Thursday, May 10, 2012

Why Johnny Hates Football

Why might Johnny hate football?

It hurts?  It's dangerous?  It's no fun anymore?

The violence of football has taken center stage in an unprecedented way in the last year or so.  Between the lawsuits by former players alleging long-term disabilities to the suspensions related to the bounty program by the New Orleans Saints to the recent suicide of Junior Seau - who joins a list of former NFL players plagued by depression to the point of early death - football is in the crossfire for becoming our guiltiest of pleasures.  Watching incredibly large and athletic men smashing into each other intentionally at high speeds has replaced baseball as our national pastime.  But many cultural critics are having second thoughts.

The national dialogue is beginning to rise above the din of smashing shoulder pads, and many are questioning whether the sport has gone too far.  From Malcolm Gladwell and Buzz Bizzinger debating why college football should be ended to ESPN analysts discussing the issue almost nightly, the question of how to deal with our fascination with hard hits on the gridiron are becoming uncomfortable.  What to do about the violence?  How guilty should we be about our guiltiest pleasure?  We know it's a dangerous game, and we expect it to be.  But we like it, and these men are on the field by choice.  And, of course, despite the concerns raised by tragedies like Seau's suicide, aren't the majority of former NFL players functioning and as healthy or healthier than the general population?  Certainly, the analysts in the booth are not suffering from early onset dementia.  And some research has even asserted that former NFL players outlive and are healthier longer than the average man.  Could be.  Makes sense in many ways.

Most recently, John Kass of the Chicago Tribune weighed in with an indictment of the sport, claiming "U.S. football is doomed."  Kass wonders whether parents may begin asking, "Is football worth it for my child?"  At least one national sports analyst has stated publicly he will not let his son play football professionally, or, if I'm not mistaken, even beyond the high school level.  His professional gut tells him that the risk of playing football at the highest level is simply not worth it.  I know it's not a question for me.  While my son is athletic and quite successful in baseball, basketball, and running, he has shown no interest in football.  In fact, his youth hoops coach is also a football coach, and he's begged my son to play for a few years.  But we tell him, "Coach, he's not interested."  Our boy doesn't like getting bumped into and tackled.  Pushing in the lane for a rebound is enough for him.

And, I'm glad.  Having grown up in a soccer community, I was never that interested in football.  Though when my friends went out for football during high school I was tempted.  My mother had a fit, reminding me of a childhood friend who passed away at the age of twelve on the football field.  It can be that cruel of a sport.  And as kids get bigger and more athletic, it only gets more dangerous.  They are, it seems, as a friend once told me "our gladiators."  And, something about that makes me uneasy.  The pressure for success on the sports field has become a serious societal force.  And it's a key ingredient in why, more and more these days, "Johnny Hates Sport."  And that's sad because the athletic field is a source for so much good in the lives of young men.  Many great lessons can come from the football field, and we may have lost some of that as concerns about health rise.

Something has to give.  And it can't only be the helmet and shoulder pads.





Tuesday, May 8, 2012

Barefoot Running in Shoes

I run barefoot ... but I wear shoes while I do it.

Several years ago, I became fascinated by and caught up in the rise of barefoot running.  It was inspired - mostly - by the publication of Chris MacDougal's fascinating non-fiction narrative Born To Run: A Hidden Tribe, Super-Athletes, and the Greatest Race the World Has Never Seen.  MacDougal's theories on and investigation into "barefoot running" was truly engaging investigative journalism on par with with the work of Eric Schlosser or Thomas Freidman.  And sales of Born to Run were aided by a timely and often-emailed New York Times article which also sang the praises of running "the natural way."

Until that time, I had gradually moved away from running and into more biking as I approached my forties and developed what the trainer at my school called bursitis, or more seriously a pre-arthritic knee. That didn't please me, but I had never been a passionate runner, and I truly enjoyed biking.  The problem with running was the mild discomfort behind the kneecap after a run, and the stiffness in the knee early in the morning, especially as I headed down the stairs.  I learned a few exercises and added the occasional rounds of MSM, glucosamine, and chondroitin to my vitamin regimen.  It was better in the summer and fall and worse during the winter and spring.  Of course, when I talked about running 5Ks and 10Ks like the BolderBoulder, our trainer shamed me with talk of his 85-year-old father speed walking the races.

And then I started reading Born to Run, and it made so much sense.  The anthropology and evolutionary biology behind his research was fascinating and convincing.  And the stories of the Stanford track team kicking off their complimentary Nikes during practice because they preferred running barefoot was intriguing.  Ultimately, the truth became clear - we've been running wrong.  Man is meant to run on the balls of his feet, but the rise of the running shoe industry had introduced the heel strike, which ultimately screws everything up.  In fact, our trainer even noted how my heel strike was contributing to my pain.  And we shouldn't have a heel strike.  If man is running naturally - like the way you would run if you were barefoot in the front yard and your toddler ran into the street in front of a car - he would be running on the balls of his feet.  It puts all the stress on the quads and the calves where it should be and completely off the knee joint where it shouldn't.

So, I began to change my gait.  And the knee soreness slowly faded away.

The rise of barefoot running has led to a new wave of products such as the Vibram Five-Finger Shoes.  And they are certainly popular.  Other shoes like the Merrells, Newtons, or various forms of Adidas offer a better running shoe style because they don't contain all the extra padding designed to offset heal strikes.  I'm personally a big fan of New Balance and always have been.  They work quite well for the barefoot runner.  It's not necessary if people are hitting on the middle to the balls of their feet and then lowering the heel to then push off with the calf for the next stride.  Ultimately, you should jog and run in the same gait that you sprint.  And no one sprints with a heel strike.




So, pick up Born to Run and give it some thought.  Then kick off the shoes, head out on the grass or a soft track, and give it a try.  It will definitely save your knees, if not your life.  And, in a teacher's view of running, it doesn't even matter if you keep your shoes on for your barefoot running.


Monday, May 7, 2012

National Charter Schools Week

Charter schools have been a fundamental force in education reform, especially in the last decade or so, and there is really no good argument against the model and its ability to effect change in many communities.  Thus, we should definitely take note of the rise of charter schools and praise the positive changes they have wrought.  And, of course there is no better time for a post on charter schools than this week which apparently - as I learned from Jay Greene's blog - has been named National Charter Schools Week.  This celebratory week is brought to us by the National Alliance for Public charter schools.  Of course, Jay Greene and the National Alliance clearly have a strong preference for charters, and many will criticize them for that bias.  However, the research on the success of charter schools - predominantly in urban areas - should not be discounted.  For, as always in a teacher's view, the point should be that "whatever works" is good policy.

Certainly, the randomized control trials (RCTs) have been quite revelatory in the benefits of charter schools, and they offer evidence to counter criticism of charters only succeeding by cherry-picking the best students.  Yet, that doesn't mean that charters don't continue to act and succeed based on the choices of motivated students.  That is, without doubt, the norm.  And there has been no example of a charter model being effectively applied to a neighborhood school whose students did not opt in to the model.  And, the case of Cole Middle School in Denver exemplifies the failure that results when that is attempted.  Despite the success of KIPP charters nationwide, the KIPP leaders and model failed when they were contracted to simply implement it in Cole.  And KIPP eventually backed out of Cole when the neighborhood rejected the model.  And, reform advocates must not discount the reality that only 20% of charters actually outperform neighborhood schools, while 20% perform worse.

However, the charter model has great value for the entire educational system.  A teacher's view of charters would simply evaluate the effectiveness and commit to the idea whenever applicable.  If a charter model is doing well, it should be expanded.  If hundreds of students more than a charter's capacity commit to it, then districts should simply find a way to let them in.   Let the kids go where they want, and open the model in a new building - even in a school-within-a-school model if necessary.  Just allow the opportunity to succeed.  There's no argument against that.

Sunday, May 6, 2012

Vocational Education Finally Gets Some National Press

In the tidal wave of attention paid to college these days - from college readiness to debates about the college-for-all mentality that is wreaking havoc public education - a few voices have been singing the praises and trying to promote a rational return to vocational ed for quite a while now.  Despite the misguided views of the Department of Education and Bill Gates, not everyone needs a four-year liberal arts bachelor's degree, even though higher education is not necessarily a bad idea for anyone.  Now, the issue may get some much needed national dialogue since Time Magazine has thrown the spotlight on it with the article Learning That Works by Joe Klein.

Among the more interesting points is the exciting developments in Career and Technical Education in Arizona.  From what Joe Klein sees, Arizona is leading the nation in developing career education through business-school partnerships, much in the tradition of the apprentice/guild model of old.  Arizona's stories of teaming school districts with local businesses is a success story in truly preparing students for the workforce, even as they hold on to the academics that people worry about when they cautiously discuss CTE.  Other insights from the article include revelations about careers and earning potential - for example, welders can make as much as $48/hour, and auto mechanics trained in computer science and automotive technology can be in demand to the tune of $100K/year.  Clearly, schools owe it to their students to put this information on the table.

A great follow-up to the idea of CTE, if you have never read it, is Matt Crawford's insightful treatise Shopcraft as Soulcraft.  At least that's a teacher's view of vocational education.



Apollo Precision Tools 50-Pc. Hobby And Craft Set

Apollo Precision Tools 64-Pc. Travel And Automotive Tool Kit

Apollo Precision Tools 54-Pc. Roadside Tool Set

Wednesday, May 2, 2012

Should College Football Be Banned?

On numerous occasions - and blog posts - I've discussed and debated the ethical conundrum that is college football.  Particularly, issues of paying athletes and concerns about abysmal graduation rates and tax exempt status for universities based on an educational mission have taken center stage.  Now, as the national discussion heats up regarding the increasingly violent and dangerous nature of the NFL - coinciding with an incredibly rise in popularity - the issue has become prominent enough to generate serious discussion in American cultural circles.  To that end, Slate Magazine will be hosting a public event on May 8, when "Ideas Guru" Malcolm Gladwell and sports chronicler Buzz Bizzinger will debate the issue of "banning college football" with a couple sports columnists and former athletes who will defend the sport as integral to the culture of higher education.

Gladwell's interview highlights many important points in this debate, not the least of which is the violent gladitorial nature of the sport contrasting and conflicting with the general culture of academic achievement.  Certainly, it has become difficult to look past the weak excuses that university athletic programs have become when considering graduation rates of college football and basketball players.  And, while I have never been a supporter of paying college athletes, there is certainly some credence to the argument that these young men are simply hired entertainers who generate incredible revenue for their host schools.  In fact, Jose Nocera of the New York Times recently opined that perhaps college athletes - or at least athletes in the big two sports - should simply be allowed the opportunity to simply "major in football."  It's actually not a crazy idea - or at least not as crazy as it appears on the surface.

Clearly, college football is at its heart a big business, and the issue of providing an authentic college experience based on learning to work as a team and be a disciplined professional is nothing but a smokescreen that sports proponents use to defend an almost indefensible system whereby colleges and universities rake in huge revenue and prestige by showcasing the physical talents of a few young men on Saturday afternoons.  And, the organizations claim tax exempt status based on an educational mission that is obviously not the priority of the young men or the athletic departments.  However, the system is so massive and ingrained, it will be tough to rattle from its moorings.

Can't wait to hear the arguments Gladwell and Bizzinger are going to generate.

Sunday, April 29, 2012

Apple Avoids Paying Taxes for Benefits It Reaps

Regardless of your views on taxes, it's hard to support a company operating fully in one state - California - and benefiting from its infrastructure, culture, workforce, quality of life, etc., while setting up an "office" in another state - Nevada which has no state income tax - so the company avoids paying for the very services it uses to great profit.  And, that's exactly the case of Apple, as exposed in this story from the New York Times.

This oligarchic manipulation of the system has been exposed numerous times over the years, especially when American corporations operate fully in the United States - benefiting from infrastructure, legal foundations, stability, workforce, etc., - but setting up the corporate "headquarters" in the Cayman Islands to avoid paying taxes.  The corruption was documented in great detail in the book Perfectly Legal by David Cay Johnston, though despite that books publication in 2003, nothing has changed.  It is absolute fraud, and it's a shameless lack of integrity.  In fact, just like the expose on Dateline tonight about teenagers, it's a culture of cheating, clear and simple.  Sadly, we have reached a sad point in our republic when people will willingly break the rules - or bend the ethics - all in the name of making money.  Sure, they can do it.  And, of course it's just good business to maximize profit while minimizing expenses.  But how we can justify this as logical, ethical, righteous, or simply not a big deal, is beyond me.  And that's what's happened to the American character.

I have to thank Darren at RightOnTheLeftCoast for linking to this story, though we disagree on this issue.

Make College Less Affordable

It's no surprise I have promoted the idea of less college for all.  Despite the desires of Bill Gates and the Obama Administration to lead the world in college graduates and have 80% of adults with a bachelor's degree, more degrees is not the answer to America's ills,  and it will not revive the economy.  In fact, more college degree holders simply drives down the demand for such highly skilled workers while increasing the demand for jobs - thus, voila, lower wages for traditionally middle class fields.

Now, Ed Quillen of the Denver Post has offered an insightful contribution to the college loan/college debt/college-for-all debate.  In Quillen's lucid analysis, increasing the guaranteed money available for college loans only leads to colleges raising tuition.  And, there is no reason that so many employers have decreed that a bachelor degree is the screening device for a job.  Thus, Quillen believe employers should no longer be allowed to use education credentials as a screening process.  Imagine that.  Of course, it could be a logistical nightmare.  But if employers simply had to screen candidates based on individual testing processes, fewer would feel the need to pursue a degree that may very well be useless in their field.

The classic example Quillen throws out is our wise "rail-splitting"President, Abe Lincoln, who earned his license to practice law through a simply display of knowledge, rather than a degree.  And, seriously.  If someone can pass the bar exam, does he really need the degree to back it up?  Does someone really need the education degree to step into a classroom?  Can't a scientist design rocket without attending a university?

Can't a surgeon operate on your brain without ... ?

OK, there are some caveats.

But Quillen has a good point.

Tuesday, April 17, 2012

Tips for Teaching Writing


I am sharing my favorite tips for superb writing as a part of the Superb Writers’ Blogathon. In partnership with Grammarly grammar checker, this series is bringing helpful hints to aspiring superb writers all across the world wide web. 

“It’s about readin’. It’s about writin’. It’s about thinkin’.”

That’s the advice of an old-school professor of rhetoric when asked about the goal of AP Language and Composition and freshman writing classes. In an era of complicated state standards and debates about the Common Core, English teachers need to remind themselves of the basic mission. Of course, many English teachers love the literature side of the job because they love their books and the themes. That handles the reading and the thinking.

But what about the writing?

English teachers are tasked with teaching students how to write - and this is often the most neglected part of the job. In fact, many English instructors don’t consider themselves composition teachers. For one, it’s hard. The reason is obvious: to assess writing, teachers end up buried under mountains of essays. Secondly, teachers too often use writing as simply summative assessment. The kids write an essay to show what they know. And many teachers do not know how to teach the craft – for writing truly is a craft, an art form.

The key to effective writing instruction is the opportunity to write. Students must practice the craft, and they must do so in a variety of genres for a variety of purposes. And it’s OK for writing to simply be practice. A colleague once told me, “If you’re grading everything they’re writing, they are not writing enough.” Whether it’s journaling and free-writing or copying famous speeches and essays in the tradition of the Greeks and Romans, regular practice of writing is integral to success. Thus, students should occasionally just write. One of my favorite free response activities is to read the students a short essay to begin class – generally it’s from the works of Robert Fulghum, the author of All I Really Need to Know I Learned in Kindergarten. His essays are great conversation starters.

So, how do we move from assigning writing to teaching it?

We all want our students' writing to sing. Creating voice where there is little to none, however, is a challenge. Thus, as my AP Language students progress in their writing and ability to argue and deconstruct style, I reach a point where top students wonder if their scores will ever improve. The key to higher scores is often sophistication of language. It's diction, syntax, tone, style, voice, mood, attitude, and command of language. Top papers just sound better. And it's the way they command the language that makes the difference. Thus, breaking the task down into its various components is fundamental. It’s what many people call Six-trait.

To that end, I use an assignment writing op-ed commentary as a way to model effective style/voice, and as a way to help them find their own. We analyze numerous pieces of commentary during the year, as they are great pieces for style and opinion/argumentation. In crafting their own, students are then challenged with finding some topic on which they have something interesting to say. To begin, we do a few short journal entries entitled "Angry Talk," Happy Talk," and "Interesting Talk." They often share their ideas - and even a few choice sentences - as a way of generating ideas and discussion. Often, this assignment produces some of the best writing I see from them all year.

The issue of teaching and grading conventions – that is, grammar and mechanics – is also a tricky aspect of the job. While grammar is only one aspect of effective writing, a poorly edited paper is distracting and ultimately ineffective. Thus, teachers are remiss if they don’t hold students accountable. In a standard, holistic rubric, conventions are certainly considered, but they are not the predominant part of the grade.

Certain practices in writing instruction can improve grammatical fluency. For example, one of the most effective is the practice of sentence combining. Giving students a deconstructed and simplistic passage in single sentences and asking them to combine the sentences is a helpful tool for improving command of language. Sentence combining not only improves sentence fluency and sophistication of syntax, but it also dramatically impacts mechanics and punctuation.

Finally, the task of editing and revising is integral to developing the craft. In this area, the use of exemplar essays is foundational to good instruction. Showing students how it’s done well is a step beyond simply assigning and returning writing. Whenever I discuss exemplar papers, I always urge – even require – that students copy some of the sample sentences that I’ve highlighted. This work goes in their writing journal along with a reflection on their own paper. Students must always copy and take note of sentences I’ve edited. Revising and re-writing a troubling sentence effectively internalizes the improvement. Early in the year, I ask students to circle all the weak word choice – especially “be” verbs – in their sentences and revise the sentences with a stronger, action verb. Giving them a list of such verbs, analytical terms, and tone words is also helpful.

Ultimately, the craft of writing can – and actually must be – taught. Students learn through the opportunity to write and create, the freedom to make mistakes, the practice of peer and exemplar review, the act of editing and revision. While few of us wield the magical pen of Shakespeare or Mark Twain, all of us can – with effective instruction – become competent and effective writers.


Franklin Advanced Merriam-Webster Dictionary & Thesaurus with Spell

Jumpstart 4th to 6th Grade 20414

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Schools Weeding Out Veteran Teachers to Save Money?

In a well-run school district with strong administration, a good teacher never has anything to worry about. At least that is my general assumption about my profession. However, stories creep out every once in a while that reinforce the reasons teacher associations hold tightly to tenure, due process, seniority, and other standards of teacher contracts. Because, we've all heard rumors and accusations that school districts seek to save money by dumping veteran teachers in search of young, inexperienced, and ultimately cheaper staff.

That's the charge coming out of Denver Public Schools, according to veteran teacher Cynthia Masters.

I've heard similar stories of teacher turnover recently from different school districts. And in one particular district, I have no doubt the superintendent has intentionally sought a younger and younger staff that he could control while keeping costs down. Of course, there are bad apples in any profession, and it shouldn't surprise us that these stories occasionally surface. However, as school districts face increasingly tight budgets, and the public perception of teachers and government workers continues to plummet, the attrition of veteran teachers to save money is a situation to watch for very carefully.


Sunday, April 8, 2012

Health Care & Insurance is Not a Free Market

As someone who purchases family health insurance not through my employer but as an individual consumer, I have carefully watched the Supreme Court hearings on the Affordable Care Act - pejoratively reviled by insurance holding members of the GOP as "Obamacare." As arguments about the "market" and the commerce clause applicability have been made to the insurance issue, many consumers have frustratedly tried to remind critics, this is not a free market issue. It's not an open market.

And, I have been baffled by the inability of the Obama administration to make this argument both in the public and in the actual court hearing. Now, finally, op-ed writer Donna Dubinsky has effectively and succinctly clarified these concerns:

As best as I can tell, the recent arguments at the Supreme Court did not touch on a critical part of the discussion about government’s role in health care: the broken market for private insurance. It was as if the court forgot that the private insurance market does not function as a normal market. If you are not employed and you want to purchase insurance in the private market, you cannot unilaterally decide to do so. An insurer has to accept you as a customer. And quite often, they don’t. Insurers prefer group plans, with lots of people enrolled to spread the risk. Can you blame them? The individual consumer is a lot of work, is a higher risk, and produces relatively little revenue.

The justices repeatedly asked: If the government can require you to purchase insurance, what else could it require you to do? What are the limiting conditions to this breadth of control?

The government muffed its response. To me, the answer is obvious. There are two simple limiting conditions, both of which must be present: (1) it must be a service or product that everybody must have at some point in their lives and (2) the market for that service or product does not function, meaning that sellers turn away buyers. In other words, you need something, but you may not be able to buy it.

Let’s test the examples presented to the high court: Can the government force you to eat broccoli? This proposition fails on both counts. Nobody must eat broccoli during their lives, and the market for broccoli is normal. If you want broccoli, go buy it. Nothing stops you.

Clearly, these are the issues which drove the move for universal coverage in the first place. And I have significant criticisms of the ACA - especially the mandates it requires for coverage to be provided for free. While I agree colonoscopies and well-visits should be covered - nothing should be for free. The consumer must contribute to the payment for all health services.

But, the private market is in serious trouble. It's not a free market, and no GOP alternatives to the ACA address that disparity.

Saturday, April 7, 2012

Turn Fitness into a Game

Why will people put hours into beating a video game, but not minutes into beating the scale? Well, obviously the easy answer is that sitting on a couch is engaging but not physically hard. But maybe there's something to the lack of level-up competition that inspires people to devote hours to beat a new video game, but not any to beat their health risks from excessive weight and lack of fitness.

Thus, a new website and application seeks to change that paradigm. The Slimkicker Calorie Counter and Level-up Weight Loss Game is an online app designed to aid in weight loss and fitness by making it a game.

To be fair I don't know much about the site, and I haven't used it yet. But I learned about the idea a while back and was intrigued by the concept. Is it possible for an app to make living healthy, and fitness into a RPG game, where users earn points, and "level up' as they accomplish their health goals? For example, what if every time a user adds something healthy like veggies to their diet, or completes a workout, they earn points. Then, as they achieve more and more, they can be entered into challenges for the chance to earn prizes.

Sounds intriguing.




Monday, April 2, 2012

Sugar is the Devil

It's been about ten years since I began to seriously consider the negative effects that sugar can have on the diet and overall health. And, in that time the research has continued to reveal the negative, toxic, even lethal consequences that come with consumption of sugar. From the rise of high fructose corn syrup - and its ubiquitous presence in everything from bread to ketchup - to the shocking increased consumption of sugary drinks, sugar has nearly overtaken the American diet. And, for the most part, Americans are unaware and naive to the problem.

The basic idea is this - fifty years ago Americans consumed a couple teaspoons of sugar a day. Now, it's often one-hundred times that. So, while eating dessert is one thing - and even reasonable at times - Americans are consuming monstrous amounts of sugar. And, as Sanjay Gupta exposes in the following segment on 60 minutes, it is impacting far more than our waste lines. It's a factor in heart disease and cancer in ways no one ever imagined. And, it's simply not a factor in other populations the way it is in America. For example, forty years ago, we declared war on fat - and heart disease rates have skyrocketed. That's because the fat was replaced with sugar, and it's every bit as destructive, if not more so.


The basic facts of the case are clear. Sugar is absolutely no good. So, the daily consumption has to drop. Even a soda a day is too much. In fact, many doctors such as Dr. Oz have long argued that if you can or will only make one change in your diet, it's to cut out the soda. Start consuming more food and join SugarBusters. Interestingly, when most of our oldest citizens are studied and polled, one key factor in their diets is that it is surprisingly low on sugar. Cut back on the sugar.

Your life truly depends on it.