To Become Popular in the USA, Pro Soccer Needs These Changes

As the World Cup draws to a close, and American soccer fanatics are left with Major League Soccer and its low-status on the hierarchy of professional sports in the United States, many will question if soccer can maintain its popularity. Some will argue that this World Cup was the tipping point, as America "finally fell in love with soccer." Certainly, there was a lot of national unity this time around, as groups as large as thousands gathered in public places to watch the USA play on soccer's biggest stage.

Alas, the moment will be fleeting.

Soccer will not maintain the hype of the World Cup any more than professional skiing or swimming or track and field does following the Olympics. It was the hype of a once-in-four-years event that truly prompted many Americans who "never watch pro soccer" to tune in to the games. I am one of them. I played year-round competitive soccer for many years, and I have never been to a pro soccer game. This is the reality, despite living in Colorado with a popular team that draws respectable crowds. For, while more American kids play soccer than any other sport, few youth soccer players turn into true pro soccer fans. Soccer is just  not that popular in a country that has so much other sports entertainment.

However, a few simple rule changes could change America's feelings about soccer:

1. Get rid of off-sides - Off-sides is the most useless penalty in soccer, and a primary reason games are low scoring and "boring" to non-afficionnados of soccer. Ending off-sides would lead to many more goals and breakaways and one-on-one match-ups.
2. Injury Box - There is nothing more annoying to casual soccer fans than the "flopping" and writhing on the ground for phantom fouls. And the imposition of "injury time" which is only known by the ref is so frustrating. So, if a player goes down and stays down long enough for a stoppage in play, he must leave the field - and be subbed for - for a period of five minutes.
3. Instant Replay Challenges - Teams need the ability to challenge plays, especially anything leading to a penalty kick in the box. Those fouls are game changers and can be game deciders. They must not go completely unchallenged.
4. Continuous Subbing -  The limits on subs is booooring. Soccer needs regularly fresh players like hockey to keep the action at a higher level.

And for more thoughts on soccer's popularity:

http://time.com/2864483/world-cup-2014-soccer-brazil-america/

http://www.cracked.com/funny-3432-5-reasons-americans-dislike-soccer/

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/06/no-record-breaking-world-cup-ratings-dont-make-soccer-a-mainstream-us-sport/373216/

Shameless Cleveland Cavaliers Accept Return of Lebron James

Have you no pride, Cleveland?

After an incredibly drawn out and annoying week where Lebron James privately basked in the sports world's obsession with his "Decision 2.0," the hype finally broke with news that "Lebron James Announces He's Returning to the Cleveland Cavaliers." Now, Chris Bosh and D-Wade and Carmelo can go about the business of making their own decisions without the burden of Lebron-ization. It's all just been so silly, and I am somewhat disappointed in the decision by Dan Gilbert and the Cleveland Cavaliers to even entertain the whims of the man who basically told a whole city and franchise to "bug off."

Sure, if it's all about winning basketball games, then the Cavs just signed the most coveted free agent in the NBA - though his value as a teammate could be debated. The Cavs bent over backwards to win back the Prodigal Son, even though nothing has changed in the team's ownership. And while Lebron made the Cavs competitive in the notoriously weak Eastern Conference, it's not like a team built around him actually won it all. I wonder what might happen if Lebron is unable to bring the trophy home as the team leader in this second turn at being a hometown hero. There's reason to believe this is not a good move for any of the parties involved.

I will say this - There is no way the city of St. Louis and the St. Louis Cardinals organization would ever consider bringing Albert Pujols back. They have too much integrity.

Lebron & "The Decision" Are Bad for the NBA

Do you remember all the trade and contract drama with Michael Jordan and Magic Johnson and Larry Bird? Yeah, neither do I.

Lebron James' "Decision 2.0" is controlling headlines and clogging up Twitter.com and delaying decisions and generally causing uncertainty that is not good for the NBA. It was bad enough when Lebron did this four years ago with"The Decision," a media circus for which he was roundly criticized and from which he should have learned. And now, he's doing it again, as the media waited while he met with the Heat yesterday and produced no contract or news or "Decision."

Ultimately, this drama is more appropriate for middle school, and critics have begun to challenge the power and significance of "King James." Mark Kiszla of the Denver Post reminds us that "Lebron Can Play, but King Tim Duncan Has a Nice Ring (or 5) To It." Lebron James is obviously "an impact player" who can compete for championships every year. And many players want to join him and many fans want to root for him and many teams want to sign him. But all this hype is bad for the NBA when:

Everybody in the league puts life on hold for LeBron.The King builds teams as he sees fit. He doesn't need no stinking title of general manager.

Hey, Houston Rockets, do you mind if free agent forward Chris Bosh puts you and your piddling $88 million offer on hold until James tells him it's OK what to do?

Think the winter is bad in Minneapolis? Wait until you check out the unbearable case of inferiority complex the Timberwolves would acquire if Kevin Love forsakes them for Cleveland, all because James snapped his fingers.

It used to be cute when Carmelo Anthony took orders from his wife before making a basketball decision. Now, like some jealous little kid, Melo is afraid to announce whether he's staying in New York or joining the Lakers in the same news cycle as Decision 2.0 by James.

James broke the hearts of Cleveland when he took his talents to South Beach in 2010. What he's doing now is making a mockery of the games, all the flyover franchises and NBA stars groveling to be LeBron's wingman.

I don't begrudge James his power. More power to him. James didn't write the rules of the collective bargaining agreement; he merely exploited them. But any league where the whim of one man is more important than the final score is dribbling down the wrong path.

The King is great. Anybody, however, who tells you James is as great as Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Bill Russell, Oscar Robertson or Hall of Famers who relished competition instead of moving on to whatever's convenient fails to realize how hard a meaningful legacy is earned in sports.

Lebron is a really good basketball player. Can we move on now?

Summer Vacation Is Not The Problem

Each year, as kids break free from schools for a little while to pursue the joys of childhood, the issue of "summer vacation" leading to the "summer slide" rears its ugly head again. Time and again, commentators weigh in on the problems of "stopping school" for a couple months when the pools open and the warm weather arrives. The most recent entry comes from Cristina Evans, a teacher, who went to the pages of EdWeek.org with "A Teacher's Case Against Summer Vacation." Evans is focused specifically on the struggles of low-income and mostly urban students who tend to experience academic regression during the months off schools. This is the summer slide.

The case against summer vacation has been made many times, and the carefree break from school has even been called "evil" by some commentators looking to use extremist language to increase readership on a blog post. The reality, though, is a bit different than much of the "history" indicates. To be clear, the existence of summer vacation is not a result of our farming history and the "agrarian calendar" that let kids out in the summer to work in the fields.  I have discussed this discrepancy more fully in the past. And the history of summer vacation is not unclear to anyone willing to do a bit of research.

To her credit, Evans doesn't call for a radical end to summer vacation. Instead, she makes a lucid case for shortening it from maybe ten weeks to six or so. And no one is arguing that in schools where a summer slide is evident that we should ignore the problem. However, a blanket argument that summer vacation should be shorter across all schools is misguided. Instead, parents and communities should know the facts for how to effectively use summer vacation for the type of enrichment that prevents summer regression in many kids. The reality is that summer vacation is embedded in our culture, and that is not necessarily a bad thing.

Is Education's STEM Focus an Ambiguous Waste of Time

Seemingly out of nowhere, "STEM" has become a popular acronym for fixing all that ails the US economy. Apparently, the problem has been that America is severely lacking in workers skilled in "Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math." Thus, schools and education reformers - backed by powerful forces such as the Gates Foundation - have responded with the goal of simply producing more people with diplomas in the STEM areas. But, a closer look from the other side indicates that the "STEM Solution" is certainly no panacea for the needs of the American economy and the alleged "crisis in education." Writer Danielle Kurtzleben investigates the complex problems of aligning ourselves with a "nonsense acronym." There is little doubt that most STEM fields have great potential to produce high-earning individuals who can positively contribute to the economy. Yet, the country is as lacking in highly skilled labor as it is suffering from a shortage of biologists or accountants. And, rather than focus on some ambiguous notion of STEM, perhaps American communities should instead focus on helping businesses align with schools to close the "skills gap."  And that is only true if the goal and purpose of the education system is simply to provide a pipeline of workers for corporate America. Is it?

Bill Gates' Common Core Obsession

For those watching the Common Core & PARCC testing debate in public education, the powerful influence of the Gates foundation has been a force to watch for the past few years. And recent events like the Gates' Foundation letter to the New York Times and the calls for a Congressional investigation into the influence of Gates and the burden of standardized testing have certainly chummed the waters. This week, I weigh in at Salon.com with an analysis and some commentary on how "Bill Gates Needs to Drop his Common Core Obsession."

After blogging for years and writing pieces for the Denver Post, this article is my first piece for a national news site. So, I am pretty excited about the opportunity to reach a wider audience.

Was the 90's the Last Great Decade?

Fourteen years after the turn of the millennium (Do you remember the Y2K crisis?), it's apparently time to look back at the decade that gave us Seinfeld and Nirvana and Forrest Gump and the OJ Trial and more. It is, apparently, the "Last Great Decade," as the National Geographic channel puts out a documentary look-back at the age of grunge music and dot-com millionaires. It was the time of relative calm between the Cold War and 9/11, and that seems to make it real in a way that the world will never be again. With the changes from the War on Terror and the incredible expansion of our technology, the world will forever after be more surreal than real. And that's the legacy that the 90's offers.

Inspired by NatGeo's look back at the decade - and posing questions about its greatness - many retrospectives will look back at the 90s, as USA Today did recently with a review of some greatest hits from the decade of Yada, Yada, Yada. Focusing predominantly on the pop culture that typifies a decade or era to us, USA notes some big moments:

• The OJ Simpson trial was really the beginning of reality TV
• An obscure rock band from Seattle, Nirvana released Nevermind and change the face of rock, introduced us to "grunge," and knocked Michael Jackson off his top-of-the-charts perch
• Television was "Must See TV" on numerous networks - not just NBC - with innovative sitcoms like Friends, Seinfeld, The Simpsons, and Frasier, and inspired new dramas like ER, Picket Fences, The X-Files, and The Practice
• Michael Jordan and the Chicago Bulls re-introduced the idea of a sports dynasty
• One of history's most popular Presidents changed the White House in ways we never would have wanted - Monica Lewinsky - yet left the office to even greater fame and fortune
• Rap music came into its own in a way no one really predicted
• And the world became fascinated by this little phenomenon called, The Internet

The Nineties were, no doubt, a unique time if only for the transition the decade offered.

Is It Time for Congressional Hearings on Standardized Testing In Public Schools?

Teaching to the test. Test scores. Standardized Testing. Accountability. Tests.

The incredible rise in significance and impact of mandatory standardized testing is becoming the lead story in public education these days. And for good reason - few of us who went through school fifteen and twenty and thirty and forty years ago can understand how significant filling in bubbles has become. As the NEA meets in Denver, and judge dismisses a PARCC-associated lawsuit in New Mexico, the issue of standardized testing and its role in public education is coming to a head.

To that end the Network for Public Education, among others, is calling for Congress to hold formal hearings to investigate the significance, benefit, and burden of mandated standardized tests in public schools. There is no doubt that the impact of No Child Left Behind lingers with the use of standardized tests for schools. As states continue the push to link test scores to teachers' jobs, despite evidence this is a bad idea and virtually worthless, the education field looks to Congress for help.

So, is it time for hearings? Congress likes to have its nose in everything, and it certainly took an interest in "testing" professional athletes for steroid use. If Congress is willing to investigate sports, it should certainly take an interest in public schools.

Are Common Core Tests Designed to Produce Failure?

The problem with the current education reform movement is that it is based on the myth that the American public education system is in a state of crisis and that American students are falling behind the rest of the world. One of the premier voices challenging this "fraud" that is perpetuated on a naive public is Seton Hall Professor Dr. Chris Tienken. Dr. Tienken has been researching, writing, and speaking on The School Reform Landscape. Tienken has serious concerns about the response to "standardize and centrally control public education" through movements like the Common Core standards.

Now, the implementation of Common Core "State" Standards and associated national standardized testing are being implicated in the plan to produce a pre-conceived result that American schools and American students are failing. As the results of Common Core testing in states like New York are released, the data reveals that the tests were designed to create an artificial and arbitrary "pass rate" of 30%. The test results, as evaluated by teacher and education writer Anthony Cody, were intended to guarantee failure as a way of validating the claims behind the current reform movement that schools are in crisis and the Common Core standards and the associated testing apparatus are the solution. Literally, students were set up to fail.

And, that just doesn't seem like good pedagogy or education policy.

PARCC Test Losing More Support in Tennessee, Arizona, & New Mexico

So, what if they gave a PARCC test and no one came?

The Common Core aligned PARCC testing consortium took a few more hits in the past couple weeks as two more states withdrew from the group and in another state a lawsuit was filed challenging PARCC's legality and authority.  Tennessee is the latest to abandon the much-maligned and controversial testing group after the state legislature passed a law directing the state to quit the group. The anti-PARCC law in Tennessee follows a similar move last month in Arizona. Arizona's governor Jan Brewer wasn't explicitly opposed to PARCC, but she wants the state to avoid impropriety in the test selection process. That potential for impropriety is what prompted a lawsuit in New Mexico with charges of bid-rigging by PARCC and Pearson, Inc. to prevent any competition for the test and testing company. And, this challenge to PARCC's authenticity is also playing out in the South, as Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal is battling with his state education leaders over membership in and use of PARCC. Apparently, the imposition of a national test against the proper channels for competitive bidding is becoming an identifying characteristic of PARCC and Pearson, Inc. Now, the PARCC consortium is down to fifteen members, and these recent challenges indicate more trouble for PARCC may be on the way.

Common Core & PARCC Face Lawsuit Challenge in New Mexico

One of the keys to corporate education reform is that applying the rules of competition and the marketplace will lead to better results in schools. This is the theory behind vouchers and charter schools and anti-union and anti-tenure and national standards and standardized testing and value-added measures and a host of other reforms. Granted, there are numerous problems with applying competition and market practices to an institution that is not a market. And, surprisingly, some market-oriented conservative groups oppose the ability of the market to fix education through national standards. However, I can understand the simple appeal and basic motivation for reformers to believe they can do so.

And, I am pretty sure I've heard Bill Gates argue that competition and market policies are the key to improving educational outcomes. And, I'm also pretty sure Bill Gates never truly wants competition for any of his ideas. So, it's not all that surprising to learn that market forces and competition were ignored in the establishment of Common Core State Standards. And, it's not surprising that a scandal is brewing over the multi-million dollar contracts secured by Pearson, Inc. to draft and administer the requisite standardized tests for the Common Core. In New Mexico, the first legal challenge has been filed, as the American Institutes for Research has caught the ear of a federal judge who supports the claim of "bid-rigging" in securing the $240 million a year testing contract with states administering Common Core tests such as PARCC and SB.

Clearly, the issue of "school choice" is paramount in this argument, as schools should have more than one option for the tests of general standards. It would seem that competition between standardized testing companies such as ACT and SAT and AIR and others would produce the "best tests." But clearly, the people behind Common Core and PARCC are opposed to anyone competing with their "solutions" to public education.

Public Education Is Not Broken - And Bill Gates Should't Be Telling People How to Fix It

So, after I criticized Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation's disproportionate influence on discussions of public education, a friend asked, "But don't you agree that the system is broken?"

No, I don't agree that the system is broken - because public schools are not failing.

Most people criticize public education as a failure, at the same time as they praise their own kids' schools. It's the same story as Americans' faith in Congress - hate Congress, love their representatives.

American public schools educate a higher percentage of the population and send a greater percentage on to college than at any time in history. They do this as successfully as any other industrialized nation, and there is no shortage of college-educated workers for available jobs. And the United States does this with the most diverse population of any country in the world.

On standardized measures of comparisons, American schools are ranked number one in the world when scores are corrected for percentages of poverty. And, there is no evidence that public school systems in other countries are producing any better doctors or engineers or accountants or attorneys or entrepreneurs or salesman or financial analysts or …. well, you get the point.

The challenges faced by American schools are about equity of opportunity, and the problem of a one-size-fits-all system based on college degrees and Carnegie units. The economy and the public education is a complex emergent systems that requires flexibility and adaptability, and that very quality is being compromised by the push for uniformity and standardization from a corporate-model which prizes job training as the primary purpose of education.

It's not.

Alice Waters, Edible School Yards, & School Lunch Controversy

The recent controversy over the National School Lunch Program began with the belief that school lunches could certainly be healthier. If children were going to eat at least one meal a day for 180 days a year, then schools could certainly do better than pizza, french fries, soda, and cookies. And, there is no doubt that many school lunch offerings were atrocious in terms of nutrition, and kids were really being set up to make poor choices. Of course, young people are not going to make healthy choices just because the government tells them to, or seeks to restrict their choices to nothing but the parameters of the arbitrary federal guidelines for healthy eating.  The key to improving the health of young people through diets is to "cultivate" an appreciation for healthy eating.



Now, as schools and the association for school nutritionists push back against the restrictions on calories, fat, sugar, and sodium, Alice Waters - one of the premier voices in healthy eating and the Farm-to-Table movement - is responding with a passionate plea for schools to buy in, rather than opt out. Ms. Water, whose Berkeley restaurant Chez Panisse is holy ground for foodies devoted to fresh, natural, organic meals, became committed to the importance of school lunches years ago. She sees an appreciation for foods and cooking as paramount to our survival as human beings.

One of the most important parts of Alice Waters message - at least to me - is when she explains, "I don't want to tell kids what to eat. I want to win them over."

Did Dr. Oz Sell his Soul for Supplements?

For many years, Dr. Mehmet Oz has been "America's doctor," dispensing free advice on Oprah and then his own show, and publishing books about how to be the healthiest person you can be. Because of his impressive medical career and engaging TV personality, Dr. Oz has gained quite the following because people simply trust his seemingly no nonsense and common sense advice about health and wellness. And he seemed to have a knack for learning about the next big thing in health care, especially when it was information about some great new health approach such as Acai berries or the ancient Chinese practice of qi gong, or the benefit of chia seeds for something other than a "Chia Pet."

It all seemed so great - but Dr. Oz may have gone to far in his promotion of "magical cures" and "easy steps to weight loss." As many less-than-scrupulous marketers began using Dr. Oz's claims to sell potentially worthless supplements to a gullible public searching for a short cut to health, the "Good Doctor" sought to protect himself from companies using his image, name, and claims without permission. So, Dr. Oz went to Washington to let a Congressional panel investigate this issue. And for his trouble, Dr. Oz got an earful from Congressional leaders such as Senator Claire McCaskill who called the doc out for making some rather ridiculous - and unprofessional - claims.

McCaskill read Oz’s words from past segments of The Dr. Oz Show back to him with a clinical formality that underscored their absurdity:

• “You may think magic is make-believe, but this little bean has scientists saying they’ve found the magic weight loss cure for every body type: It’s green coffee extract.”
• “I've got the number-one miracle in a bottle to burn your fat: It's raspberry ketone.”
• “Garcinia cambogia: It may be the simple solution you’ve been looking for to bust your body fat for good.

McCaskill continued, as if reproaching a child. “I don't know why you need to say this stuff, because you know it's not true. Why—when you have this amazing megaphone and this amazing ability to communicate—would you cheapen your show by saying things like that?”

The doctor has some explaining to do in regards to his "flowery" language promoting miracle cures and supplements, which he claims was just part of the entertainment designed to engage an audience. In essence, Dr. Oz was challenged for making claims that he knew weren't exactly true, and Congress called upon him to stop promising miracle cures when he knows there aren't any. The most disconcerting part of this story is that it doesn't appear that Dr. Oz was profiting from the companies who were selling the products he endorsed. He certainly never promoted specific companies, and he wasn't selling his own products. It's almost as if the "good student" mentality led Dr. Oz's ego to a desire to be the guy with all the answers. If there was a miracle cure, then Dr. Oz wanted to get credit for turning the nation on to the information. Even if it was nothing but bad medicine.

There is not miracle cure, especially for weight loss. And while foods/drinks such as goji berries or green tea certainly have value, they aren't what Dr. Oz led people to believe. And, so, in the words of John Oliver, Dr. Oz needs to stop touting these "cures" on a show called Dr. Oz, but he could promote them on a show called "Check this s@#t out with a guy named Mehmet."

Soccer's Growing Popularity in America - World Cup

When I was a young boy growing up and playing soccer in the 1970s, I regularly heard that soccer was going to be hugely popular in the USA by the time I was in high school and college. With so many young people playing the sport, it would no doubt pass at least one of the four major league sports - MLB, NFL, NBA, NHL - and it would join its rightful place as the world's most popular spectator sport. Heck, Pele's popularity alone was enough to make this prediction, right?

Wrong.

For many reasons, soccer has never quite caught on with American fans, and it still trails even hockey in terms of viewership and revenue. In fact, years ago, I made a bet with someone that if soccer even surpassed hockey in terms of popularity in my lifetime, I would pony up big cash. And I've felt pretty confident for a long time that I would never pay up. But the World Cup this year has me thinking. Just like it had during the Olmpics in America in 1984 and 1996, and during the America-hosted World Cup in 1994, the country seems to be catching a little soccer fever.

Of course, whether that ever translates to regular viewership for a professional league remains to be seen. Major League Soccer (MLS) has had some great years recently, averaging about 18,000 fans in stadiums across the country. And in some places, the local teams are drawing as many as 40,000 fans like the Seattle Sounders, and that's probably sustainable to some degree. Of course, popularity is a complicated thing, and I would have to judge at least part of that by revenue - and TV revenue is king. So, the current average salary for a professional hockey player is $2.4 million while the average pro soccer player makes about $150,000.

So, there is still a lot of growth to come.

Next Food Network Star - Kenny Goes Home

Near the end of this week's "Next Food Network Star" on the Food Network, the viewer poll indicated that 75% of viewers would send Kenny home. Thank goodness Alton and Bobby agreed. The owner of a fast-casual Asian restaurant, Kenny Lao just could not compete on the show designed to "discover" a true celebrity chef in the making - a person who can just flat out cook and engage a TV audience while he or she does it. And the first rule of the Food Network is that you have to be a top tier chef. Kenny wasn't even close. In fact, I am curious as to how he ever became a finalist. Was the applicant field truly that weak.

This week's episode of FNS was framed as an episode of "Cutthroat Kitchen." And, that was only mildly entertaining to me - for the concept behind these intense food competitions and the added element of "sabotaging the other contestants" just doesn't indicate great culinary skill to me. That's the problem with trying to keep a network and a series fresh - they have to keep pushing the envelop to fined new forms of entertainment. And it simply becomes too gimmicky at that point. In this week's episode, the challenge of cooking with chocolate bacon or grinding meat in a snow cone machine didn't do much for me. Well, that's not entirely true - because the chocolate bacon worked in favor of Emma, who I think would make a great Food Network Star.

Christopher survived this week, and even thrived. But he will not be a FNS, for he is just too milqutoast to entertain and hold his own. Chris continues to struggle, which is a shame because he is in many ways very entertaining. Sarah didn't annoy nearly as much this week. And Lenny actually really struggled in the food category. It was quite a shock to see Bobby Flay spit out food. I can't imagine what that sopapilla must have tasted like. Of course, Lenny has reined in the crass comments and seems truly humbled. Ultimately, Lenny should not be the next FNS, for he really brings nothing new to the table.

Still like Nicole and Emma the best.

The Spurs Re-Defining Success in the NBA - Owning the Heat

In the NBA playoffs, it's pretty clear that in forty-nine states people are rooting for Tim Duncan and the San Antonio Spurs. And then Miami Heat fans are, of course, casually but not devotedly cheering on Dwayne Wade's Miami Heat, featuring the services, or "talents," of Lebron James. It's been so easy to root against the Heat because of the feeling that this "Dream Team" with a "Big Three" was put together to provide Lebron with a championship team that he could never develop on his own. And the dependence on the "Greatest player on the planet," but one who will never be as good as Michael Jordan, does not endear the team to true basketball fans.

That dependence on a superstar is why the last two victories by the Spurs have been so enjoyable - they represent basketball at its purest as a team game. Certainly, the Spurs have a genuine team of superstars built around a mega-player in future Hall of Famer Tim Duncan. But watching the team play as a unit that passes and passes and passes, but never over-passes, until they get a shot has been so satisfying in the way that would do Hoosier's coach Norman Dale proud. And the team magic of Coach Pop and the Spurs provides hope for NBA fans that the Spurs dominance will lead the NBA in a new direction, away from the Lebron/Carmelo-style, and toward the purity of a Tim Duncan led team.

This idea was well developed in a "hopeful" piece by Denver Post sportswriter Chris Dempsey who is "Hoping the Spurs Spark Better Basketball."

The Spurs play a beautiful game of passing and movement, a work of art worthy of inclusion in The Louvre. It's FC Barcelona, circa 2012. It's jazz. Basketball, as the Spurs have put on display in a demolition job of the defending champion Miami Heat thus far, should look just like that.

And yet their brand of basketball, a free-flowing, constantly moving ballet is the exception to the rule the NBA is transforming into. The game is pushing more toward pop than jazz, steering itself into a formulaic game. Shots should be taken from here, here and here, not there or there. Players should be played in these combinations, not those. 

No exceptions. No improvisation. No jazz. Just pop.

So, here's hoping.

Banksy Returns with a New Documentary - or Does He?

The internationally known and vastly popular graffiti artist Banksy always seems to be one step ahead of all the forces that are interested in his work. The enigmatic artist and filmmaker first fascinated art fans - and frustrated critics - with his Oscar-nominated film Exit Through the Gift Shop. He then responded with a month-long series of "art showings," or publicity stunts, in New York City, which included selling originals of his art work for as little as $60 on the street. The works could actually sell for tens of thousands. And, now, he has teased us again with a short documentary film recounting the New York project, which he posted on his website, implying a longer film was coming.

Now, it's time to wait and see what comes next.

UPDATE:  Banksy is undoubtedly a significant cultural phenomenon, and many people may be intrigued about this fascinating artist. A great resource is the Banksy Art page from a group known as Artsy. 

We strive to make all of the world’s art accessible to anyone online. Our Banksy page, for example, provides visitors with Banksy's bio, over 250 of his works, exclusive articles, and up-to-date Banksy exhibition listings. The page even includes related artist & category tags, plus suggested contemporary artists, allowing viewers to continue exploring art beyond our Banksy page. 

Is Common Core about to Become "Gates-gate"?

Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation seem to be doing some quick damage control lately regarding the Foundation's connection to Common Core State Standards. After a year or so of backlash from parents, teachers, education researchers, and conservative pundits, the pro-Common Core Gates Foundation took the surprising position recently of calling for a two-delay in the use of Common Core-linked tests as measures for teacher and student accountability. The Gates Foundation director apparently conceded the frustrations from groups critical and suspicious of "the Common Core" when she wrote in an open letter to the New York Times:

“ … the best new ideas aren’t self-fulfilling; they have to be put into practice wisely.” She added: “No evaluation system will work unless teachers believe it is fair and reliable, and it’s very hard to be fair in a time of transition. The standards need time to work. Teachers need time to develop lessons, receive more training, get used to the new tests and offer their feedback.”

The timing of the public statement conveniently coincided with a critical Washington Post story by Lindsay Leyton who sought to explain ("expose"?) "How Bill Gates Pulled Off the Swift Common Core Revolution." The implication in the title - and, of course, fleshed out in the story - is that the establishment and promotion and adoption of the "national standards" by forty-five states was the brainchild and pet project of Bill Gates, a billionaire computer mogul and philanthropist who has no educational background or credentials other than having gone to school and dropped out of Harvard. The not-so-subtle criticism of the story is that the Common Core standards, contrary to the all-out PR effort of the Gates Foundation and the Obama administration, were not "states-led" but, in fact, "Gates-led.

On a summer day in 2008, Gene Wilhoit, director of a national group of state school chiefs, and David Coleman, an emerging evangelist for the standards movement, spent hours in Bill Gates’s sleek headquarters near Seattle, trying to persuade him and his wife, Melinda, to turn their idea into reality. Coleman and Wilhoit told the Gateses that academic standards varied so wildly between states that high school diplomas had lost all meaning, that as many as 40 percent of college freshmen needed remedial classes and that U.S. students were falling behind their foreign competitors.

The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation didn’t just bankroll the development of what became known as the Common Core State Standards. With more than $200 million, the foundation also built political support across the country, persuading state governments to make systemic and costly changes. Bill Gates was de facto organizer, providing the money and structure for states to work together on common standards in a way that avoided the usual collision between states’ rights and national interests that had undercut every previous effort, dating from the Eisenhower administration.

The story has picked up steam and has been repeated and extrapolated on by many Common Core critics who question the validity of the process by which the standards came to embed themselves in school districts across the nation, even as criticism grew. Teacher and education blogger Mercedes Schneider, who has been tracing the corporate forces that have pushed the agenda, has been critical of Gates' seemingly excessive influence. And, after the WashPost story was published, she asked,
Why Would the WashPost Wait Three Months to Publish a Gates Interview?" There seemed to be more powerful forces at work on a project that by many accounts should have been far more inclusive of teachers and school communities. And the charges of manipulation by Gates and his Foundation extend beyond the simple question of 'backing the standards. In funding PBS programming devoted to promoting the Common Core standards, Gates may have been using the movement to sell software and educational materials. That charge of creating and exploiting a "crisis in education" as a way to hedge the market on materials is the concern of teachers like Joshua Katz who warn of the "Toxic Culture of Education."

Now, the questions about Gates' influence could stretch all the way to the White House, as conservative critics of federal influence on local control of education begin to question whether any laws were broken in the promotion and possible coercion that led to the adoption of the standards across the nation. Stanley Kurtz of the National Review is asking whether it is "Time for Congressional Hearings on Common Core." If the federal government has had any undue influence on establishing learning standards and curriculum for the nation's public schools, then President Obama and his Education Secretary Arne Duncan may find themselves in the middle of "Gates-gate," as that action is specifically prohibited by federal law. And, of course, the president and his billionaire buddy will be targets for criticism on a personal level when they have to explain why Common Core standards are necessary for America's children, but not for their own.

Student Loan Debt - The Scam of the Ivory Tower

Long gone seem to be the days when students could pay their way through four years of college by working full-time during the summers, part-time in the summer, and perhaps assuming a little student loan debt. Now, with the cost of college having gone up by almost 1200% in three decades - more than any commodity or investment - Americans are beginning to ask questions about sustainability. And, for the first time they are beginning to ask "Is College is Worth The Investment?" That question gets some support in a new documentary Ivory Tower from director Andrew Rossi.

Certainly, the American belief in the value of higher education and a college degree is an ingrained value and tradition. However, as more and more students are burdened by crushing debt for degrees (some from for-profit colleges who have exploited student loan policies to coax poor and minority students into pursuing potentially worthless degrees), the policies and costs of higher education are becoming more suspect. And, even as President Obama and congressional Democrats attempt to offer a solution, many argue the efforts are too little and too late - and won't solve the problem anyway.

The suspicion of the system and the belief that the President can do little to alleviate the problems are rooted in the flaws inherent in the system. The problem of rising college tuition is the fault of the colleges themselves, argues Thomas Frank who believes "Colleges are Full of It."As the colleges have competed with each other for an ever more valuable slice of the college student loan debt pool - now valued at a staggering, bubble-busting $1 trillion - they have exploited the country's faith in the value of a degree, and have convinced millions of students to leverage their futures on a piece of paper that may not prepare them for the workplace, won't necessarily guarantee them a job, and which they may never be able to pay off. And, for years there has been evidence that "College is Not Worth the Cost."

As far as plans to fix the problem - no easy task - Jordan Weissman believes that students, and especially Democrats, need to forget the claims and plans of Elizabeth Warren and President Obama and instead give credence to "The Best Plan to Fix the Student Loan Debt Crisis" from a little-known Republican congressman from Wisconsin named Tom Petri. For anyone following the issue, or God-forbid planning on incurring tuition costs in the near future, it is worth doing the research on not only the schools but also the issue of student loan debt.

Do We Need Gifted Education?

In an era of standardization in education, in which all kids must learn and accomplish the same skills/knowledge at the same grade level in all schools from Anchorage to Albany, parents and teachers of "exceptional kids" have reason to be concerned. The issue of advanced learning for "gifted" children is one of those areas where kids who operate outside of the standards could be restricted by the push for standardization and uniformity. The issue gained some national prominence via the New York City schools after commissioner Carmen Farina intervened by diminishing, if not demeaning, the practice of "gifted education." So, the question that follows is: "Do We Need Gifted Education?"

The New York Times took up the debate in its Room for Debate opinion page, presenting arguments on both sides of the issue. Policy writer Hailey Potter sees "gifted and talented education" as nothing short of segregation, and she presents some compelling evidence about the racial disparity in the gifted track of New York schools. Certainly, the disparity she presents is disconcerting, and economist Darrick Hamilton sees the need for "gifted education for all students." Of course, that perspective denies the reality of "giftedness." If everyone is and can be doing it, then it really isn't an exceptionality. And that is the important distinction to be made in education. Just as a special education learning disability requires a different approach, a truly advanced student needs accommodation as well - and has legal right to it.

The counterargument to Farina's and Potter's dismissal of "gifted ed" is presented by Rick Hess. Hess and Bruce Sacerdote acknowledge the existence of giftedness and promote the value in understanding that a ten-year-old who is performing higher level math like Calculus or reading/understanding/conducting research on stem cells or reading and understanding Crime And Punishment is simply "not like other kids," and his education should honor that exceptionality. Certainly, as Mr. Hamilton notes, all kids deserve access to the quality education, and every kid should be encouraged to achieve at the highest level. But if every kid is doing the same thing, it is no longer an exceptionality, and that simply defies reality.

School districts have begun to move away from "tracking," and instead promote more inclusiveness in the advanced classes. And improving the way giftedness is identified and honored is certainly a step in the right direction. But it's important to note that gifted kids should spend their days with age-level peers for many reasons, while at the same time they should be allowed to pursue academia and their intellectual interests to their highest degree. And that can only happen in a system that maintains "gifted education." For, not every kid is going to play varsity, but every kid should be able to play.

And gifted kids should be allowed to excel, for it is in our interest to meet their learning needs, even if those needs are not "Common" or standard. Giftedness is a reality, and acknowledging and honoring it is the right approach for education.

Coke is not "The Real Thing" - Some Negatives on "Buying the World a Coke"

I always really liked Coca-Cola. It wasn't just soda that I enjoyed - because Pepsi did nothing for me, and I would only occasionally go for a 7-up or A&W Root Beer. But Coca-Cola was something special. It may have been that unique flavor that wasn't entirely sweet - but was probably the commercials. No one had a brand like Coke:

Though I rarely drank more than one at a time, I enjoyed Coke so much that I bought stock in the company. This decision was made when I was traveling in some far corner of Vietnam, and I realized you can buy a Coke just about anywhere on Earth.  However, Coca-Cola is a company of much myth and lore, not the least of which is unflattering. There are some pretty disturbing claims made about the ingredients in Coke and their effects on the body. In fact, many people have offered strange, but practical uses for Coca Cola that have nothing to do with drinking a refreshing beverage. And now, a YouTube video from "Crazy Russian Hacker" has gone viral with "What's left when you boil down Coke":

So, it's definitely worth some consideration of just what soda companies - and Coke is the Big Dog, no doubt - are doing to the health of their consumers.

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.