally criticizing them for instigating controversy and routinely lambasting them for anything he did not like. In fact, his criticisms were usually quite biting referring to several as being guilty of overmanaging while trying to make names for themselves. In short, it was not unusual to compare himself with other managers, to which he found himself to certainly be superior. Along that same line, President Trump has made no bones about how much better he is than most all other presidents, proclaiming that he has done more in his short-time presidency than most all his predecessors. His fixation with former President Obama is a constant in his numerous tweets. Just as Martin's chief rival was Earl Weaver (Baltimore Orioles), Mr. Trump's chief rival is his immediate predecessor--both Martin and Mr. Trump have self-created the arrogant image of "look at me; I'm the best!"

 

As stated in previous blog entries, I am disturbed by the current state of our country. Most concerning is I clearly recognize that changes are needed in our immigration policies,  tax codes, national security, as well as other hot areas. However, what I fear is that even though both Martin and Mr. Trump have been labeled as change agents, both could/can only accomplish so much before their self-fulfilling arrogance emerges as key factors. In any persuasive situation, the ethos (credibility) of the persuader has major influence on the message's effectiveness. As Martin eventually burned out as an effective manager due to his combative personality (ultimately being killed in an unrelated automobile crash), I sense that our president's effectiveness as a deal closer may, too, burn out. Bottom line is that Americans may eventually (if not already) just begin to hear "blah, blah, blah" when he speaks because his act has gotten old. Pity our country, I suppose, but he is our president . . . I can only hope that his overbearing personality and unpredictable decisions are part of a grand master plan currently unknown to anyone other than him . . . and that plan will ultimately benefit us--not just him. I am figuratively holding my breath.

 

 

Politics, Grading, and Synchronization . . . Take Your Pick!

When I first began presenting Views from the Hot Seat in 2013, I wrote these words: Give the readers something to think about, make the writing easy to read in 5-7 minutes, try to interject a bit of humor when possible, use everyday words, and take a stand. For those who have read my blogs, I appreciate your loyalty and hope I have remained married to my original intentions. At no point, however, did I infer that I would expect readers to agree with my perspectives. Truly, of the aforementioned objectives, the one that I remain most loyal to is give the readers something to think about. In today's emotionally charged political world, it is quite safe to say that many, many people may not share my views . . . but if I can get my readers to think, not just react, maybe I am accomplishing my objectives. With that said, today's blog is a compilation of thoughts gathered in the past few weeks . . . hope I can sustain your attention!

                                                                  *****

I might as well begin by elaborating on a previous expression: Donald Trump scares the hell out of me. As stated in my last blog, I have tried to give him space, but the proverbial "shooting himself in the foot" just will not go away. Interestingly, I understand a few of his objectives and am not out-of-my-head opposed to everything he represents, but he is not the man to bring about needed changes. If he were the CEO of any company around here, a mayor, a commissioner, a boss of any kind, my hunch is he would have been dismissed long ago. However, for whatever reason, he holds a guillotine to his challengers. When a person can ruin another's livelihood by simply threatening or writing a tweet, that is a dangerous power that can ultimately destroy confidence and support. Again, I stress: my problems with our President are character related . . . connecting the dots of his alleged inproprieties throughout his career indicate to me that many of us have been shammed.  

                                                                 *****

For the past eight years, I have been honored to serve as an evaluator for the national Advanced Placement (AP) Language and Composition exams. In that time, I have spent eight days per summer in locales such as Daytona Beach, Louisville (KY), Kansas City, and, most recently, Tampa, grading over 1700 essays per week. This past year our 1282 readers were challenged with reading over 1.7 million essays written by 581,598 students throughout this country . . . intimidating numbers, for sure. From my experience, I am able to offer a few observations:

   *The numbers of students taking the AP exam have become overwhelming and not indicative of the AP program's integrity. My hunch is that because of the legislative, administrative, and parental pushes to get kids as prepared for college ASAP that the quality of students is being sacrificed for the appearance of school districts and family bragging rights. As evidence, I offer this tidbit: More than ever before, the papers that I graded this year were, in a nutshell, immature, lacking depth of thought, and, most of all, reflective of basic writing skills. The common grumble among so many evaluators was that "most of these kids are not even ready for this level." Trust me, I get it. Having played a role in beginning the AP English programs at Dover High School several years ago, I realized that when kids are forced to take an upper level jump we may be hurting them in the long run. Do not misinterpret my point: I understand that kids need challenged--no problem there from me. However, if  kids are not mature thinkers and lack strong writing skills, we have set up those students for subtle embarrassment and potential failure. My point is simple: Too many unprepared kids are taking advanced level classes for all the wrong reasons . . . I remain unconvinced that this is good for education. As for students attending college as high school students, that is a topic for another day!

   *Trying to decipher kids' handwriting skills has put me "over the edge" and is the primary reason why I have graded my final AP essay. Like so many tests, students' writing samples are in blue or black ink and not on a computer. As a result, evaluators are exposed to the most bizarre handwriting one could ever imagine. Because we are strictly instructed to ignore handwriting in our evaluation due to maintaining consistent standards focusing on content, we are forced to read writing that challenges our eyesight. When I am forced to determine kids' letters by using a magnifying glass, that is "pushing the envelope" for this boy. I must stress that our jobs would be so much easier if we were reading typed essays, but that possibility raises new questions for test security and, therefore, has not been utilized. Additionally, the role of teaching cursive vs. printed lettering is not that big of a factor--most kids print anyway. My point is the sloppiness that we see is a direct offshoot of rushed time and lack of pride in a finished product.

   *Although I have written of this before (and probably will again), the greatest weakness that I see with the AP students and my college students as well is the inability to present a successful argument with logic, explanation, and detailed examples. If parents want to offer encouragement for their students' college preparation, nothing better could be done than to read the editorial section of any newspaper. By examining what columnists are advocating, determining those writers' strategies, and by being exposed to others' thinking, those students will truly be demonstrating the mature thinking that I mentioned previously. Trust me when I say what distinguishes our top-level students from our average is the ability to use logic and reasoning, two traits that are directly related to reading!

   *Having made my observations, I must also stress that a few of the essays I read were off-the-charts, outstanding writing that--if I were teaching the kids who wrote those--I would want the world to know that our future is in great hands. Like any other situation, when average is the prevailing norm, "outstanding" sticks out and screams! 

                                                           *****

The synchronization of traffic lights in Dover has raised eyebrows and recently lit up the Times-Reporter's "30 Seconds." I suppose what is desired by the complainers is a straight run from one end of town to another without interruption, almost like Dragway 42! From where we live, however, the synchronization has been a godsend; on most days, I can go from Dover's north end all the way through the city's nearly twelve lights and only stop two or three times as contrasted with the nearly seven times or so I was accustomed to stopping prior to the new lights. I suppose we next need to talk to people about coming out of those annoying side streets with the trip lights--they're interrupting my acceleration patterns! Additionally, I have read a few complaints from people disgusted with the lights on Walnut Street; unfortunately, my friends, those lights have not even been addressed yet. Again, if we are going to complain, I hope we at least are arguing facts, not what we think we know.

                                                         *****

I will conclude my notes today by again inviting readers to offer their input by offering intelligent perspective and discussion . . . I hope I have provided something to think about!

                                                         *****
Previous blogs can be found at the michaelagunther.blogspot.com site.
I may be contacted via e-mail at mag.gunther@gmail.com or guntherm@roadrunner.com

Stay in Your Lane

Growing up, I was a twerpy kid who ran my mouth too much.

 

I paid a price for that behavior, of course. In my Catholic elementary school days, it was not unusual for me to receive a checkmark in the behavior column; in middle school, I received enough paddle marks on my backside to humble me; in high school, I played (please interpret that term in whatever fashion you desire) football on a freshmen team that was pretty good, creating a feeling that my teammates and I were bad asses. However, it didn't take long for me to learn that freshman cockiness was merely a mask. All it took was Tom Kochman, a junior, slamming me into the lockers outside Mr. Riley's room, clearly teaching me that my twerpiness needed to come to a screeching halt. Although my mouth occasionally resurfaced, a valuable lesson was learned: stay in my lane.

 

As LaVar Ball, self-proclaimed expert in raising athletic boys and an insistent self-promoter, has been quoted, "staying in your lane" is the criticism we should expect if we speak out on a topic that exceeds our knowledge. While my respect for Ball is nonexistent, his comment struck a nerve in my adult life: play to my strengths and disguise my weaknesses. I have admitted in several blogs that I am an avid reader, exposing my thinking to various writers and perspectives. Additionally, I try to watch several informative news programs ranging from CNN to Fox to MSNBC. My point is that I choose to remain as independent as possible, not aligning myself with any political party or particular school of thought. I try to absorb as much information as possible before I solidify an opinion. While I realize that approach may be perceived as "straddling the fence," it is actually anything but. This, my friends, is where the "staying in my lane" comment comes into play . . . please allow me to explain.

 

*I do not like Donald Trump. Certainly, I am not an expert in politics, so my perspective is based on what I know. His "divide, conquer, bully, the devil is in the details" approach runs contrary to the world I live. As our President, he deserves the respect and integrity that goes with it--that I get. Believe me, I have tried to like him, but "my lane" is understanding language, rhetoric, and people. His constant "shooting himself in the foot" indicates to me that he is "way out of his lane," yet I persist in hoping he will correct himself and become a 70-year-old man who will learn and respect the dignity that accompanies his office. Without his maturity, my fears are that the necessary changes our country so badly needs will not happen under his leadership.

 

*One of the greatest weaknesses we possess is the opportunity to offer opinions when we really know little, if anything, about something. Cases in point revolve around the Dover City Schools and their ongoing tussle with the Dairy Queen location, which sits in the heart of the schools' construction plan; I read one online comment by an individual who stated, "Why does Dover want to build a new high school in New Phila?" For whatever bizarre reason, the individual believed that Dover's new high school would be built at the New Phila Dairy Queen location, approximately three blocks from the Quakers' high school. Safe to say that the individual had absolutely no knowledge about the actual situation. Along the same lines, the recent raise approved for Dover's school employees has absolutely nothing to do with the Dairy Queen dilemma--two completely different funding mechanisms. However, many do not understand that, through either choice or simple lack of knowledge. Just because we might think we know something certainly does not ensure that we do know something . . . "staying in our lane" might prevent embarrassing situations.

 

*Over the years, I have learned to respect and admire those who are CEOs, presidents of companies, owners of small businesses, and other leaders within our communities. Although I certainly do not always agree with decisions that are made, I have learned that their expertise far exceeds mine. My background is education, not business. I am reminded of my time as a high school teacher and coach; I never aspired to be a principal or a superintendent simply because I knew the higher up the proverbial ladder, the less control I actually had over my teaching and the more people I had to answer to when the "screws got tightened." Being married to a hospital administrator, I have learned to appreciate the many perspectives that must be weighed. As for advice, I do not offer it unless I am asked . . . staying in my lane is the safest route for my happiness.

 

From my seat, the staying in my lane analogy carries much weight. While I certainly do not begrudge individuals for having opinions, my sincere hope is that their perspectives are based on actual knowledge, experience, or expertise--not simply what they think or what their buddies think. As a parent, we teach our kids so many lessons, many of which we are not even aware. Perhaps one of the most valuable life lessons we can display is being less judgmental and more insightful in our appraisals of others . . . staying in our lanes, my friends.

 

You see, even this twerpy kid can mature into someone who realizes that merely running his mouth accomplished nothing but bringing negative attention to himself . . . life teaches us so many humbling lessons!