Disappointing Food Network Star Finale - Lackluster Lenny Wins … but Isn't a Culinary Star

Well, this is two years in a row that viewers of the Food Network Star competition have voted for a really mediocre personality. Last year it was Demaris Phillips, whose "new southern" cooking was the wrong choice in a world that should be moving away from the Paula Deen mentality. Has anybody really watched Demaris' show? Cooking southern at heart (on the road to a heart attack) is not what I want to learn. And this year, shocking as it is to people with refined tastes and high culinary standards, the choice is "cowboy chef" Lenny McNab.

Granted, Chef Lenny is a "nice guy," and he is a reasonably skilled chef. There were many times that he helped out his teammates, and he certainly knew food as well as any of this year's finalists. But, as I noted last year after the Food Network Star finale, Chef Lenny is not - and never will be - in the same league as chefs like Bobby Flay and Tyler Florence and Geoffery Zakarian and Ming Tsai and Alex Guarnaschelli and, even, Alton Brown (whose behavior in this season indicated he clearly knows everything about food and has utter contempt for anyone who isn't a food dictionary like he is). Lenny is, and excuse my elitist attitude, simply uncouth. He is a bit crass and unsophisticated, and his knack for saying the wrong thing simply makes me uncomfortable. Can you imagine attending a high culture food and wine event like the Aspen Food & Wine Festival, and after discussing cuisine with Bobby Flay or Emeril Lagasse turning around to greet Lenny? It's simply not a very appetizing option.

Of course, this decision tells us a lot about the direction the Food Network is going - and it's not in the direction of good taste. And, perhaps it's the competition mentality which led us down this road. It's a road that has led the Food Network to become the Guy Fieri Show - and some argue that Guy's bombastic personality has ruined the Food Network. While that's a bit of an exaggeration, I don't disagree that a TV network constantly focused on food from "Diners and Dives" is not exactly elevating our culinary discussions in this country. While the Food Network still maintains some excellent evening programming with Chopped and Restaurant Impossible, it is more inclined to seek really low-class E-Entertainment sensationalism like Cutthroat Kitchen and Restaurant Stakeout.

So, I offer sincere condolences to Chef Nicole Gaffney and Lucca Della Casa. It had to be tough to lose in that manner. And, by the way, I completely disagree with the manner in which the Food Network eliminated Nicole first and then made her sit there between the other two and wait to learn who won at her expense. That was a pretty classless act, in my opinion. Nothing would have been lost by simply doing retrospective looks at all three and then announcing the winner from the three. So, sorry, Nicole. You deserved better.

And, to the Food Network: I will never watch Lenny's show, I am losing interest fast in the Guy Fieri obsession, and I am a little put off by how truly "commercial" and gossipy your evenings have become.  America has a complicated relationship with food - and you could elevate it or cheapen it. So, far it's seems you are much more about "Network" and much less about food.

Interesting News & Information Websites You Probably Don't Know About

What did we do before the internet?

Information and entertainment is so infinitely accessible these days, it's hard to imagine a time when we couldn't instantly look up reviews of restaurants or the background of a movie actor or the latest stats for the PGA Championship or the NL MVP race. I'm a bit of an information hound, which means I am constantly looking for engagement  - or distraction  - across the internet. That's why I've always been such a fan of magazines. And I can stand in the supermarket aisle for an hour reading random articles from Fast Company or Psychology Today or Men's Journal.

Of course, now that information is all immediately available on any electronic device. And that has led me to all sorts of new time-using (I avoid the word "wasting") sites. Here are a few new sites that I've recently discovered or engaged with to check the headlines on what is new and intriguing:

Thrillist - a digital men's lifestyle magazine with plenty a brain candy like the best Beer Festivals in Denver this month.

The Alternet - a news and information site that has original news and commentary. It pulls from a variety of news aggregation sites like Salon.com and HuffingtonPost.com - and occasionally sends content to those sites.

Vice.com - an international news magazine out of Canada with a a little bit of everything including arts and culture as well as alternative news. It seems to be a go-to for the millennial generation. And they give it as much clout as Gen X gives the New York Times, or HuffPost for that matter.

Can All Teachers Be Great? Is Great Teaching a Teachable Skill?

How many truly inspirational people are there in the world? Enough to fill the nation's classrooms?

Those questions are at the heart of the discussion of education reform as countless people - not the least of which are President Obama and Ed Sec Arne Duncan - set a simple goal of putting a "great teacher" in every classroom. So, the question becomes: "Are great teachers born or made?" Writer and critic Nick Romeo asks this question in response to a new book which claims that great teaching is a simple matter of certain identifiable and teachable skills and tasks. Great teachers do certain things that can be modeled and packaged and voila - a Great Teacher in every classroom.

The foundation of this idealistic view is found in Elizabeth Green's new book, Building a Better Teacher, which implies that society - and education schools - can do exactly that. Green, who is a veteran education writer and editor of Chalkbeat, crafts her message around numerous anecdotes and profiles of "great teachers" who offer countless analogies for what effective teaching looks like. It certainly is a noble undertaking to research and document all these examples of greatness. Though packaging it as a series of practices that can simply be emulated deserves scrutiny. That critical eye is the point of Nick Romeo who logically argues that some people are simply better students who would, thus, be better at applying the seemingly foolproof keys to effective teaching that Green offers.

Ultimately, just like athletes who can all learn the skills, teachers will achieve varying levels of "greatness." And the question becomes whether it is acceptable to be average or adequate in the classroom. Certainly, once we know about great teachers, we would never want our children taught by someone who is simply OK. Thus, not being "great" becomes a matter of being "a bad teacher." And, like all popular critics who seek greatly oversimplified answers to incredibly complex questions, Whoopi Goldberg simply wants to "get rid of the bad teachers." Which is so helpful. Thanks, Whoopi. Because apparently some people want to keep the bad teachers. Right?

Ultimately, the concept of great teaching is like great art - we know it when we see it. And just because we can create a paint by numbers version of the Mona Lisa doesn't mean that we can all be Da Vinci.

American Schools Are Not Failing - The Manufactured Crisis & Public Education Myths

American schools are not failing.

Education scholar and professor David Berliner tried to warn us.  Nearly twenty years ago, Berliner published The Manufactured Crisis: Myths, Fraud, and the Attack on Public Education to warn us about the fraudulent claims being used by "education reformers" to radically alter the landscape of public education. Following the release of the Reagan-era education policy statement "A Nation at Risk," Berliner examined thoroughly and exposed the misleading criticisms of public education that were being used to launch reforms of public education. The none-too-subtle title of "Risk" contained a Chicken Little "sky-is-falling" warning that American schools were in such bad shape that a new "Sputnik moment" was upon us, as the miserable state of the nation's schools would lead to the decline of the nation within a generation.

Clearly, that was far from true.

Yet, the education reformers have not relented in their efforts to basically gut the foundation of public education and expand the reach of the business community and the private sector into the classroom. The rise of the voucher movement and the expansion of charter schools have opened the door for the Common Core revolution and the massive expansion of standardized testing as a measure of "school quality." And, thus, David Berliner is back again with another warning in 50 Myths and Lies That Threaten America's Public Schools: the Real Crisis in Education. Berliner and education professor Gene Glass take on some of the top "myths" in the public discussion of public education. Notably, they expose the truth about:

• American students are "falling behind" students in other countries
• The ability of standardized testing such as exit exams to create accountability in schools
• The problems of "value added" in judging teacher quality. 

Berliner and Glass recently spoke with education blogger Larry Ferlazzo about the gist of the book and their concerns. Their explanations of the hard realities about public education are lost on the unknowing American public who have long bought into the education crisis - even though most view their own schools and teachers very favorably. And Berliner and Glass are not alone in their attempt to expose the problems with the ed reformers.  Another public education defender - and reformer critic - Dr. Chris Tienken offers a similar and well-researched critique of the education reformers and the false claims about the education crisis in his book  The School Reform Landscape: Fraud, Myth, and Lies. 

Slate Writer & Critic, Troy Patterson: An Interesting Dude

Sometimes there are people who just "know a lot," and they are the type of people who just naturally seem worth listening to. One of these people who is simply in tune with the contemporary world is Slate Magazine's Troy Patterson. Patterson writes the "Gentleman Scholar" column for Slate, and has generally been referred to as a "Writer at Large." That is a gig that many aspiring bloggers and writers would naturally say, "That's what I want to do." It's not easy, though, to do what Troy does. It takes a real eye for the zeitgeist, and an ability to distill the complicated to the accessible and find the interesting in the ordinary.

Troy's latest piece on how to be "Well Read without Reading" is just the sort of random topic that is both engaging and something most of us might ponder but rarely craft it into a piece of writing. Troy, however, has been doing that for quite a while. Working as a book and film critic for NPR, Spin, and Slate, Troy has crafted a niche market for his astute observations that can both engage and instigate.

You can follow Troy at @untitledproject.

Who's Responsible for Student Achievement?

Where do you stand on public education and teachers and education reform? That probably depends on where you stand on responsibility for student test scores. It seems these days that views on public education reform are entirely dependent on whether a teacher or a student is responsible for the student's performance on a standardized test.

And that's a problem.

In an era of increased hype around standardized testing - primarily resulting from continued emphasis in No Child Left Behind, Common Core, and PARCC/SmarterBalanced initiatives - the general public is forced to determine whether the quality of a teacher can be determined by how that teacher's students perform on standardized tests given by the state or private testing companies like Pearson and ACT. New NEA president Lily Eskelsen Garcia called the entire idea "stupid, absurd, [and] non-defensible."

There are certainly many reasons to cast "doubt on grading teachers by student performance." The public education system contains such disparity in the lives of students and the conditions in which teachers teach that it seems rather unconscionable to establish a standard test for all students to meet. Obviously, all students can achieve, and there is little doubt that some teachers are more effective than others at inspiring kids and improving achievement. However, there is little emphasis on how that happens and the significant role played by the kids - and even the parents, community, and environment - in that "equation." That said, certain hard realities indicate that specific populations will perform worse on specific tests in spite of the teaching. Motivation to take the test seriously can be a predominant factor, as can the overall state of mind for the students when they arrive at school - on test day or in general.

Thus, it remains a complicated issue - and ultimately un-definitive reality: "Should Student Test Scores Be Used to Evaluate Teachers?"

Community Schools - Should Public Education Provide More Than Academics

One of the primary arguments behind "ending summer vacation" and extending the school year to year-round schedules is that students lose ground when they are away from school. These losses are not just in academics, but also in the reality of providing structure to kids whose lives outside school can be quite chaotic. For many students, school can be the one place where they can count on a meal for the day, and it might be the only place they can access health care. So, there is a movement on the rise to create more Community Schools - turning school buildings into year-round operations that provide all manner of social services from health care to food stamps to family counseling.

Of course, doing so would obviously require much greater funding for public education - an issue that is certainly not a foregone conclusion. However, there is bi-partisan support in Congress for expanding the reach of "Community Schools," as explained in a recent column from Democrat Steny Hoyer for EdWeek.org. There is no doubt that opening schools year-round to provide all sorts of government services could dramatically improve the lives of children in economically challenged communities. And many private and charter school programs that do more than provide academic classes from 8-3 for a traditional year have proved the ability to make a difference. Geoffery Canada's Harlem Children's Zone is an example.

In "A Teacher's View," the only rule for improving education and achievement in the lives of kids is that it works. If expanding the reach of schools throughout the year to provide more support is successful, and it is the most cost effective way of doing so, then communities should pursue it. Of course, this approach should be pursued at the state and local level, and it should not be implemented as a standard for uniformity for all communities.

Whatever works.

Is STEM Worker Shortage Based on a Lie and a Scam

The debate over STEM education and an "alleged STEM-worker shortage" received another critical voice this week as Ron Hira and friends took to the pages of USA Today to challenge and expose "Bill Gates' Tech Worker Fantasy." Gates and his monolithic Gates Foundation have been the driving forces behind the obsessive focus on increasing math and science oriented students to fuel the tech sector's supposed need for workers. Proponents of STEM-education argue that the new technology-driven era will create an ever-growing demand for computer scientists and engineers to fuel the the economy ... and to fill the bankrolls of tech companies like Microsoft. However, critics like Hira challenge these absolutes and point to evidence of a "STEM-shortage myth" in light of the fact that many college-educated STEM grads are currently out of work or working in non-STEM fields. This revelation is bolstered by news of Microsoft's recent announcement of plans to lay off 18,000 workers. Stagnant wage growth in STEM fields and collusion by tech companies to suppress wages in the field also expose the problems of STEM-only focus in education.

Criticism of the need for STEM workers has been building for years, as many researchers indicate the economy may have twice as many STEM workers as it needs, leading to wage decline and unemployment. The STEM push had been used by tech companies to increase the ease and availability for hiring foreign workers. But again, much of the propaganda for increasing STEM numbers appears to be based on myth and misinformation. Of course, there is validity to the need for STEM workers. And the argument that a shortage of technologically skilled workers is real and growing has plenty of support. No one would dispute that the world and the economy are becoming increasingly tech-linked. So it stands to reason that workers with backgrounds in the kind of math, science, technology, and engineering used to support that economy should be in regular demand. And STEM proponents argue that critics don't fully understand the numbers.

The problem, of course, is that no one seems to have a definitive answer that is not in some way driven by an agenda. Even the "experts" don't know if the shortage is real. But from "A Teacher's View," the impact on education is serious and significant, and it's worrisome that the push for students to learn is simply based on the premise of getting a good paying engineering job. For, what of the social-emotional side to society and the economy? What of the artists and creators and poets and writers and thinkers? What of the dancers?

Certainly, STEM is a need and a reasonable focus for education. But it can't be the only one.

Can Students Work Their Way Through College?

College is truly expensive, and it's becoming more cost prohibitive each year. There is no doubt about that. And students are graduating with record loads of debt, with the average kid starting post-graduate life saddled by almost an $30,000 burden. However, some recent education critics have argued that "Working Your Way Through College is Impossible." Is it?

According to recent graduate Ethan Smith, it is "mathematically impossible to work your way through college." Apparently that dream has been gone for more than a decade. He presents a convincing argument about the burden of working to simply pay for tuition, and the current minimum wage jobs that are workable by full-time students barely make a dent. Providing anecdotes from several students and crunching the numbers with info from the Student Debt Project, it seems reasonable that students simply can't accomplish what they did in the 1970s. That much seems obvious. Student worker Randal Olsen is another person who has crunched the numbers, researched the challenges, and blogged extensively on the financial challenges facing today's generation of college kids.

However, there are some caveats and other aspects to the story of spiraling student debt - and a "definitive answer" on working your way through college. College is truly expensive - but some places are more so than others. For example, Ethan Smith (who I am assuming is from Colorado) attended Elon University in North Carolina. Elon is a small, private, liberal arts college that is, by all accounts, a pretty good school. Yet, the tuition alone at Elon is $30,000 a year - and that includes nothing in terms or living expenses or travel. By contrast, the tuition at the University of Colorado - Boulder is roughly $12,000 per year. And the total on campus cost for a CU student is about $28,000. So, outside of financial aid, Ethan's entire year at CU would cost less than just tuition across the country at Elon. A question for prospective students is: Is an Elon education worth three times as much as a CU education? We know that's not true.

Granted, $28,000 is no small change, and it would be tough to work enough to pay that off and be a full-time student. That much is true. But there are many other in-state options. The tuition at the University of Northern Colorado is roughly $6500 per year. And, students who stay close to home have the option of limiting their living expenses. So, the issue of college costs is certainly more complicated than the blanket statements by students such as Ethan and Randal. That said, the counterargument shouldn't negate the criticism of rising college costs - and there is no doubt that as states continue to cut budgets, suffering under low tax revenue, the burden will increasingly shift to students. However, the greater question may be whether communities and students and employers begin to re-evaluate whether college is necessary at all.

Regarding college costs, though, the recent documentary film Ivory Tower sides with Ethan Smith.

Next Food Network Star won't be Emma Frisch

In a scene reminiscent of last year's Next Food Network Star competition when popular, sweet, genuine, and talented food blogger Nikki Dinki was basically shown the exit door by Alton Brown for not knowing what a pilaf was, the soft spoken, but engaging, all-natural food advocate Emma Frisch was eliminated from the Food Network competition last night. Emma's team in the competition to create a 360-degree "food experience" suffered from a poor vision and even worse execution. And because Emma was seen as the leader - and because her food disappointed - she was ousted. That left the brash personalities of Lenny and Loreal to survive another day.

Texas chef Sarah - who hasn't until last night actually shown any hint of what "Tastes of Texas" really means - led her team to victory, and they truly did put on a nice show. The problem, of course, is that none of these contestants has true star power, and it's clear that none is really ever going to be a "Food Network Star." There is no Guy Fieri or Bobby Flay or even Jeff Mauro in the mix. They are not food experts or great personalities or even exceptional chefs. There is seemingly less "star power" in each season of the Food Network Star.

As I noted last week, the "star" of the Food Network Star is the show itself, giving greater vehicle to the network and its icons like Bobby Flay. But it's not producing stars - because Lenny and Loreal and Nicole and Luca and Sarah are simply not that impressive. And they won't ever be. And here's another interesting thought: When did Alton Brown turn into such a total jerk? I know Alton has always been that sort of quirky personality that goes back to his breakout success on "Good Eats." And, he had a bit of an edge as a "food elitist" because he really does know his stuff. And I always enjoyed watching him. But Alton seems to have bought into the "caricature of himself," and he's made the mistake of not just being naturally quirky and curt, but going out of his way to be … a prick (pardon my language - it just fits here.)

Ultimately, the prize should probably go to …. oh, hell, I don't really care. Pretty boring people at this point. However, I will keep an eye out for the continued rise of Jeff Mauro. And a big congratulations to Michelle Ragussis, from two seasons ago, as she has secured a spot of NBC's new food show "Food Fighters with "Man vs. Food" Star Adam Richman. Can't wait to see it - a chef like Michelle and a foodie like Adam are what I think of when I think of "Food Network Stars"?

Of Course "Big Food" is the Problem

In a classic moment from Morgan Spurlock's pivotal documentary on the processed food industry Super-Size Me, a lobbyist for the Grocery Manufacturers of American (GMA), Gene Grabowski says "We part of the problem." Spurlock could hardly believe his good fortune - and, interestingly, six months after the release of the film at the Sundance Film Festival, Grabowski "no longer worked for the GMA." The reality is that "Big Food," or the corporate conglomeration of processed food manufacturers play the primary role in what America eats. And, if Americans are eating excessive amounts of unhealthy, sodium and sugar-laced products that provide little if any nutrition, then the people peddling the goods are primarily to blame. We can't simply excuse the companies for "selling Americans what they want." The food producers have actually played the primary - and subversive - role in creating those tastes.

Thus, I was a bit dismayed when I ran across an article on Esquire.com in which professional chef and high quality foods advocate Chef Linton Hopkins argued "Big Food is not the Enemy." Well, of course they are, Chef. Granted, the word "enemy" is certainly a bit exaggerated - but if we are having a discussion about the poor health of Americans and the bad dietary choices they regularly make, we can do nothing else but point the finger at the people serving it up. We did not exonerate Big Tobacco, and we do not excuse drug dealers for peddling dangerous products. And, neither should we condone the abysmal quality of some of our most detrimental processed foods.

Kacy Catanzaro - First Woman to Conquer American Ninja Warrior

Anyone looking for a strong, positive role model for girls and young women needs to look no further than a 5-foot, 100-pound gymnast from Belleville, New Jersey, named Kacy Catanzaro. Earlier this week, Kacy became the first woman to ever complete a finals course for the popular adventure and endurance competition American Ninja Warrior.

The tasks completed by Kacy would break most athletes before they finished even a few of them. "Warrior" contestants, however, have to complete a course of seemingly endless physical challenges. And, up until this week, no woman had ever completed a finals course, which qualifies contestants for the national finals at "Mt. Midoriama" in Las Vegas. Only one woman had ever accomplished an ANW standard, the "warped wall," in which competitors must scale a 17-foot curved wall. Kacy was the woman who did it last year during qualifying. This year, she bested herself by completing the entire course to the cheers and astonishment of fans and commentators.

The tiny but powerful Catanzaro - who is trending on Twitter as #MightyKacy - was a Division 1 gymnast and NCAA Regional Gymnast of the Year for Towson University exemplified a strength and endurance that few believed women were capable of demonstrating. Clearly, young women like Kacy continue to challenge the conventional wisdom about what woman can and can't do, and she should likely become a role model for women and for healthy living and exercise.