Education in America

My wife and sister are studying to become teachers, my brother is a teacher, my mother-in-law is a teacher, and I have many close friends who are teachers.  I really believe that they are all excellent educators, but unfortunately I don’t think they are representative of teachers in general.  The current administration agrees, which is why they are pushing for education reform that aims to weed out bad teachers and reward good ones.  It is undoubtedly true that the education problems in America are at least partially caused by teachers with inadequate knowledge of the subjects they teach.  I have heard many stories of educators, particularly in elementary and middle schools, who cannot perform basic math or who consistently misspell simple words or who even teach completely false information because they are unaware of the truth themselves.  These stories always make my teacher friends cringe, and rightfully so.  If we really want better teachers, we must make their training more rigorous, focused more on the subjects they plan to teach and on student teaching, much less on educational theory.  Perhaps one or two education courses on the side would be helpful, but we should not be so easily qualifying those who are responsible for training up the next generation. 

Although improving the quality of our teachers is a prominent topic in the education discussion, it is only one step, and only a small portion of the problem.  While we could bring up all sorts of things – inadequate funding (which is huge), teaching to standardized tests, demographic issues – I would like to discuss two things that are often neglected in the discussion.  The first is the students themselves; the second is the overall implicit reasoning behind the American education system.

Having recently been through high school and college, and having a wife who teaches high schoolers every day, one thing is imminently clear: rich or poor, many students in America are not motivated to learn.  It seems that much of the arguing and disputing that goes on about how to fix education ignores this fact.  We cannot just assume that better teachers, more funding, or more appropriate curriculums will fix education – these will do nothing if the students do not want to learn.  To me it appears that the younger the child, the more his interest in learning is influenced by his teacher.  Great teachers can make a huge difference on young children.  But by the time a student reaches high school, it is much more difficult to reestablish respect for authority and a belief in the value of education if they have been lost throughout the previous years.  And it seems that more and more high schoolers have lost these values.

This lack of willingness to learn is at least partially due to the sense of entitlement that is growing among America’s youth.  The wealthy and middle class students often believe that everything will be provided for them, that every problem can be solved with the application of money, that their money gives them intrinsic superiority over others, and that they will always have money.    Ironically, I began writing this post, and then the next day I saw a post on Discovery News that discussed a recent study showing that narcissism and feelings of entitlement have been on the rise for the past fifteen years among US college students. I would wager that studies would find similar trends among younger groups as well.  Obviously, if students have tricked themselves into thinking they will advance in life without work, they have no reason to think education will help them.

Regardless of affluence, in all cases I believe that both the lack of immediacy of future needs and the collapse of the American family have combined to contribute to students’ lack of motivation.  For many kids, it is difficult to see the connection between doing an English worksheet today and achieving success tomorrow.  We live in a culture of instant gratification, and it is hard for them to see that education is a long task with equally long payoffs.  They want short tasks with current payoffs and little else.  Additionally, with more and more single parent homes or homes with absentee parents because of workaholism, many children are not receiving the guidance and discipline necessary to push them in the right direction.  They are never taught that money does not give them the right to be lazy or that the lack of education will often lead to ruin.  In fact, they may be implicitly taught the opposite of what they need, for many parents act as if money is all that matters or that they deserve certain things because of their place in society.  Sometimes teachers can work miracles on these kids, but we should never expect teachers to do so.  Lazy students and their sense of entitlement can only be cured by strong guidance and discipline at home.

Secondly, America does not seem to recognize what its real strengths are.  Whenever I hear a politician speaking about education, they always focus on our deficiencies in certain subjects, and they seem to hone in especially on math and science.  They say that these two subjects are important for the rekindling of innovation in America.  In focusing on innovation, they are headed in the right direction.  America has always valued free-thinking and creativity, and while math and science may be the realms in which we need our innovation to bloom, the creativity itself does not come from focusing on math and science.  What we should really be focusing on is achieving a greater breadth of education that exposes students to ideas from all realms of study.  It is in the intersection of various fields or in the application of ideas from one field into another where many of the greatest ideas dwell.  When it comes to innovation, focusing on anything too much is detrimental.  I know there is only so much money to go around, but if we really are going to produce innovative leaders, we should think twice about cutting the fine arts and other “superfluous” subjects that often focus more than other subjects on the development of creativity. 

I recently ran across a report that discussed the importance of a comprehensive education and how dedication to breadth in teaching seems to be one of very few traits that countries who consistently rank better than the US in education have in common.  Here is a list quoted from their website of some of the expectations in other countries:

·         Fourth graders in Hong Kong visit an artist’s studio, study Picasso’s Guernica, and analyze the works of modernist sculptor Henry Moore.

·         Finnish 5th and 6th graders study how the invention of writing changed human life and the impacts of the French Revolution; they trace a topic such as the evolution of trade from prehistory until the 19th century.

·         Seventh graders in Korea are expected to know not just about supply and demand, but about equilibrium price theories, property rights, and ways to improve market function.

·         Japanese 7th to 9th graders “conduct experiments regarding pressure to discover that pressure is related to the magnitude of a force and the area.”

·         Eighth graders from the Canadian province of Ontario are expected to create musical compositions, conduct, and know musical terms in Italian.

·         Dutch 12th graders must know enough about seven events connected to the Crimean War to be able to put them in chronological order.

·         Canadian 12th graders in British Columbia are expected to identify the author of the words: “Thou art slave to fate, chance, kings, and desperate men” and to what Admiral Nimitz was referring when he said: “Pearl Harbor has now been partially avenged.”

·         On a Swiss examination 12th graders write an essay analyzing JFK’s October 1962 proclamation that led to the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Source: Common Core website

I am college educated, and I only ever dealt with Guernica, the musical tasks, and the economics, and the last two mostly in college.  But what tremendous thinkers we could develop if we taught students with the breadth of education that many other countries employ.  I am not an education expert, and I know there are tremendous hurdles to overcome, but I think we should begin to think more about a broadening of education rather than a narrowing of it.  Innovation in technical fields is not the result of producing workers who excel only in math and science.  Innovation will flourish when we produce more workers who are able to draw on education in many other fields to develop ideas.

The federal government may be able to reform education to help improve the quality of teachers and curriculum, but nothing will be very effective if families do not begin to invest more time in the encouragement and discipline of the young.  Especially in suburbia, children are often so pampered that their work ethic is eradicated by the time they reach high school.  Advocacy for a breadth of content in education must also start in the home, where children can be led into a wide variety of topics by parental encouragement.  In this age when America is accustomed both to being the best and to thrusting off responsibility for its actions upon others, we as a nation must admit we are stumbling and attack the root of the educational problem in the home.

The Warning Signs

Today marks yet another day of failure among Americans. Joe Stack, who was mad at the government, the IRS in particular, flew his plane into an IRS building in Texas, killing himself, injuring several, and perhaps killing one other (who is currently unaccounted for). He had apparently written a note on a website about his plans. Here is what the NY Times had to say about the man and his internet note:

It ended with passages strongly suggesting that its author expected to die on Thursday, including a reference to Feb. 18, 2010, as his date of death.

“I saw it written once that the definition of insanity is repeating the same process over and over and expecting the outcome to suddenly be different,” the note concluded. “I am finally ready to stop this insanity. Well, Mr. Big Brother IRS man, let’s try something different; take my pound of flesh and sleep well.”

Source: NY Times - http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/us/19crash.html?ref=global-home

This attack comes while two other similar instances are fresh on our minds. Just yesterday I heard a report on Amy Bishop, the angry woman who killed several colleagues at the University of Alabama at Huntsville recently. And only back in November, Major Hasan went on a shooting spree at Fort Hood, killing many of our nation’s best.

In all of these cases we managed to “miss the warning signs” of aggression. In retrospect, they seem so clear. Hasan had been in contact with radical clerics and had a history of psychological issues. Interviewed students had clearly noticed anger and social problems with Amy Bishop. And Joe Stack left us a note on his website openly saying (apparently) what he intended.

When such things come to pass, we feel that not only is the perpetrator guilty of a crime, but so is the person who failed to prevent the event from occuring in the first place. As humans, we have a sickening desire to pin the blame on someone, and the media feed off of this desire, pushing into every dark corner, turning over every scrap of information until someone is guilty. We say it is about justice, but really it is about revenge. Holding someone accountable for his own actions and rendering recompense to those afflicted is justice. But in these instances, we seek to hold one person responsible for someone else’s actions, even if the connection is tenuous. We are unable to accept the fact that sometimes people do crazy things, and we simply cannot stop the world from containing these people.

But once these events have occurred, it is important to prevent them from reocurring. And that, many will say, is why we ask about missing the warning signs. And yet, the country we live in places high value on the right to express ourselves freely. The note Joe Stack wrote on his website could be described in two ways up until today: an angry rant that would amount to nothing and the active promotion of free speech in a great nation. But when the insane aspect of Joe Stack decided to act on his rant, it became a missed warning sign.

And this is nearly always the case. The observance of our rights today becomes the obvious omen in retrospect. Our rights of free speech are in direct conflict with our notion that someone was wrong for missing the warning signs. Take Amy Bishop as the next example. If you were a college dean, considering her for a position on the faculty, what would you say when you notice she is a little odd, that she doesn’t make eye contact with you, but that her credentials are appropriate and her criminal background check turns up clean? You would probably say that, like the majority of professors, she was simply eccentric, and you would hire her. Despite the fact that the deepest background checks, like those for caretakers of children, would have turned up a few suspicious items, the depth used for this type of job did not. Just like in Mr. Stack’s case, until the day Amy Bishop turned violent, her eccentricity was merely part of her personality, and she, like the rest of us, had the right to be eccentric.

I do not pretend to know how to solve this problem. It has always existed, and it probably always will. But there is one important thing to glean: life is not fair. It’s one of the most unfortunate truths around, but we with access to internet and free time to read blogs cannot say life has been unfair to us. When, on occasion, though, the fact that life is not fair is brought back into our wealthy, secure laps, we seem to be unable to handle it and cast around for scapegoats. On this account we have something to learn from the child with AIDS who, despite the fact that he could easily and justifiably blame his illness on his parents, does not. No, most such children quietly lead their unhappy lives until death, never blaming. The same can be said of many others among the malnourished and impoverished masses around the world. We who have been so fortunate as to be born in the West should learn to accept the unfairness of life when it so happens to brush us by.

Many years ago our nation decided that free speech tends to make life more “fair” than “unfair.” It leads to progress and reform, the expansion of liberty to those who lack it, the protection of the minority against the domination of a majority. Those nations that have practiced censorship may not have as many crazed shootings, but they often end up trading them for secret police raids in the night and coerced confessions. History has shown us that this often leads to even more death and “unfairness” than we have otherwise.

So it is a trade-off. Recently we have seen the downsides of our freedom in these events, but we have only to look to the room around us to see its upsides.

Perspective

Gaining perspective is a lifelong endeavor. I probably only see life in two-dimensions right now, compared to the view enjoyed by my elders. But occasionally my perspective is expanded by an experience, a book, a piece of music, an article, or a keen insight. Recently, my 2D world has taken on a variety of new shades and hues, pushing towards the reality of three dimensions. I don’t know if I’m quite there yet, but I have progressed.

England obviously opened my eyes to the concept of living with less and to being more environmentally conscious. I always knew there were other, equally good, or perhaps better, ways of living than the American way I had known since childhood, but I never imagined I would adopt any of those foreign principles. But they made sense – what could I do but accept them? I imagine that these amendments to my way of life will slowly accumulate with time.

Experience aside, a few books have profoundly impacted the way I view the world. A long series of books, articles, and discussions over the years have completely transformed how I view the relationship between God and science, particularly regarding creation and evolution, both of which I believe occurred, which obviously requires that I interpret the book of Genesis figuratively. Why it is so difficult for many to even consider the possibility that Genesis is figurative, I know not.

But that could easily, and probably will, fill a later blog. Right now, I want to discuss a few other books that have revealed the foreign world to me in a powerful way. Most recently, I finished reading The Kite Runner, by Khaled Hosseini, just a few weeks ago. Further back, I read Balkan Ghosts, by Robert Kaplan, and portions of Black Lamb and Grey Falcon, by Rebecca West. All of these books helped me to see, for the first time, the alternate reality of places that I only knew as war zones. One book is fiction, the others are non-fiction, but they all revealed the humanity of war torn regions.

Balkan Ghosts and Black Lamb and Grey Falcon are both about the Balkans. Many people don’t even really know where the Balkans are. I could probably have only named one country from the region before I read Balkan Ghosts, and I probably would have labeled several other countries as “Balkan” which really are not. When Bosnia and Serbia and all those names came up, I immediately thought of Milosevic, and that was all I could think of. Murder, rape, genocide. And while war and strife has certainly been long-lasting in the Balkans, so have love, friendship, loyalty, hope, joy, and daily life. Some critics of Kaplan say his book is too defeatist, implying that peace is never possible in the region because of the deep-seated ethnic hatred, and while that may be a good critique, the book nonetheless opened my eyes to the beauty and mystery of the region.

Investigating further, I read portions of Black Lamb and Grey Falcon, the definitive travel book about the region, and perhaps the first true travelogue. Written in the late 1930s, this book more completely brought to light the Balkans known by those who lived there. There was certainly much grief and frustration, but there was also much pride and love. Most Americans do not travel to places like Bosnia or Serbia because they seem dangerous, and they are, to some extent. But they are probably more dangerous because we flaunt our wealth in the face of their relative poverty; we are easy targets. In Oxford I had the pleasure of meeting several students from the Balkans and many others who had traveled through the region. They all agreed: it was one of the most charming, beautiful, and fascinating places they had ever visited.

When I read The Kite Runner recently, this same idea was again intensely present. The Afghanistan portrayed prior to the Russian invasion and then later under Taliban rule was deeply moving and a complete surprise. I knew that the Taliban were ruthless and that the country was impoverished, but I had no idea that the country had ever been anything but that, even for a small group of people. The narrator, who grew up in a privileged neighborhood, was certainly not the normal Afghan, but the portrayal of the freedom there, most notably of religion, and the relative liberalism compared to the rule of the Soviets and Taliban, were utterly strange to me. I had to completely rethink the image I had of Afghanistan. No longer was it simply the impoverished, religiously intolerant, backward country of the Taliban; now it was a country once headed on a good path which met a disastrous fate at the hands of the Soviets and the conniving Taliban. How sad to think of where it was before the invasion and to where it has fallen now! It is a great tragedy; a tragedy which I previously blamed on the Afghans themselves. No people is completely innocent of its country’s descent into violence, but the Afghans have been abused and exploited. Most of them have only suffered while small groups of power-hungry villains lay waste to the country.

It is clear to me that many of my views of the world have egregiously lacked perspective. The more I learn, the more I discover my own error. Especially when it comes to understanding the foreign world, I no longer trust my preconceptions. I used to list both Afghanistan and the Balkans as places I had no desire to visit, ever. Now, they are both on the list.

Luxury vs. Necessity

In my March 31 post, "Do you want three shots or four?", I discussed the sense of entitlement assumed by many Americans. Basically, I said that the convenience of access to goods and services in America should not become an excuse for greediness.

I was listening to NPR the other day (you should all listen to NPR, it is amazing) and I heard a story that was very encouraging. They were interviewing a man from the Pew Research Center about a recent poll the Pew Center conducted. Apparently, the Pew Center has been asking Americans since 1973 what they consider to be luxuries and necessities. The poll focuses on things like cars, TVs, dishwashers, microwaves, and the like. From 1996-2006, Americans' perceptions of most of these items as a necessity steadily increased. By 2006, 91% of Americans thought a car was a necessity, 83% said the same of a clothes dryer, 70% for home air conditioning, 64% for a TV, 68% for a microwave, and 33% for cable or satellite TV service.

A few years ago, I probably would have said most of those things, with the exception of cable and a TV set, were necessities, particularly AC, a car, and a microwave. Living in Georgia, AC is a must have. It's either AC or death in the middle of the summer here, and I still believe that. But after living in England without a single one of the things listed above (and no dishwasher either!), I have revised my views a little. Whereas I felt that I needed my own car, I have realized that sharing a single car with my wife is really quite feasible, at least for now. We also do not have a microwave in our new apartment. It didn't come with one, and we hardly ever miss it. When I was in college, I used the microwave almost every day. I really didn't need to. We have decided that it's not worth it to spend the $30 it would cost us to buy a microwave - that is how little we need one. We only get the basic channels of TV, and it's great; we read more instead.

In short, I realized that many of the things I considered necessities were really luxuries, and some of them were luxuries that I really wouldn't miss if I didn't have them. Apparently, the recent economic troubles have caused many Americans to rethink this issue as well. Now, according to the poll, the percentages listed above have dramatically reduced. That is great! While the recession is not a good thing, I'm glad it has caused people to realize what is luxury and what is necessity. Some of the new percentages of people considering items as necessity are as follows:

Car - 88%
Clothes Dryer - 66%
Air Conditioning - 54%
TV set - 52%
Microwave - 47%
Cable or Satellite TV Service - 23%

I'm especially pleased that less than half of Americans think microwaves are necessities. Compared to the old 68%, the microwave percentage dropped 21% in three years! That is marvelous. Unfortunately, I know all the numbers will go right back up when the economy rebounds. Meanwhile, it is a good time to reflect on how good we have it in America, because in many places, all the items in the poll are luxuries. And while I'm not saying it is bad to own the things in the list, just because we can afford something doesn't mean it is necessary.

For a summary of the research mentioned, click here.
For the complete report, click here.

Dragons

Commercials are an interesting part of our culture. Those of us who care nothing for the NFL (college rocks) still watch the Super Bowl just to see what Budweiser will come up with. In my opinion, the commercials are often better than the game. But sometimes you find a gem of an ad watching something other than the Super Bowl.

This happened for me not too long ago. I was innocently watching some nerdy program no doubt, when I was suddenly rapt by drama and excitement of the highest order. The Mac Daddy of all commercials had finally been produced.

Since the commercial is inexplicably absent from Youtube and the rest of the internet as far as I can tell, I will describe the commercial for you. It should not surprise you that the commercial is for Gerber Graduates, food for toddlers. They have always had splendid ads. (And they make food that looks cool, tastes awesome, and is nutritious to boot!)

Basically, a 2-3 year old fellow, who I shall refer to as Henry, has captured a dragon (his mom) and imprisoned her in a cage of couch cushions with little more than brute strength and a tin foil sword. But, alas, it is lunch time! How ever will Henry eat if he must guard a dangerous dragon?!?! Whatever will become of the fair peasants whom Henry guards?? The suspense is so intense!!! !! !

Henry has the perfect solution: "You're freeeee dragon! Fly! Fly! Fly! Fly!"

I never would have thought of it myself. But Henry knew his adversary, and he knew that the perfect way to eat lunch, was to free the dragon. It worked like a charm. Three year olds always know what to do.

The first time I saw the commercial, I had many reactions to it, all of them good. My gut reaction was laughter, of course, as it is quite comical. But then I realized that the little boy had done what I always wanted to do - he had purposefully released a dangerous creature, knowing its heart was good all along. He realized that dragons have feelings too and set it free to revel in its power and mystique. He was the quintessential knight, upright and just.

Now I'm sure the line was scripted, and I'm sure the shot that made it to TV was the 319th take (I can just imagine the producers: "Alright Henry, just hold that 'freeee' a little longer - and why don't you wave the sword around too? No, Henry, you cannot have another popsicle until you finish the commercial!"), but the line was right in sync with the ways of the young. It is just like them to have a keen insight into life at the perfect moment, or to ask the question you have always intended to ask but never did.

I identify with the little guy; I've always wanted to free the dragon but I'm afraid it will eat me. Now I know dragons just want to be free and fly. So next time I'll free the dragon.

I'll be eagerly awaiting the next development in food for toddlers.

For my favorite dragon, click here.
For some funny kid quotes, click here.

Rethinking Enviornmentalism

It's been a while here at the JP Survey. Moving does that to you. So I (Ashley) have decided to write a few guest posts to get dicussions flowing again. Jonathan and I both enjoy reading about issues, playfully arguing - I mean, dicussing - issues, and writing about them, so please join us!

Now that we're back from jolly old England, re-adjusting to American culture has left us walking less, surrounded by much newer things, and sadly, drinking a little less English Breakfast. On the bright side, though, we now have a working faucet in the bathroom, 70 degree weather in February, and Chick-fil-A. So we're good.

On a more serious note, there is one distinction in particular between Americans and Brits - generally speaking - that we'd like to share today: views on the enviornment.

This is a somewhat hot-button topic in American politics. If you haven't followed this debate in recent years (due to being in Timbuktu or Siberia, of course), the broad break-down in opinion follows:

LIBERALS: Followers of Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth. We've destroyed our environment, if we don't act now the earth will be inhabitable within 24 hours, yada yada.

CONSERVATIVES: Inherently dislike Al Gore and therefore reject anything he publishes. The economy is more important than the environment, there is no proof of harm anyway, blah blah.

Enlgand, however, is over this debate. They've, ahem, sided with liberals here. Now before all you conservative readers stop reading, let's rethink this whole issue for just a minute, as my husband and I did while living in Oxford. We confess to having not carefully considered the issue before; but once we did, the results were interesting:

For Christians, why did this turn into a political debate in the first place? And how in the world did most Christians (the so-called "right-wing evangelicals" and such) end up on the "we don't really care about the enviornment" side? Seriously. Let's go back to the basics.

"God created the great sea creatures and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good....God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good." (Genesis Chapter 1)

Notice the pattern? God creates. It's good. God creates. It's good.

Then what does he do when humans enter the picture? He gives us the entire earth. To subdue it, to care for it, to tend it. In a way, we (mankind) are the governors of the world. We are not the ultimate ruler, but we definitely have some authority, at least for now. The question is, how do we use that authority?

Somehow, I'm fairly certain the answer should NOT be to trash the earth without regard to its future. No, we are called - yes CALLED - to care for the earth. So whether or not Al Gore is "making up" enviornmental drama is not the point. It doesn't matter if the Earth will self-destruct in 1 year or 1,000,000,000,000 years. We have responsibilities to do the best job we can as 'governors' of the world today.

The environmental debate is still important scientifically, of course. (And may I encourage you to read the scientists themselves on this issue, not news columnists or politicians who can filter the data one way or the other?) But again, the truth or falsity of An Inconvenient Truth should not be our basis for how we view environmentalism. Look to higher standards of Truth.

Practically, what does this look like? Well, we're still working on that part. But little things do add up, so why don't we all start by trying to waste less? Let's reuse and recycle, as Captain Planet always encouraged us as children. (And let's "take pollution down to zero" while we're at it! Just kidding.)

Food for thought....

And Jonathan wanted to include a note:
Save the polar bears.

The Death of Education

Once upon a time in a land far away, there was a boy. Sure, there are boys right now, in a land close by, but there was nonetheless a boy, in a land far away, once upon a time. Every day this boy got up and went to school, at least, most of the time. Sometimes he may have looked a bit disheveled upon arrival, but that is besides the point. Everything was normal. He would go and listen to his teacher, read some dry textbooks, eat, and go to sleep too late. This went on for some time without exception.

Then one day his teacher announced, "Today we will divide up into groups to begin a group project." Once upon another time, this boy had encountered these so-called "group projects" and was not a fan. You see, twice or thrice upon other times (perhaps even tetrice or quintice), the boy had dealt with group projects and those notorious group members with whom we are all familiar. Free-loaders, slackers, pungent persons - they go by a variety of names. However, this group had no members of that type. After the first or second group meeting, the boy was sure this project would turn out better than most. Everyone had attended and seemed eager to help. Life was good.

For this particular assignment, the group was required to turn in a 25 page paper. This may seem a trivial project to those of you in lands nearby, but the boy knew better. In his land there was only one thing to study, and that was business. Everyone believed themselves profound utilitarians. Over the millenia, the arts and humanities, not to mention the sciences, had fallen to the wayside, deemed unproductive, money-sucking, utility-wasting ventures far below the lofty intellects of the citizenry. Unfortunately, the boy enjoyed money-sucking, utility-wasting activities like reading and did not even own a Q-square (very similar to what may be called an X-box in your land). But despite his misguided ventures, he had learned the value of being able to communicate in writing. And the boy knew that his group mates may not regard the skill of writing as important, potentially increasing the time necessary to edit the paper. Thus, he was sore afraid.

Well, each member had been assigned a five page portion of the paper and come time to gather them together, the boy was pleased to find that his fears were unnecessary. All of the partners had produced excellent work, even one of them who has from a land even farther away and did not speak the boy's language natively. "But wait, weren't there five of us?" the boy thought. There were indeed five of them, the others confirmed. One person was missing, and with the last member were the final 5 pages. Now the boy, and the other members, knew the group was flawed after all. No group project reach completion without a problem.

Already annoyed by the tardiness, the other members were further perturbed upon reading the paper, finally produced about a week later. Have you ever seen those funny translations from foreign languages into English? My favorite was a set of instructions to motorists in Tokyo reported by Bill Bryson in his book The Mother Tongue:

"When a passenger of the foot heave in sight, tootle the horn. Trumpet at him melodiously at first, but if he still obstacles your passage, then tootle him with vigor."

Sometimes they make even less sense. In any case, the final five pages were such that the boy and the other group members all thought the entirety had been copied from such a translation. The project, after all, concerned Mintendo, maker of the Q-square, who published most of its information in a foreign language. So the group did have some reason to doubt. Sentences like this were popping up all over the place:

"Everyone knows Mintendo for the icon colorful and full of mushrooms Nario games."

It just didn't seem normal, and everyone agreed, including the non-native speaker.

Perturbed but convinced, the boy and a friend confronted the member gone astray, for no one wanted to suffer the consequences of plagiarism. Sadly, after much discussion and many embarrassing moments, the boy and his friend were convinced that there had been no plagiarism. It was much worse. The member simply could not write intelligibly. The land far away had reached a new low. All those seemingly small budget cuts to literature and the arts had done their deathly deed. Now people might realize just how useful reading and writing truly were.

This experience was just the first of its nature for the boy. In the next few years he had innumerable group projects, and he was continually astonished to realize how unisolated were such occurrences. In truth, many future groups did not even have a majority of people who could construct full sentences on a regular basis. And, I forgot to mention, the boy was at an institution of higher learning, sometimes referred to as college. He left the institution deeply worried about the future of education.

Unfortunately, a strikingly similar, perhaps even completely parallel situation is occurring in our own land. Going through UGA, it was immediately apparent that most students hardly read for pleasure (or for school, to be honest). Especially in the business school, it was difficult to comprehend how some of the students had ever made it through 9th grade literature class, much less gotten into college. Obviously this does not describe everyone, and I had many friends who loved reading, including a few in business. But I nonetheless was left with the impression that many business students cared nothing for reading because they really cared nothing for learning, they merely wanted money.

I believe that a number of things are to blame for this sad state in our nation's colleges, but I will only address a few.

Politicians often refer to the importance of college as a way of improving the productive stock of the nation. Going to college, they say, prepares you for future work and makes you add more to the nation long-term. I only partially agree with that statement. First of all, that is not necessarily true for people who want to be mechanics. We should never forget that many fields simply require different training to be effective, and those individuals are no less important than PhDs. But more importantly, the super-focused approach of colleges these days often ends up hurting the students' ability to think and reason, in my opinion. Business students hardly study anything other than business. Physics students hardly study anything but physics and math. There is so little exposure to the arts and humanities in general that students often end up being completely one-sided. And if they do manage to retain reasoning abilities, they are often boring people with no appreciation for beauty and truth who believe their field to be far superior to all others. Many famous economists, I've noticed, are more than eager to mock the findings of other fields. You can often find them at Ivy League schools, patting themselves on the back while looking disdainfully towards the literature department. (Though I do know some economists who enjoy a good book). Well-roundedness has been abandoned for the cult of the specialist. But despite education trends, insightful knowledge does not restrict itself to one field. Therefore, I believe we are severely restricting our own productivity and learning.

The US also seems to have decided that math and science are more important than other fields, placing special emphasis on these subjects in elementary school through high school. But I feel it is equally important to study literature and writing. Communication of ideas is of extreme value. In fact, it may be of more importance than discoveries themselves. These days in academia, you have to convince your colleagues that your discovery or insight is not only valid but useful. If you are unable to do so, your discovery is doomed to live in dusty basements. You may have discovered a new theory of physics that would revolutionize the provision of energy, but if you cannot communicate its importance, it doesn't matter. And obviously, as my story (with actual quotations from an actual paper) shows, the ability to communicate, even among college students, is often absent.

Although these are just a few symptoms, I believe the underlying problem of improper priorities in education is massive. So maybe read some King Lear tonight, if you haven't in some time, and remind yourself just how excellent language can be. Although solutions may be hard to come by, they start with individual commitment to learning. Posterity will certainly have no reason to love learning if we tacitly convince them that close-mindedness, ignorance, and sloth are acceptable.

For further reading, check out these two articles:
Why We Educate our Children
College Illiterates

Where's Georgia again?

A few months ago on a flight back home from the Caribbean, I sat next to a nice gentleman who we will call Elmer. Elmer had a family with him, a wife and a few young kids who sat in the row in front of us. They were all quite nice and I enjoyed our conversation - it is always pleasant to have a few words with a fellow comrade while sealed in a metal cylinder hurtling through the air faster than the speed of sound.

Well, as we were on an international voyage (to be fair, it wasn't really international coming back from Puerto Rico, a commonwealth of the US), we naturally talked about where else in the world we had been. Elmer had been a place or two, mostly in and around the US though. And I told him of my two trips to Europe and the upcoming move to Oxford. Whenever I talk about travel with anyone, I like to emphasize how wonderful Scotland is, because truly, it is amazing. I love everything about that country, so verdant, such fantastic history mixed with modern comforts; you should go, dear reader. So I rambled on a bit about the glory of Scotland and Elmer seemed at least nominally interested. Then came that fateful moment, the point of no return after which our conversation had an undeniably different tone. "Scotland, that's up there near New Zealand, right?" asked a curious Elmer. Now I admit that I sometimes assume certain things to be common knowledge which just aren't; some friendly readers may recall incidents involving the Bikini Atoll and the Simon and Garfunkel song "Scarborough Fair." But generally I can chalk those up to the eclectic conversations I had in my family growing up (and still have to this day) where dinner time topics could range from the doctrine of predestination to the theory of relativity and back all before I finished my mashed potatoes. This time, though, I knew he must surely jest - "Ha ha!" I laughed, expecting his face to light with the knowing glow of a joke well-placed. But Elmer did not reciprocate, and within a second I knew I had taken the bait for a joke that did not exist. I tried to recover, "Oh, ya know, they're not too close really...." Awkward silence. Poor Elmer - I think I could probably work on my tact some more.

Well, I hope you, dear reader, are aware that New Zealand is possibly the very farthest away on this Earth that you can get from Scotland. Perhaps Australia is more directly opposite, or maybe somewhere in the ocean, but the two nations are surely not neighborly. I felt bad for Elmer, really, and for some time to come I wondered if this was another mashed-potato moment. Maybe no one really knows where New Zealand is - I mean, who really keeps up with our antipodean cousins anyway (more to come on this in a future blog)? But since then, I have been assured by many diverse friends that most people at least know that Scots and Kiwis (as New Zealanders call themselves) inhabit very different, distant lands.

This unfortunate occurence came to mind recently with the onset of the Russo-Georgian conflict. Although I never encountered anyone in recent weeks who admitted a lack of knowledge of Georgian geography, I read many news articles that mentioned the general American unawareness of where in the world Georgia was, the country, that is. I probably would not have known either had it not been for a recent fascination with central Asia and the Caucasus region (and it didn't hurt that many James Bond and other spy video games involve post-Soviet states). Now I understand that people didn't know where Georgia is - not many of us will ever go there and it would not have much impact on the US in normal circumstances. But our lack of geographic knowledge in this instance and in the case of Elmer betray a general ignorance in the field among Americans. To be frank, it is really sad that so much of the world can name the US capital and many of our important cities, knowing fairly accurately where each of them is, when most Americans don't know even half of our own country's state capitals. There is no hope for world geography if we can't even master the domestic realm.

Now forgive me, dear reader, if you indeed have a strong grasp of world geography; in fact, I applaud you. I do not mean to say that all Americans fall short in this area; I do mean to point out that in general, we fail to teach geography adequately in our schools. In high school, I was not required to take a class in geography, nor in college; in fact, when I went through high school, geography carried the connotation of a low-level class, the sort of course that you exempt if you are "smart enough," to be blunt, though I know that is not the case in all schools. But no one ever tested me in geographic knowledge; for all they knew, I could have graduated high school thinking New Zealand and Scotland were landlocked neighbors in western Africa. Likewise, perhaps I still think that Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Chicago, and Philadelphia are the capitals of Washington, Oregon, California, Illinois, and Pennsylvania, respectively. (The true capitals are Olympia, Salem, Sacramento, Springfield, and Harrisburg.) I know of many, including myself at times, who think the capitals are simply the largest cities around. In college, geography seemed to be so focused on human migrations and anthropology that students still did not learn where anything was. Why does it matter where people groups ended up in Europe if we could not locate them now based on current landmarks?

Unfortunately, I don't presume to have the readership or the influence to spawn a new day in geography education in America. But truly, this is one field in which we are woefully ignorant. So next time you find yourself or a friend asking "Where's Georgia again?", pull out an atlas and have a look around.

Of Brooms and Stones

On cold winter days, there is nothing I like to do more than to go outside, find a large stone, and slide it with finesse across a frozen pond. But if I can't find an adequate rock, taking a broom to that frozen expanse is almost as good. In my dreams anyway. Maybe if I lived in Sweden instead of Georgia.

You may be wondering what on earth I am talking about, and you would be justified. If you are perplexed by my sporting wishes, let me be the first to tell you of the best of obscure sports: curling. It is a truly obscure sport, especially in the southern United States where long-standing ice is rare in winter. But curling almost seems to be famous for its obscurity, a delightful paradox. As far as I know, the sport was developed by the Scottish, no doubt in an attempt to fill the bitterly cold winters with something exciting. The plenitude of lochs must have had something to do with it also. Regardless of its origins, it is amazing, so let me fill you in on its wonders.

Basically, you have a large smooth stone with a handle on it, and you have to slide it along the equivalent of an ice shuffleboard into the center of a target. Sounds easy enough. But the strategy can become quickly complicated because competing teams alternate turns. You may launch your stone precisely into the bullseye only to be dislodged by the next team. To heighten the competition, two members of each team are allowed to use brooms (and yes, they really used regular old brooms back in the day) to brush the ice in front of the stone as it hurtles (gently) towards the target. At first I was skeptical that this would have any effect, but I have seen sliding stones spin and twirl behind the able guidance of British broomsmen, among others.

Although I had first heard of the sport in high school as a look-what-I-know anecdote from a rightfully proud classmate, I did not experience the thrills of curling until my college days at UGA. There, due to the misfortune of 8 o'clock classes, I was drawn to the dining hall at ungodly hours with some of my cohorts. It was winter 2006, and the UGA dining staff had set up a projection screen in O-House dining hall to provide non-stop Olympic coverage. Of course, curling did not have quite the following to merit primetime scheduling, so my friends and I would encounter this stone ballet on ice every morning amidst our juice and cereal. We didn't think much of the sport initially - it appeared to require the patience of cricket and was, frankly, quite silly-looking. It's not often one sees grown men and women gliding stones over the ice and frantically brushing away unseen obstacles as if to save their lives. But every morning as we battled our way through endless preliminary rounds followed by the semis and finals, we all became more and more engrossed. We knew which teams had what it took; we knew the basic strategies employed by the epic broomsmen; we even knew that they were stones, not rocks. We knew this was no sport for wimps - this was the sport of champions.

But more importantly, we were bound together by our shared experience of this unforeseeable icy tournament. And not only my group of friends, but all the other students who shared our frozen universe every morning. It was so clear who deserved to win, who was the noblest and finest of them all. In this case, the Americans had no chance for gold (although the men won a very respectable bronze), but we cheered them on nonetheless, for they were us, through and through American. And in fact, our solidarity reached far beyond our little dining hall. At a school so fiercely competitive and proud of its football team, this was the one time we knew that we were one (as blasphemous as it may sound) with all of our Saturday evening enemies. All of us, across America, were joined in hopes of eternal curling glory. It was truly a unique, wonderful experience.

This scene was repeated at a completely different level this year as Michael Phelps swam for golden history. And what awe-inspiring moments he and his teammates produced with their electrifying comebacks, hundredth of a second victories, and even the complete blow-outs. At no other time in my life have I felt such unity with my countrymen, together as one behind one young athlete, hoping he would get that next medal. I know I was not alone in this sentiment.

As special as his triumph was, what happened back home in the US was even greater. I was not around for the era of the large-scale wars of the 20th century; I do not know what it is like to be united by a global war in which every family has a son or daughter helping the cause against Naziism and Fascism. In fact, the recent wars we have fought have been completely the opposite - they have polarized our nation.

So when I stumble unknowingly into the raptures of curling, or when I knowingly hope for Phelpsian records, I am really making an appeal to my homeland, an appeal for unity. And my countrymen respond with brilliance. Beyond all the politics, the personal enmity and everything else that divides our blessed nation, some things rise above. So cherish the memories of these Olympics and others gone, and remember that patriotism need not hibernate until London.