David Lee Roth, King Solomon, Game Theory, & Freakonomics

Many 80's rock fans know the infamous story of Van Halen's contract rider that required bowls of M&Ms with "all brown M&Ms removed." While that seemed to be the perfect example of petulant rock star excess and extravagance, it turns out it was truly clever bit of gamesmanship.

When the M&M clause found its way into the press, it seemed like a typical case of rock-star excess, of the band "being abusive of others simply because we could," Mr. Roth said. But, he explained, "the reality is quite different." Van Halen's live show boasted a colossal stage, booming audio and spectacular lighting. All this required a great deal of structural support, electrical power and the like. Thus the 53-page rider, which gave point-by-point instructions to ensure that no one got killed by a collapsing stage or a short-circuiting light tower. But how could Van Halen be sure that the local promoter in each city had read the whole thing and done everything properly?

Cue the brown M&M's. As Roth tells it, he would immediately go backstage to check out the bowl of M&M's. If he saw brown ones, he knew the promoter hadn't read the rider carefully—and that "we had to do a serious line check" to make sure that the more important details hadn't been botched either. And so it was that David Lee Roth and King Solomon both engaged in a fruitful bit of game theory—which, narrowly defined, is the art of beating your opponent by anticipating his next move.

This example of "Game Theory" is at the heart of the latest book of scientific insight from the brilliant mind of Freakonomics author Steven Levitt, along with Stephen Dubner. Levitt and Dubner are so apt at mining the research of things like Game Theory that they have been able to squeeze a third book out of their information on the laws of economics that impact our lives in ways we never imagine. And, now, with the book, Think Like a Freak, they are offering new insight and advice on how to game the world by "tricking the guilty and the gullible into revealing themselves."

Like their other books, and like many of the other "Ideas Gurus" like Gladwell or Pink out there, Levitt and Dubner have example after example and anecdote after anecdote of the many ways people have learned to game the system.

Louis CK, the Philosopher King

It's the comedians that put it all in perspective.

I've always appreciated the brilliance of comedians in contemporary society because they are doing so much more than entertaining us. It's often about so much more than just making us laugh. Basically, the best comedians are able to expose to us the absurdity of it all. Louis CK is one these humorous cultural critics. While I have been aware of him for a while, it was his guest spot on Conan O'Brien when he explained why he won't get his child a cell phone that made me pay attention:

Recently, Louis CK has made headlines with his long Twitter rant about his frustrations with Common Core State Standards after struggling along with his daughters in doing their math homework. The brilliance of Louis' commentary on the issue is that he wasn't speaking as a comedian, but simply commenting as a parent. There has been a lot of backlash against his criticisms of Common Core standards. And some of it comes, astutely, from teachers. But there has been as many people who appreciate his commentary and support him.

Louis CK is Right About the Common Core

The Trouble with Common Core

Louis CK Hit a Home Run with Common Core Criticism

Louis CK and the Common Core - Diane Ravitch

And, so, Louis is on my radar. And I am enjoying a season of his sitcom, Louis. And, as I look for more insight and commentary - and laughs - from a man who is being called today's "Lenny Bruce, or Bob Dylan, or a philosopher king," I was pleased to run across this really nice interview on Charlie Rose's show:

Princeton Kid is, in fact, Privileged, and Rather Naive and Foolish

Mark Twain once said, "It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt." A few years down the road, this advice might actually come to mean something to Princeton student Tal Fortgang.  Tal has become the poster child for the debate about "white privilege" after his op-ed defending his "success" was published. After opening by questioning "this phrase, check your privilege" that has been circulating around such privileged campuses as Princeton, Tal recounts how he is apparently not privileged because his grandparents struggled to escape the Nazi's during World War II. He then "concedes" that he is privileged to have been raised with values like faith and education, and that he will "apologize for nothing."

And, that is the basis of his problem.

Tal has been raised in the tradition of parents wanting their children to have a better life. And there is nothing wrong with that. The problem is that in not wanting our children to want for or suffer from anything, we leave them with little appreciation for the hard work that has afforded them a degree of comfort. Tal is too blinded by his own upbringing to even understand that no one expects him to apologize - not for his success or his race or his parents' hard work or, even, his hard work. Nothing. The idea of acknowledging privilege is merely to understand that he has it. His life, born of the hard work and struggles of his grandparents and his parents, has given him advantages that he is unable to appreciate as such. That is why he could benefit from understanding the "veil of ignorance," an academic concept that was probably discussed somewhere in his high quality education. Alas, he won't be able to.

And that is why the backlash and criticism of Tal has been so swift. As in this note To The Princeton Privileged Kid, by Violet Baudelaire. Or the sentiment from Mary Elizabeth Williams who simply wants Tal to know: "We Don't Need Your Apology, Princeton Kid." Sadly, Tal seems to be a pretty bright young man who wants to think about big ideas and engage in serious conversations. Yet the immaturity with which he defended his privilege - even though no one asked him to - will probably tag him as the "Poster Child for White Male Privilege" for a long time to come.

Problems with PARCC and Pearson

Again, it's not really about the standards (Common Core State Standards CCSS) - though there should be an understanding of why people are weary of the standards that were adopted by states via their governors and state officials without consultation with their teachers, teachers association, administrators, and parents.

The more serious and substantial concerns are coming from parents and educators who challenge an increasingly intrusive and burdensome system of state (and federal) mandated standardized assessments. More and more parents are taking the serious step of "opting their kids out" of the state assessments, as Kristin Kidd of Colorado recently did when she "Let My Kids [Play] Hooky from School Tests." Of course, it wasn't all tests: her kids took tests like MAPS, DRA2, Explore, and others which did not intrude as much on instructional time, and which aren't being used to create a more collective system of accountability. And, perhaps as important, those tests weren't the sole control of Pearson, Inc.

Despite the claims by Bill Gates and other reformers that the new system of assessment would open up a field of competition to create the best tests, the huge multinational testing corporation (out of Great Britain) has basically devoured the PARCC testing consortium. With dozens of states testing millions of students, this contractual victory is worth billions of dollars to Pearson. And critics are calling foul over the lack of oversight and accountability for the test. Basically, people are wondering who is going to evaluate the tests and their reliability. Because Pearson has more than a few problems in its past regarding the authenticity of its tests.

The reality is that this PARCC testing system (and SmarterBalanced for other schools preferring a vegetable spread to a standardized test) has become a behemoth of control over the nation's schools. And that has happened with very little transparency regarding the tests. As some states have withdrawn and asserted autonomy over their tests, other states like Colorado have faced very close party-line votes that ultimately left the PARCC test and Pearson in control.

Of course, that doesn't mean that students and parents like Kristin Kidd won't fight back next year - and the nation could see a massive parental opt out movement, the likes of which has never been seen.

It's about Sugar & Carbs, not Fat

As I've noted on this blog before - Sugar is the Devil.

As Americans continue to struggle with expanding waist lines - and the heart disease, diabetes, and other associated health risks - it is ever increasingly clear that America's health problems are not about fat. In fact, as the Wall Street Journal reports today, fat in the form of meat and dairy is actually part of a healthy diet. And the weight and health problems arise from sugar and carbs.

This is, of course, not new. For years now, "Scientists have said carbs - not fat - are the biggest problem with America's diet." And while I can recall the "War on Fat" from my childhood in the Seventies and Eighties, I learned very early about the low-fat and fat free scam. When huge and powerful food corporations remove the fat from foods, it seriously affects taste, which they then compensated for by replacing the fat with sugar. The problem is that the body turns the sugar and carbs into fat.

One of the biggest sources of the problem is the corn and grain industry that have successfully become financial behemoths with the inclusion of High Fructose Corn Syrup into nearly every processed food. And they have reaped billions of dollars in profits and government subsidies. Thus, if Americans are really concerned about the state of their health - and corrupt business/government alliances - then they should radically decrease their consumption of processed foods.

Bikers Against Child Abuse

Have you heard of BACA?

I never had either until my daughter came home from school today, and told me about Bikers Against Child Abuse - and organization doing some amazing work for children - "to empower children to not be afraid of the world in which they live."

You Won't Make Great Money as a Novelist

Writing the Great American Novel (the GAN).

It's a dream for many an English major and English teacher. We all see the huge contract with a generous advance, as well envisioning publishing parties in New York with hip people like Michael Stipe and Malcolm Gladwell in attendance. We also envision being able to stop working - teaching or bar tending or landscaping or working in sales - because we all know that published authors make millions of dollars.

Alas, it's really not so.

This week on Salon.com "bestselling author" Patrick Wensink comes clean about how little money he made for his independently published book which spent weeks atop the Amazon bestseller list. In reality, publishing is a complicated industry, and there is really not that much money to be made by selling books.

On Not Going to College, and Not Being Pressured to

Today was senior day at my school, where we celebrated college decisions which must be made by May 1. And, of course, the expectation that our seniors are, in fact, going to college is a pretty obvious expectation at a high achieving school like mine. That said, I have been a critic of the college-for-all mentality for a long time, and I consciously advocate for a stronger career education track, along the lines of many European nations. And, it's not just about students who are "not college material." I think we have a truly in-efficient system, and we send kids on to college for the flimsiest of reasons - earning power.

So, when articles come along that promote alternatives to college, or the standards K-16 track, I tend to listen and promote it.  This week, to coincide with things like "College Day," the New York Times Parenting Blog offers thoughts for When College is Not in the Cards. That can be a particularly hard time for some kids and some parents in certain communities. And that is truly sad. For, sometimes, heading into a career is what a child needs, and sometimes it's just a matter of needing a little time to figure things out - we call that the "Gap Year."

It's important for young people to know that "You Don't Have to Go to College." And to critics who argue that I am just perpetuating stratification in society, I would counter by arguing we would be better served in reforming labor, than we would be in sending everyone to college simply because "college grads make more money." That argument, while statistically true, is flawed and deceptive on so many levels. And it raises the question of whether we'd be better served by looking at the "wage gap."

Anyway, it's worth the discussion - There is plenty of reason that a "college education is not worth it." And, as parents deal with the issue of children who are ambivalent about signing on for a very expensive four years of the very thing they couldn't wait to escape, it's worth listening to voices that say, "I Don't Want My Children to Go to College."

Should Schools Group by Age or Ability Level?

"Teach them where they are, not where we expect them to be."

That adage around adjusting and differentiating instruction has stuck with me for years, especially now that I am a parent. One of the biggest problems and challenges in education is the notion that schools group children by birth date. While there is some validity to determining "what a five -[or eight or ten or fifteen or eighteen]-year-old should know or be able to do, there are wide variances in the reality of children and peer groups. This has become even more complicated in the era of Common Core State Standards, even as many people argue that "Grouping Kids by Age Should Have Vanished with the Little Red Schoolhouse." The idea of a "peer group" is complicated when kids of the same age are at different points. And one should not be slowed down any more than the other should be pushed to move beyond readiness.

It's been a fairly accepted standard that girls mature faster than boys, and for this reason, many critics argue that boys and girls should start school at different ages. Certainly, the growing dominance of females in education seems to indicate some credibility to this view. And, in an era of increased emphasis on standardized tests as the barometer for all that's good in education, there is a problem with testing students outside of what they actually know. Having just come off a spate of mandated standardized tests, I was frustrated by the mis-application of the idea. At my school, we have some ninth graders who are already taking Calculus classes, while others are still struggling with multiplying fractions. Yet, each is required by law to take the ninth grade test where Algebra I is the standard.

What a waste of time for both groups of kids.

That said, society may need to seriously reconsider what a "peer group" is and how we assign and test students. Certainly, there is much evidence to support students being challenged by advanced material. And a student who remains "behind" with all the other students who are "behind" may not catch up. Though perhaps it's better to look at why and how. Advanced students can elevate the game for all classmates .... though they can also dominate and discourage those who struggle. Fortunately, more schools are beginning to consider alternatives and "grouping by skill, not age." It seems that the idea of "ability grouping" which was dismissed - with good reason - as tracking that held down disadvantaged students is now making a comeback.

Surely, there are implications associated with whatever system, such as not grouping by age. But in an era of standardization and people confusing access and opportunity with expectations of uniformity, it's important to understand that all kids are not the same simply because of the year in which they were born.

Should Women Lean In, Lean Back, or Lean at All?

Anybody in education these days knows that young women are doing very well. Women are accounting for a greater percentage of honors classes, college admissions, and graduate degrees. Even though females still trail in their participation in STEM-focused careers, they are making ground. And there are many reasons for this increasing success, not the least of which is their better organizational skills and greater ability to simply do what needs to be done in the classroom.

Granted, the glass ceiling still exists. And even though we may have our first female President, to follow our first Black President, there are still many barriers to leadership positions for women. This can be surprising when more research shows that it is Emotional Intelligence (EQ) and associated skills like empathy and listening that are often keys to success for the nation's CEOs. And with the rise of CEOs like Melissa Meyer at Yahoo, young women are hearing more encouragement to strive for leadership. These words of advice are coming from strong female leaders like Sheryl Sandberg, the Chief Operating Officer at Facebook, who encourages women to Lean In as a way to succeed. Her primary focus is about being diligent and committed to the "will to lead."

Of course, there are counter opinions from women as successful, and none more prominent than the woman who redefined media with the rise of an incredibly significant online newspaper. That would be Arianna Huffington and the HuffingtonPost.com. In a recent article for Slate.com, Hannah Rosin posits that Arianna's advice in her book Thrive: The Third Metric to Defining Success ... is not to "Lean In," but instead to lean back. It is a much more laid back approach to the pursuit of success and happiness.

Either way, leaning in or leaning back, women are definitely moving up.

Who Is Michael Lewis, & Why Should You Care?

It was probably about 2005, when I first ran across the work of business writer Michael Lewis while prowling around a bookstore or library. His book, Next: the Future Just Happened was out in paperback, and I was looking for a new book to be the summer read for our CP English 11 class. Because I've always gravitated toward non-fiction, as many males do, and because the first story is about a fifteen-year-old kid named Jonathan Lebed - the youngest and first to ever be indicted by the SEC for internet stock fraud - I latched on to Lewis' book and sold the idea to our English department. Since then I've read whatever I can by Lewis, and watched him rise to the top of the charts again and again.

Most people who know Lewis know him from his books Moneyball, about the innovation of Billy Beane and the use of sabermetrics to alter the way small market MLB teams like the Oakland A's play the game, or The Blind Side, about the fascinating story of Baltimore Ravens left tackle Michael Ohr who was basically adopted by a white southern woman named Leigh Anne Tuouhy and her family, or The Big Short, in which Lewis tracks how the economic crash of 2008 happened despite obvious warning signs from people like Meredith Whitney and exposes how a few people almost reluctantly made billions from the fall. Lewis is so skilled at what he does and finds the stories he writes about in an almost eerie string of being in the right place at the right time, as as the case for his first book about the financial crash of the 90s called Liar's Poker.

Michael Lewis truly is a writer of zeitgeist-like instincts, and he has seemed to lead quite the charmed intellectual and literary life. He is as interesting a person himself as are the subjects which he continuously brings to light for the public knowledge. That's what led New York Mag writer Jessica Pressler to profile him as one of the most "significant long form journalists" since someone like Tom Wolfe. He does have the ability to touch a nerve whenever he writes, as can be seen by the recent pushback against his most recent book, FlashBoys, which argues that the work of high frequency traders basically means "Wall Street is Rigged." It's words like this that can get him the press - and the ear of senators. But it's his fascinating insights wound into great storytelling that make him such an interesting figure to profile, as Conor Clarke did nearly six years ago for The Atlantic.

Michael Lewis is just one of those names - like Oprah or Elon Musk or Elizabeth Warren or Michael Pollan or Malcolm Gladwell - that well informed people are talking about. And for good reason.

Hill Street Blues - Where Modern TV Police Drama Began

"Hey, hey, hey, ... let's be careful out there."

Those iconic words from Michael Conrad will instantly bring members of Generation X, and more than a few Boomers, to a moment of quiet nostalgia, as we wait for that garage door to open to the sound of those sirens amid a subtle piano melody.

This week, which brings the release of a full 32-CD boxed set of Hill Street Blues, Denver Post TV critic Joanne Ostrow reflects on the modern police drama that set the standard for all the others. Today is, no doubt, a "golden era" for the genre, as shows like The Wire, Homicide, Law & Order, CSI, and others continually dominate the ratings and around water-cooler talk, or Facebook.com posts. But the original work of Steven Bochco really changed the way we watched television, and gave us so many poignant and endearing moments. Bochco was willing to ask tough questions, portray difficult conversations, and challenge TV censors long before it became fashionable - and even absurd - to do so.

The police drama has such a difficult task, to entertain while also philosophizing and humanizing the dark side of society that we didn't used "talk about at parties." And, networks would be crazy not to always carry a crime drama. But for these stories from the street to carry the deep, almost literary, significance of a show like Hill Street is truly something special. As the boxed set comes out, the actors will re-surface to discuss the groundbreaking television and reflect on its time.

For those on the couch, it's time to just sit back, relax, and visit our friends at the precinct one more time.

Are "College & Career Ready" the Same Thing, or Can It Be Either/Or

In the endless debates about Common Core State Standards and PARCC/SB testing and teacher accountability and student accountability and education reform and "fixing public schools," every voice seems to focus on the importance of making sure students are "college and career ready." The implication is that schools, especially high schools, need to be preparing students for both options. However, I am wondering if at times those ideas might be at odds with each other and mutually exclusive. That was certainly one embedded implication of the Harvard-led report Paths to Prosperity. And that seems to be the general consensus of the rest of the world - in education systems that often "outpace us" on PISA tests - where students generally separate onto either a college or career path between the ages of twelve and sixteen. It's like the opening decision in the game of monopoly - Do you choose college or career?  Joanne Jacobs writes about the discussion of "Success paths for all," where she links to several articles on the ideas of common foundation skills and the ideas that "multiple pathways can better serve" all students.

And to further complicate the situation, Valerie Strauss reports on a school canceling the kindergarten's play for the spring in order for the kids to keep studying to become "college and career ready." It's no joke, and the thought of this makes me positively ill. Earlier this year, I attended a public education forum in which a principal/founder of a K-3 charter school was actively promoting the idea of being "college ready." I, of course, questioned him a bit about this emphasis, and he reasonably talked about teaching to a population that almost never thinks about college … for any of its kids. So, there is value in presenting that goal - the same goal that most middle and upper class kids get almost without thinking. But the downside of emphasizing college to five year olds is the justification for canceling recess and the arts and anything other than math/literacy instruction in order to send all kids to college. And that is a problem.

Granted, I understand the need to emphasize to students and families the long term benefit - and earning power - of a bachelor's degree. But perhaps, rather than simply saying that we need to make all kids "college ready" because college grads earn more money, we should instead focus on reforming society and the marketplace so that non-college-educated, but still motivated and skilled people, can earn a decent living.

Thomas Picketty has some ideas about that:

Yeah, that's about right.

The Question of How Much Standardized Testing

The state of Colorado seems ready to commission a task force to study the value, benefit, and burden of standardized tests in public education. The state's Senate Education Committee passed HB1202 yesterday which, if it passes the house and goes to the governor will establish the task force. The issue of increases in standardized assessments has come to a head in Colorado in recent months, as many forces have begun to push back against Common Core standards and, more specifically, the implementation of PARCC testing. While the Democrats in the state legislature have pretty much voted party lines to maintain PARCC, the state Board of Education recently passed a resolution calling for a withdrawal from the controversial national testing consortium. The state's teacher association also passed a resolution to join forces with the anti-PARCC movement, which includes educators and grass-roots parents organizations. And the issue of standardized testing is getting national attention, as many begin to ask, "How Much Standardized Testing is Too Much?"

The GOP and Conservative Right's Racist Rebellious Rancher Problem

It may have seemed, to Sean Hannity and Rand Paul, that defending the "rights" of a simple cattle rancher was the perfect case for the GOP and conservatives. It seemed on the surface that the big bad federal government was pushing this man around, bullying him, and practically extorting money from him. He's a farmer after all, and his cattle are just livin' off the land in good ol' America.

But there's more to the story.

Apparently, Cliven Bundy is a man who refuses to recognize even the existence of, much less the authority of, the federal government of the United States of America. For that reason, he will graze his cattle on federal land while refusing to pay any taxes or fees for that privilege. That makes him a bit of a rebel, and in Hannity's world, America needs to push back against the taxman.

Jon Stewart recently had great fun with this.

The Daily Show
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,The Daily Show on Facebook,Daily Show Video Archive

Of course, then things got much worse.

Thomas Picketty's Econ Comic Book Rocks the Economics World

Apparently, a 685-page comic written by a liberal French economist who references Marx and Balzac is now the number one bestselling book on Amazon.com  Thomas Picketty's book Capital in the Twenty-First Century is not only a fabulously bold and edgy undertaking, but its analysis on wealth disparity is rattling the powers that be at places like the Wall Street Journal, and it has made him the conservative right.s "Public Enemy No. 1." At the same time, Picketty has managed to make the sort of salient arguments about wealth distribution that most liberal politicians wish they could make.

Who knew econ could be so fun?

US News Releases "America's Best High Schools" List for 2014

Americans love their rankings and the act of living by comparison. And, that is perhaps nowhere more significant these days than in the world of education. As the debate about "Common Core State Standards" and PARCC tests have fueled the accountability discussion around schools, education reformers insist on quantitative data to determine "what school is the best." Newsweek was the first to gain prominence years ago for ranking "America's Top High Schools" according to Jay Mathews' (of the Washington Post) Challenge Index. It was a simple formula that ranked "best" by the number of AP exams taken, divided by the number of graduating seniors.

The more comprehensive list was developed later by US News & World Reports. Its list of the "Best American High Schools" is based on numerous factors, including AP scores and other state-mandated assessments, the achievement by minority students, and measurements of college readiness. US News awards school gold, silver, and bronze medals, and publishes basic demographic data. It's no surprise, as with any of the rankings systems, that the top of the list is generally dominated by charter and magnet schools. Schools such as the Dallas School for the Gifted & Talented or the Thomas Jefferson School for Science and Technology are truly exceptional academic institutions.

There is certainly nothing wrong with these rankings, though they can be myopic. For example, Jay Mathews concedes with his list that 67 of his top 100 high schools don't even field a football team. Is that truly the "Best High School"? Not that football is the end-all-be-all of high school - but it is sort of a standard and iconic symbol for a thriving athletic program. And athletic programs are an important aspect of public education, if we're actually interested in educating the "whole child." The same goes for theater programs. And fine arts classes. And school clubs and activities. And a strong counseling and post-graduate office.

A truly great "high school" would do all these well. Like schools such as Stevenson High School  in Lincolnshire, IL, or Cherry Creek High School in Greenwood Village, CO. Cherry Creek is ranked #341 on the US News list, and it received a gold medal. It is also the top ranked athletic program in the state according to Mile High Sports. And Sports Illustrated recently ranked it the fifth best athletic program in the country. And the school's music program recently won a Grammy Award, as part of the Grammy's Signature Schools Program. And it has eight different choirs, several of which travel and perform internationally. And the school has nearly 100 active clubs, with everything from National Honor Society and Robotics Club to the Harry Potter Club and Capture the Flag Club. And it has a top-notch post-graduate program that helps kids access the best colleges in the country. And it has 206 state championships in 25 different sports. And it defies the downside of large schools by achieving success with 3,500 students. And its student body has raised tens of thousands of dollars every year for the Make-a-Wish Foundation. And it has the eighth best Speech & Debate program in the United States, as well as being one of the largest programs. And it has more than thirty different languages spoken in the homes of its students. And it's growing more diverse every year. And its Diversity Task Force is the host of the nation's largest diversity conference for teens. And it is a neighborhood school that accepts and teaches to all kids within its boundaries.

Its seems to me that we need to start looking at schools that offer a full range of successful programs aimed at educating the whole child. The "Best High Schools" have strong academics, a thriving fine arts program, numerous extra-curricular activities, a broad and inclusive athletic program, and more.

The "Best High Schools" really do it all well. Not just test scores.

Breaking Bad is Not "All That"

So, I just finished the first season of Breaking Bad, Vince Gilligan's hit AMC show about the high school chemistry teacher who "breaks bad" after learning he has stage-3 lung cancer and starts "cooking meth" with a former student. The show, which just wrapped last year, grabbed America's attention, especially during the fifth and final season, as everyone waited to learn the fate of "everyman" anti-hero Walter White. The show's raves have elevated it to nearly mythical status, with some even opining that Breaking Bad is "better than The Sopranos.

Well, I'm just not seeing it.

Walter White is an interesting character in some regards, true. And the story is compelling enough for me to venture into the second season. But better than The Sopranos? Blasphemy. And just naive and misguided TV watching. Overall, the characters in Breaking Bad are just too limited and un-interesting to hold a chance against the boys of Bada-Bing. David Chase created a world of New Jersey thuggery that was on par with The Godfather, and the characters of Paulie and Chris and Carmela and Meadow and so many others represented depths of humanity that Breaking Bad - at least in the first season - can't begin to match.

Is Gladwell Wrong on "His" 10,000 Hours Theory

In one of his classic books of distilling complex scholarly research into infinitely accessible pop culture theorizing, Ideas Guru Malcolm Gladwell made a splash with his book Outliers that basically quantified "mastery" of anything as being the result of 10,000 hours of practice. There was a lot of great scholarly support for this theory - but now it is coming into question. Many researchers are arguing that pursuers of mastery need to "Ditch the 10,000 Rule."

Brown, Roediger, and McDaniel aren't the first to challenge the theory, and Gladwell's promotion of it. Writer David Epstein argued as much in his best-selling book The Sports Gene:Inside the Science of Extraordinary Athletic Performance. Epstein and others have presented numerous examples of people who reach mastery outside a quantifiable certainty of 10,000 hours. And, granted, it should be noted that Gladwell was promoting research that saw the 10K as "an average." But in our data crazy world, filled with "Tiger Mothers" who will chain their kids to a piano for hours, it's worth noting the flexibility in this "rule."

Can the Government Quantify Everything in Education?

Accountability.

That is the buzzword in education … and really everything these days. In the era of Big Data, we are planning to quantify everything that costs money, from health care to education to the price of avocados. And that can't be a bad thing, right?  With the rise of teacher-based accountability in many states including Colorado, and the huge faith being put in un-tested tests like the PARCC test, education "reformers" are arguing that a cost-benefit analysis is the answer to education's woes.

Now, that issue is hitting higher education, as the government seeks to protect its "investment" in colleges via things like FAFSA federal aid, Pell grants, and research grants. The question for many small liberal arts college facing scrutiny is whether the "US Colleges Should be Graded by the Government." Certainly, the rise of many for-profit universities (with abysmal graduation and job placement rates) like University of Phoenix and Westwood and Devry has led the government and tax-payer watchdogs to more closely scrutinize the industry. And, let's be clear, it is an industry.

So, can the government effectively quantify value to institutions of higher learning?

Richard Gere was just … cool. Breathless, ah!

When I was fourteen years old, and looking for the essence of identity, and seeking the cool that was just the sort of identity you'd expect a fourteen-year-old male to find perfect, I watched Breathless with Richard Gere and Valerie Kaprisky. The 1980s remake of the classic Jean-Luc Goddard film about fatalistic love resonated, for some reason, with me. In the scene below, Jessie watches Monica from the balcony. The scene is beautifully set against the amazing sounds of Philip Glass' piano composition "Openings," with a truly sexy saxophone accompaniment. It was … cool.

It was a moment that defined a lot for me, as strange as that sounds for a middle school Catholic kid in southern Illinois.  And then, of course, there was the ending. Perhaps, Richard Gere's greatest cinematic moment. It left us all … breathless, ahhhh.

Two Deaths Linked to Marijuana Use in Colorado

When the state of Colorado was considering legalization of marijuana for recreational use, one of the primary arguments is that cannabis is safer to use than alcohol, which is responsible for thousands of deaths each year. The statistics certainly support the idea that marijuana is not a deadly drug. It's been accepted that you can't overdose on weed, and no one gets violent or dies from high speed crashes when "baked."

Until now.

In the past month, two deaths in Colorado are being directly linked to ingestion of THC-infused products. In March, a college student died after jumping off a balcony in a Holiday Inn during what was apparently a marijuana-induced psychotic episode. Levy Thamba was a 19-year-old college student who had come to Colorado for spring break. It is believed that he joined friends here for the purpose of trying out Colorado's new recreational marijuana business. Thamba and friends bought several THC-infused "cookies." While the cookie's dosage was supposedly six servings, and Thamba's friends each had "a slice," Thamba apparently felt nothing early on and ingested the whole cookie. Later on, Thamba became agitated, anxious, and openly hostile. After his friends calmed him down several times, Thamba began hallucinating and left the room. He jumped over the balcony to his death.

The second death linked to ingesting marijuana "edibles" is being ruled a homicide after a man high on weed and hallucinating allegedly shot his wife in the head while she was on the phone with 911. Kristine Kirk was shot and killed by her husband who had apparently ingested marijuana candies a few hours before. Richard Kirk will be charged with first degree murder in the case. When he was arrested, he apparently made bizarre religious statements and admitted shooting her. Kristine Kirk pleaded with the police to hurry after her husband removed their gun from the safe and began threatening the family. The couple have three young children.

This certainly changes the image of marijuana as a safe alternative to alcohol.

America Is Not a Democracy - It's Worse

For as long as I've been teaching, I have always encouraged my students to understand the nuanced reality that "America is not a democracy." Despite the platitudes and the grandstanding of talk television, the reality of "democracy" in America is, in fact, limited by the U.S. Constitution. Instead, as most astute voters will explain, the United States of America is a democratic republic. Basically, we have representative democracy in that the voters elect representatives to voice their views and govern for them. This is not a bad thing, per se. It's really a blessing. For democracy - or "rule by the people" - is actually a logistical nightmare. It quickly devolves into anarchy. This is what prompted Winston Churchill to note, "Democracy is the worst form of government - except for all the others."

However, Churchill got it wrong.

The worst form of government is not a democracy, but more importantly, a democratic-republic that is actually not one, though it masquerades that way to a naive and ideological and misinformed electorate. And that is the conclusion drawn by a team of researchers at Princeton University. Apparently, close data analysis can reveal, and even prove, that America is not a democracy or democratic republic. It's, instead, a more sinister form of government than even fascism: The United States of America is an oligarchy. America is basically ruled by, and in the interest of, a small number of wealthy elite who can impose their will upon the legal system. Sadly, this is the system that people like Thomas Jefferson feared far more than tyranny. Tyranny is a clear and obvious enemy. An oligarch is a far more insidious one.

I have noted this for years in conversations and on blog discussions. America is an oligarchy because the power, for the most part, is concentrated in the hands of a wealthy few. And the recent SCOTUS rulings on campaign finance have only reinforced and emboldened this reality. Campaign finance is really nothing more than legalized bribery, and it's not "free" but instead very expensive speech. It only takes a cursory read of the news, or books like Perfectly Legal by David Cay Johnston to expose the true nature of our "democracy." Other great examples would include.

Pity the Billionaire by Thomas Frank

The Trillion Dollar Meltdown by Charles Morris

Come Home America by William Greider