Next Food Network Star 2014, Luca Loses Out

OK, as I noted last week, the primary and non-negotiable component of being a "Food Network Star" is that you have to be able to cook. And Luca Dell Casa could do that. But Kenny Lao proved twice tonight that his skills in the kitchen are suspect. Yet, Luca was eliminated because he "never looked at the camera." That's a bit of a shame because Kenny really should have lost out and gone home in Episode Two. If a man does not know how to cook a roux, and creates such a mistake that the next contestant had to fix it - as Areyan had to do - then he certainly can't make another mistake like not heating his pan until he has five minutes left to cook a fish, and still be allowed to continue. Period.

A quick note on the mistake that Areyan had to fix: yes, Lenny should have helped her when he knew how to fix the mistake. The poll on screen that had 60% of respondents saying "no" is sad - it's not that kind of "Survivor" mentality, and Lenny didn't lose out by helping her. Certainly, when both Bobby and Alton praised her, Areyan could have done the polite thing and acknowledged the help she received. But that doesn't mean Lenny was cheated or should avoid helping a chef in need. That's simply kitchen etiquette.

And what was with that obsessive focus on Sarah Penrod in the first half of the show? For some reason - probably because she is blond and attractive and "pageanty" as Alton called her, or maybe because she exudes "drama" like Demaris did last season - the camera was fixed on Sarah. In fact, for the unfamiliar viewer, it seemed as if Sarah was actually the narrator of the show. Of course, I guess she has her fans back in Dallas. But while Sarah improved from last week, it wasn't by much. The presentation of "turkey burger meat loaf" with a side of potatoes as a "date night meal" was about as bland and disappointing as any presentation I've seen on NFNS.

As far as the others: I am not as annoyed by Cowboy Lenny as I was last week, and he doesn't seem as crass as Rodney "Pie-in-the-Face" Henry was last season. But I don't think the Food Network needs another personality like Lenny. They already have enough over-the-top man personalities on the show, especially those that cook and promote unhealthy foods. That said, his crab cake and Waldorf salad looked quite divine, and he should stick around … but tone it down, Kenny.  Nicole Gaffney continues to impress with her quality skills and easy going nature. I'd sit around her kitchen, listening to her talk food all night. The same goes for the farm-to-table voice of Emma Frisch - she is so easy to listen to, and even Iron Chef Alex Guarnaschelli said she was just "so easy to listen to and follow." I disagree with the criticism that she was too soft and lulled people to sleep. TV chef Sarah Moulten has made a career  with that easy going, almost toneless, instruction - and Sarah has a much whinier voice.

So, Luca was not meant to be a FNS - apparently "looks aren't everything on the Food Network." And Kenny is pretty obviously going out next. Stay tuned.

Capitalism, Market Forces, and Education Reform

Education is not "a market." And that may be the key to conflicts in the education reform world.

For far too long, earning potential has been the primary justification used for education and education reform in American society. It has driven the "College Degrees for All" push, and the emphasis of STEM subjects to the exclusion and diminishment of the Humanities, and the argument for Common Core State Standards, and the calls for accountability, and the extreme influence of billionaire philanthropists on the crafting of education policy on a local, state, and national level. And the application of capitalist tendencies and market forces to the education is "a disaster waiting to happen," argues Eric Levitz in his Salon.com interview with education professor David Blacker who recently published his warnings in The Falling Rate of Learning and the NeoLiberal Endgame.

The primary target of my critique was large-scale educational reform, the systemic movement. The goals of which, my heart is with: unionization, desegregation, inclusion. But I think my conception of fatalism is that the institution of education is so deeply, structurally tied to a certain trajectory of capitalism that it’s not amenable to structural reforms. So that’s where my pessimism comes from. I think that that kind of mainstream liberal activism, at best, has the effect of softening blows that are almost inevitably coming.

The criticism of market forces in education was challenged by writer Matt Bruenig who warned that reformers' naive focus on education in Finland was a misguided approach to the problems of the American education system. A lack of understanding for how Finland applies egalitarian ideals to its education system and social welfare leads reformers to believe that Finland's emphasis on teacher quality will not only solve students' academic shortcomings but will also solve the nation's inequality issues. This is, of course, fundamentally not true. But that won't dissuade a billionaire like Bill Gates who has decided - with little evidence or reasoning - that 80% of Americans need bachelors degrees. In believing that because college-degree holders earn more money that simply increasing the number of degreed citizens will magically raise wages and decrease income inequality, Bill Gates has abandoned all the critical thinking that is supposed to be at the heart of the Common Core revolution.

Yet, the power of market forces has led to Bill Gates' ability to almost singlehandedly wage a "coup" in the education world.

Bob Mould Still Bringing the Punk Rock Ethos

It was 1979 that Bob Mould helped put together Husker Du, the seminal punk band that paved the way for some of the best rock music of the 80s and 90s. And long after many of those pioneering a powerful rock sound have faded away, Bob - post-Husker, post-Sugar, post-grunge, post-alternative - continues to plug along making good music. He's back this summer with a new CD, Beauty and Ruin. Check out this perfectly framed piece of music and commentary called "I Don't Know You Anymore":

And he's profiled in a great piece on, where else, NPR. Take a look at Bob Mould's Beautiful, Ruinous Life in Punk.

On a new record called Beauty & Ruin, out this week, Mould looks back on his life and long musical career, both of which were profoundly influenced by his father — a music enthusiast who bought him records and guitars, but could also be cruel. In a conversation that covers Mould's entire artistic life — from playing along to Ramones albums in rural New York to building a DIY touring network with Hüsker Dü, through sobriety, sexual self-discovery and the death of his father — the elder statesman of alt-rock tells NPR's David Greene that at 53, he's finally starting to have fun.

You know, we fell into this hardcore punk sound, and we quickly moved away from the dogma — the strict sort of anarchy-slash-destroy-the-government thing. By 1985 with New Day Rising, as a songwriter I was already trying to be a bit of an older soul. I started thinking about time, the temporal nature of relationships, opening myself up more personally. By the time we got to "I Don't Know for Sure" off of Candy Apple Grey, punk rock had become "alternative rock"; it was on MTV all the time. It was just a natural progression.

Having said that, as far as people accusing Hüsker Dü of selling out or whatever, it was a pretty ferocious live band. If the records had been softened even one bit, all anybody had to do was come and see the band live and they'd recognize that there wasn't anything soft about it.

The Truth About Sugar

Sugar is sweet, and sugar is toxic. Sugar is pure, and sugar is the Devil. As Americans continue to struggle with weight and health, the myriad of quick fixes to an unhealthy of diet only serve to complicate the issue. And when even the experts seem to change their mind, and the standard arguments don't provide clear solutions, it's difficult for a consumer to make a good decision. Certainly, we know that eating sugar and empty white carbs is not good for us. This was well argued by Dr. Lustig in his landmark speech:

And, the simple answer of everything in moderation is insufficient advice when it clearly doesn't work that way.  Add to that the Atkins diet with its emphasis on proteins and fats, and combine it with a healthy dose of Sugar Busters, topped off with news about the Big Fat Surprise, and the world of food seems so complicated.  So, what's the deal with sugar and carbohydrates? Well, for those interested in a great piece of work from a man with the credentials to know, check out thoughts on "BEING HAPPY WITH SUGAR" by James Hamblin, MD, a senior editor at The Atlantic. Hamblin runs through all the available information from the experts, exposing the back tracking of Dr. Oz:

“Over the past few months, I’ve become increasingly concerned about a sweetener that I’ve recommended on my show in the past,” Mehmet Oz lamented in an apology earlier this year. Oz, the practicing cardiac surgeon and professor at Columbia University who hosts an eponymous daytime-television extravaganza, is given to emphatic food recommendations. Either run and buy something, or throw it away. Throw it as far from you as possible. “After careful consideration of the available research, today I’m asking you to eliminate agave from your kitchen and your diet.” That’s a stark difference from 2011, when fans of Oz’s show listed their “all-time favorite tips” from Doctor Oz, and number one was “Agave Nectar as a Sugar Substitute.” Number one. Agave flooded “natural” food aisles. By 2012, agave nectar sales were projected to double within the decade, as they had the decade prior. America’s Doctor was at the helm.

And, he offers insight on Lustig, too.

The concern is that when a person consumes too much fructose, their liver gets overwhelmed and converts some of the fructose into fat that ends up in their blood as small dense LDL that lodges in blood vessels, causing atherosclerosis and, subsequently, heart attacks. Lustig is a gifted talker, and he has his points down. He has called sugar “the Professor Moriarty” of the obesity epidemic, before upping the metaphor and calling fructose “the Darth Vader of this sordid tale, beckoning you to the dark side.” It’s this narrative that emerged as the backbone of the documentary Fed Up, which premiered at Sundance in January and is now in widespread release. Produced and narrated by Katie Couric, the film takes us through interviews with more than 20 nutrition experts, basically a who’s who of New York Times Magazine nutrition articles in the last decade—Marion Nestle, Michael Pollan, Gary Taubes,Michael Moss, Michele Simon, David Ludwig—and others who constitutewhat Times food columnist Mark Bittman calls “the professional sane eating brigade.”

There is no easy answer, but there are some pretty obvious truths about diet and health. Hamblin offers some nice perspective on those truths.

Who's Who Behind Attacks - or "Reform" - of Public Education

For as long as I've been paying attention, public education has been one of the primary concerns of the voting public, and it has been an endless source of "reform movements." Starting with A Nation at Risk in 1983, and continuing through the turn of the century with No Child Left Behind, Americans have perceived problems in need of serious reform in the nation's public schools. The movement behind Common Core State Standards and the push for national standardized assessments is only the latest outgrowth or development of that perception. Of course, there is plenty of misinformation, and people are constantly asking me to explain the Common Core, PARCC, NCLB, accountability, etc. And I try to do so with as little bias as possible. But we all have an opinion.

The latest voice to enter the murky world of public education reform - especially the corporate movement behind the establishment of national standards and assessment - is a teacher and education blogger with an amazing knack for statistical analysis and an ability to dig up the bones on education. Writer, teacher, researcher Mercedes Schneider began making a splash at her blog about a year and a half ago, and she has been one of the most prolific in tracking down the truth by "following the money." Now, she has compiled all the research into a fascinating expose of "Who's Who in the Implosion of Public Education." The use of the word "implosion" certainly does not hide Schneider's criticism of and contempt for the people behind the corporate education reform movement. And, it's not, as Anthony Cody notes, for the "faint of heart" in education controversy.

But it appears to be a pretty compelling and informative look at the past decade or so of changes in public education.

Meat & Fat are Healthy & Nutritious Foods

Despite what the American Heart Association - and Michelle Obama - like to believe, eating meat and foods with saturated fat is not unhealthy. And meat and dairy are not the villain in America's battle with expanding waist lines, diabetes, and heart disease. At least that's what most of the research shows, as collected and artfully presented by health writer and investigative journalist, Nina Teicholz in her new book, The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat, and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet.

Americans have been fighting the Battle of the Bulge, and equating the enemy with meat and milk for at least fifty years now. At that approach is mostly likely based on flawed data and the mistakenly belief about what causes the body to put on weight in the form of "body fat." Teicholz, who has been writing about health and nutrition for years, began to investigate America's "issue with fat" when she was assigned a story by her editor at Gourmet to report on the trans fat problem in processed foods. She began to learn just how much mis-information led to "How Americans Got Red Meat Wrong." It's pretty clear that there is no causation, and not even any real correlation between meat consumption and America's weight and heart disease crisis.



The problem, of course, is that Americans love to latch on to a narrative, and will firmly believe it even after evidence exposes its flaws. And that has driven the low-fat and non-fat craze in food production - a movement that has done nothing to decrease America's health issues. And now that issue is invading the public education reform movement, as the new healthy lunch standards limit kids to skim and non-fat milk for no good reason. This sort of misinformation spread by deceptive organizations like the USDA, and naive campaigners like Michelle Obama, is doing nothing to address health issues, and will only seek in driving high school kids away from the federal lunch program.

It's worth noting just how misguided we have been about health and diet, as evidenced by the realization that even as Americans increase their consumption of fruits and vegetables, the weight problems continue to grow.

Mathematical Thinking & the Keys to the Future

In the era of big data and standardization and accountability and an ever increasingly complex economy and business environment, the skills of numeracy and mathematical thinking could not be more important. And that is a problem in a country where people habitually shrug off science and mathematics by saying, "Oh, I'm just not good at math."

Of course, it doesn't have to be that way, and it's never to late to start. In fact, once people become more successful with those skills and concepts that seemed so foreign and useless (When am I ever going to use this?), they become more empowered. And they are less likely to pass their apprehension on to their children. Additionally, they may become more astute in areas of consequence such as personal finance, voting, and predictions. Now, the issue of mathematical thinking gets some clarity in an accessible new book from University of Wisconsin math professor, Jordan Ellenberg. The book is:

Sarah Gray of Salon.com talked with Professor Ellenberg about "The Hidden Power of Math: On Politics, Uncertainty, and the Rare Talent of Nate Silver."

Public Schools Aren't Failing - They Outperform Private Schools

The primary narrative behind the establishment of Common Core State Standards and national assessments  such as PARCC and SmarterBalanced is the "claim" that "American schools are failing" and that "American students are falling behind." While there is plenty of evidence to the contrary, and plenty of information about how the conversation is much more complicated than sound-bites, it's important to consider the reason and motivation behind these myths - and the impact they have had in literally altering education policy. Basically, the concern of public education advocates, and the motivation for the changes, is a belief that private schools are better than public ones. And there's the claim that if public schools were privatized - namely out from under teacher associations - then the school system would miraculously solve all social ills and America would have the top schools in the world.

But what if private school superiority were the myth?

That is the conclusion of perhaps the most important new book on education policy, The Public School Advantage: Why Public Schools Outperform Private Schools. The research of Christopher and Sarah Lubienski from the University of Illinois compiles extensive data for not only the strength of public education, but also for understanding why the "public" has long believed private is better. The reality is far more complicated than any book or review can explain. America has some fantastic schools and world-class students, and it has some schools and communities where the system is pathetic. Poverty seriously impacts student achievement - but it is a cop-out to simply use poverty as an excuse for failure. Poor kids can achieve, and the success of some charter and magnet schools should not be dismissed. At the same time, the charter model is no panacea, and it is not the only answer to poverty-stricken communities where kids struggle to even become proficient students. Regardless of the causes and the people behind the solutions, no progress can come if people are under mistaken beliefs about the current quality of public education.

Certainly, America's public education is far from flawed. But at the same time, public education is definitely not in a state of ruin.

Food Network's "Next" Food Network Star Returns

After the dismal 2013 season of the Food Network's Next Food Network Star which awarded the title to "Paula Dean Wannabe" Demaris Philips, the star-making show that gave us people like Guy Fieri and Jeff "The Sandwich King" Morrow returned tonight with twelve new Food Network hopefuls.  Our celebrity chef hosts Bobby Flay, Alton Brown, and Giada DeLaurentis return to guide the aspiring stars through weeks of trials where they will prove not only their culinary chops but also their star power and the ability to engage an audience in front of a camera. Having that coveted "point of view" which can be marketed is the key. Of course, the primary focus of this opening show is "Can They Cook?" Certainly, time in front of the camera can be awkward and take some practice. But if someone can't cook, that person can't be a star on the Food Network.

In the opening episode, the contestants were given a shot to offer their point of view in a minute or less - and that went well for some and not for others. You would think they would expect this, but it apparently caught some off guard. That said, it's not worth talking about how bad some where. Because the next task was to prepare their own "perfect bite" and then sell it in a red-carpet affair with celebrity host, E's Ross Matthews. This format is an imperative, with some really shining or redeeming themselves, and others struggling to connect. It was a perfect window into the potential of this year.

My personal bias is against the "Cowboy Chef" because while it was clear that he can cook, I am not a fan of the over-the-top, loud and crass personality that reminds me of last year's debacle of a finalist, Rodney "The Pie Guy." I really hope the "farm-to-table" girl Emma gets a chance to re-deem herself, because her message is real, and the hosts were too critical of the all-natural message. It is not too tired or cliche, and we need more press about it. Chris Kyler has a lot of potential, and I am impressed with the food of both Kenny and Chris. But it was definitely time for Donna to go home, and Sarah is not long for the competition.

Can't wait to see how it all turns out. My early predictions are for Loreal and Nicole. Luca and Rubin will be good challengers as well.

Math Teacher Explains Problems with Corporate Education Reform

Are America's schools failing?

That is what many in the education reform movement would like for you to believe. That claim - that US schools are "failing," that we are "falling behind the rest of the world," that American kids are "losing the ability to compete in a global market" has driven the education reform movement since at least 1983 when "A Nation at Risk" was published. And that claim drove the passage of No Child Left Behind, as well as the recent push for Common Core State Standards, PARCC and SB standardized testing, and the Race-to-the-Top school funding (blackmail) initiative. But what if it weren't true? What if it is more complicated than that? What if the proposed solutions do nothing to address, much less solve, the problem?

Mathematics teacher explains the reality in a must-see Tedx speech at the University of Arkansas.

In his criticism of the "toxic culture" surrounding education reform, Joshua Katz asks us to consider the realities behind the claims. The most interesting point for me was the connection to "The Incredibles" theory of villains, whereby a villain actually creates the problem that he will then be the only one who can solve. The idea that corporate education interests exploited the belief that schools were failing in order to push through legislative agendas that allow them to sell more educational materials and tests is not as far-fetched as many might think. For, there are many American schools producing world-class students who do not need new national learning standards and accountability tests in order to perform.

Scripps National Spelling Bee … And a Complete Waste of Time

So, what is the value of knowing words like kneidal, stromuhr, cymotrichus, or guetapens? What is the value in being able to spell them from memory? Especially, when the spell-check on my computer lists them as mis-spelled.

Of course, tonight was the national championship for the Scripps National Spelling Bee, which is broadcast on ESPN and is the Holy Grail for thousands of families across the nation. This year provided two champions, as two boys outlasted the list, finishing off with words like fueilleton.  Of course, like always, it is the strangest form of entertainment, providing many bizarrely memorable moments like these. This year Ansun Suejoe and Sriram Hathwar shared the championship of a trophy and $30,000 in prize money. And, I guess, the bragging rights.

But why is this worth it? Why does this matter?

As an English teacher of advanced students, and the parent of a gifted child who has advanced far in both spelling bees and math competitions, I have to admit that I can't quite fathom a more inane pursuit than the spelling bee. And don't bother telling me about the cognitive development or the inclusion of the vocabulary component. It is just the most useless form of trivia. And I am not arguing that all educational pursuits should be utilitarian.

But imagine if all the countless hours (and thousands of dollars) spent memorizing obscure and useless words ( most of which aren't even English ) was instead spent developing skills in math and science and the fine arts. What if kids spent the hours learning how to play an instrument or write a symphony or develop their hook shot or swim a faster quarter mile or study ecosystems or … well, you get the point. And, don't even get me started on the prize money. $30K?  Hell, I bet most families of top competitors spend thousands on tutors and travel and more. And the prize money doesn't come close to funding pursuits in college. Perhaps Scripps could pony up a real scholarship. Like maybe four years of in-state tuition for students who can write and develop arguments and feature stories on complex ideas and global issues.

That might be worth my time.

In all honesty, I used to intentionally fail at the spelling bee, so I wouldn't have to stand up in front of the class going through the charade. And that approach has been so perfectly captured by comedian Brian Ragan.

Michelle Obama's Food Fight

Michelle Obama - along with many others - is seriously concerned about America's weight and health problems. And she is committed to combating those challenges by focusing on children. It was with that focus that she led the food fight for increasingly rigorous nutritional standards in the National School Lunch Program. The primary focus of reform of school lunches is on reducing consumption of calories, fat, sugar, and sodium. While this approach/solution seems pretty straightforward to the casual observer, the issue of food quality and its connection to "weight" is far more complicated.

The problem with changes to the food program is, basically, that kids do not want to eat the food, and school cafeterias are losing money. This has led some schools across the country to "opt out" of the school lunch program. And they have made this decision knowing they will lose federal funding for meals and more. The reality is that schools will not stay with a program of meals that kids refuse to eat. And, despite what Michelle Obama likes to claim, students are still throwing away a lot of food. And now legislators are joining the cause, introducing a bill which would allow schools waivers from the new nutritional standards. The movement to delay and roll back nutritional standards is not simply a way of pushing back against the federal government and the Obamas … but it can seem that way.

Yesterday, the First Lady decided to fight back in the food fight. Mrs. Obama sought to make this all about the children, as she noted she will not back down on plans to bring "better" nutritional standards to school lunches. However, the battle over school lunches is not simply a matter of calories, fat, sugar, and salt. And there is certainly no value to serving - even force feeding - food that kids don't want to eat. Certainly, schools need better education on nutritional choices. And they need better offerings in the cafe.

But simply restricting menus is not going to do the trick.