I think I have figured something out. Those wingnuts that post crazy things to Facebook about all the rumors and myths about Obama are just blind with hatred. That is why they don't recognize legitimate criticism of him. That is why they focus on Benghazi, but ignore him pulling support from Egypt now that it is back under military rule. That is why they complain about Syria, but ignore Saudi Arabia's anger at the lack of support.
One of the latest posts of the nuts is about Obama denying knowing about NSA tapping of foreign leaders phones. It isn't that he did the tapping, or that as the chief executive he is responsible whether he knew about it or not. It isn't about him not having control over the policies of our intelligence services. It is if he lied about knowing of it. My guess is that he knew about it, but needs to deny it in order to improve relations with the foreign governments or at least with the people in those countries. But all the logical arguments are thrown out. The only thing that matters is blind hatred of Obama.
Another one going around recently is the outrage over people having to change their insurance under Obamacare, because their current coverage doesn't meet the minimum standards of the ACA. Instead of arguing that the standards should be lowered, they are just pissed that Obama said people would be able to keep their insurance. This is just mind boggling.
Before Facebook, I had no idea there were this many crazy people. I thought most people were normal level-headed moderates. Boy was I wrong. I have seen comments calling for Obama's impeachment, and saying he is the most evil person to hold the office of president. I assume they have no clue about history, and not that they support things like the genocide of the American Indian. I thought we were far more sophisticated than that. I was wrong.
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Monday, October 21, 2013
Which Side of the Fence?
My favorite right wingnut posted on his facebook page a lame copied post about the difference between a conservative and a liberal. I think I am going to alter what the conservative side should read...
Tuesday, October 15, 2013
Support the Military
It seems that everyone supports the military. No matter if you are a hawk or a dove, you have to support the troops. Everyone on TV goes out of their way to show how much they support the troops. The small government conservatives still love a big government military. We bash government institutions as incompetent, but not the military. They are great. If you dare to speak out against the military, you are going to be attacked. But, isn't that a bit fascist?
We create slogans like "they are fighting for our freedom", but in reality our freedom hasn't been at risk since the 1940's. In all seriousness, the Revolution, the Civil War, and World War II are the only wars were our freedom has been threatened. The War of 1812 saw a threat to the country, but that was our own doing. We could have stayed out of that war. Far more often than fighting for our freedom, the military has been fighting to support the political ambitions of our elected officials.
Is it right to promote and praise individuals who have served in an organization whose purpose is to kill other human beings? We don't have to vilify these people, but there isn't really a need to praise them as if they have saved your kitten from a tree. Just treat them like you would the garbage man, the box boy at the grocery store, or a plumber. That is because in the last 50 years, a soldier hasn't been any more important than people from those lines of work.
We create slogans like "they are fighting for our freedom", but in reality our freedom hasn't been at risk since the 1940's. In all seriousness, the Revolution, the Civil War, and World War II are the only wars were our freedom has been threatened. The War of 1812 saw a threat to the country, but that was our own doing. We could have stayed out of that war. Far more often than fighting for our freedom, the military has been fighting to support the political ambitions of our elected officials.
Is it right to promote and praise individuals who have served in an organization whose purpose is to kill other human beings? We don't have to vilify these people, but there isn't really a need to praise them as if they have saved your kitten from a tree. Just treat them like you would the garbage man, the box boy at the grocery store, or a plumber. That is because in the last 50 years, a soldier hasn't been any more important than people from those lines of work.
Monday, October 7, 2013
Social Commentary
I am taking a break from the normal political, economic, and education related post to talk about something sociological...
It is not uncommon to see a car with a memorial on the back windshield. It says something like "In loving memory of" and then the person's name and then the birth year and death year. I can't help believe the person who owns the car isn't too bright. I say that because there are much better ways to remember someone than on the back window of a car. The car is going to eventually be destroyed and the memorial forgotten. It is similar to the t-shirt with the kid who died during high school. Is that the best you can do? The answer to that is no, because I have heard of several people getting tattoos as memorials to departed family.
Here is the problem with all of those... they are superficial and very easy to do. If you want to honor someone, change your life for the better in their honor. Making yourself better will make those around you better and that will be passed on to following generations for hundreds of years. That is the best legacy you can give someone. It is more difficult, which is also why it is such a nice tribute to the departed.
It is not uncommon to see a car with a memorial on the back windshield. It says something like "In loving memory of" and then the person's name and then the birth year and death year. I can't help believe the person who owns the car isn't too bright. I say that because there are much better ways to remember someone than on the back window of a car. The car is going to eventually be destroyed and the memorial forgotten. It is similar to the t-shirt with the kid who died during high school. Is that the best you can do? The answer to that is no, because I have heard of several people getting tattoos as memorials to departed family.
Here is the problem with all of those... they are superficial and very easy to do. If you want to honor someone, change your life for the better in their honor. Making yourself better will make those around you better and that will be passed on to following generations for hundreds of years. That is the best legacy you can give someone. It is more difficult, which is also why it is such a nice tribute to the departed.
Friday, October 4, 2013
Expecting Privilege Without Accomplishment
This is going to be one of those teacher rants about what is wrong with kids today. That is probably one of the more boring things to write about, but I think I have a good observation. I am also not blaming kids. Kids act the way they are conditioned to. It is we, the adults, that have to take blame.
Today, for the second time this year, a student got made at the way I answered his question. The first time, I was told by a student that I didn't have to "be smart". Today, another student said I didn't have to be a "dick".
The first time I was asked a question about the student's study guide and if he should tear the pages out of his notebook and turn them in. He asked this as half the class was up stapling their pages that they tore out of their notebooks and turning them in. So, I told him sarcastically to leave the pages in whatever they are currently in. Turn in the notebook, backpack, shirt, jacket, car, house, whatever is surrounding it. I said it with a smile and I joke all the time with my students, but this kid got all bent out of shape. That is the fist time anyone has ever overtly been offended.
Today, I posted the scores of the final exams for the quarter. I posted them in the classroom right under where I posted their grades right before the final. I explained that they can figure out their grade for the quarter because the grades before the final represent 3/4 of their grade and their final score was the other 1/4. Then I got a bunch of questions about what was their grade for the quarter. Then I told them to just do the math. Finally, a kid asks me if I am going to post the grades for the quarter. So, I addressed the whole class, telling them that they should be able to do the math and figure it out. It was simple math, and if they can't figure it out, they don't have the math skills expected of someone graduating high school. That is when the kid told me I don't have to be a dick about it. That is the second time that such a thing has happened since I started my teaching career.
Here is the interesting thing about these two students: they violate classroom and school rules all the time. I get on them about it, and I tell them that it hurts the participation portion of their grade. They just don't care. They care about being treated with respect and dignity, they just aren't going to give that back to anybody. Here lies the problem. Many kids want to be treated like they are better than others, but they do absolutely nothing to distinguish themselves from anyone else.
Some might say that it is because the kids watch reality shows and see nobodies become somebodies without doing anything. I disagree with that premise. I think it is because adults don't treat them as average and instill in them the desire to accomplish something so they can be special. We also make excuses for kids. The kid that doesn't want to pay attention in class could have ADD. The problem is, when there is something that he does like, that keeps his attention just fine. I don't believe there is such a thing as Selective ADD (although that may be coming soon).
I could keep going, but I think you can get my idea. We are creating a generation that thinks they are special because they are not dead. In reality, there is a kid in Asia working his ass off to take the job of the American kid. The structure of those Asian societies are such that failure is so present, that much fewer kids think they are special without accomplishment. We need to pick up on that, or we will be raising a bunch of underachievers.
Today, for the second time this year, a student got made at the way I answered his question. The first time, I was told by a student that I didn't have to "be smart". Today, another student said I didn't have to be a "dick".
The first time I was asked a question about the student's study guide and if he should tear the pages out of his notebook and turn them in. He asked this as half the class was up stapling their pages that they tore out of their notebooks and turning them in. So, I told him sarcastically to leave the pages in whatever they are currently in. Turn in the notebook, backpack, shirt, jacket, car, house, whatever is surrounding it. I said it with a smile and I joke all the time with my students, but this kid got all bent out of shape. That is the fist time anyone has ever overtly been offended.
Today, I posted the scores of the final exams for the quarter. I posted them in the classroom right under where I posted their grades right before the final. I explained that they can figure out their grade for the quarter because the grades before the final represent 3/4 of their grade and their final score was the other 1/4. Then I got a bunch of questions about what was their grade for the quarter. Then I told them to just do the math. Finally, a kid asks me if I am going to post the grades for the quarter. So, I addressed the whole class, telling them that they should be able to do the math and figure it out. It was simple math, and if they can't figure it out, they don't have the math skills expected of someone graduating high school. That is when the kid told me I don't have to be a dick about it. That is the second time that such a thing has happened since I started my teaching career.
Here is the interesting thing about these two students: they violate classroom and school rules all the time. I get on them about it, and I tell them that it hurts the participation portion of their grade. They just don't care. They care about being treated with respect and dignity, they just aren't going to give that back to anybody. Here lies the problem. Many kids want to be treated like they are better than others, but they do absolutely nothing to distinguish themselves from anyone else.
Some might say that it is because the kids watch reality shows and see nobodies become somebodies without doing anything. I disagree with that premise. I think it is because adults don't treat them as average and instill in them the desire to accomplish something so they can be special. We also make excuses for kids. The kid that doesn't want to pay attention in class could have ADD. The problem is, when there is something that he does like, that keeps his attention just fine. I don't believe there is such a thing as Selective ADD (although that may be coming soon).
I could keep going, but I think you can get my idea. We are creating a generation that thinks they are special because they are not dead. In reality, there is a kid in Asia working his ass off to take the job of the American kid. The structure of those Asian societies are such that failure is so present, that much fewer kids think they are special without accomplishment. We need to pick up on that, or we will be raising a bunch of underachievers.
Monday, September 30, 2013
Macroeconomics
Having watched a bit of the coverage on the government shutdown, Obamacare, and upcoming debt ceiling crisis leads me to believe that most politicians and people on TV have no idea about macroeconomics. I think they should have taken a course on it in college, but either they cheated off the guy next to them, or they found a way to skip that class and still graduate.
First, there is the Republicans love of cutting spending. This is fine when the economy is good, but it is terrible when the economy is slow. Why can't there be a Republican who is also a Keynesian? Can't someone be pro business but also support temporary government spending in a depressed economy? If spending is cut now, that means less money in the economy and it will slow down even further. The crazy thing is, if one looked at Europe, they would see what happens when spending is cut in a depressed economy (it gets worse). However, the people who advocate austerity in this country say we don't want to be like Europe, so we must cut spending. Do they really believe this crap?
Second, there is the "Obamacare is the worst thing ever in America" crowd. I wasn't big on Obamacare when it was first proposed because nobody tried to sell it as something that is good for America as a whole. It was always appealing to my desire to help some poor person with medical problems get healthcare. Well, I am a mean, heartless, bastard, who doesn't give a damn about someone I don't know suffering through some terrible illness without medical insurance. To me, a random person in Indiana is no different than a random person in Syria or North Korea. If I don't know them, I don't care about them. If you care about the random person suffering, then take a look around the world and then kill yourself, because there is no way to help these people.
Sorry, back to Obamacare... It has passed and it is law now. I have heard some economists like Paul Krugman say Obamacare will be good for most people and lower premiums. This is where my laziness comes in. The Affordable Care Act was something like 2,000 pages long. I didn't read it. I am not going to read it. I am just going off people who should know about these things and their explanations. I get the premise of Obamacare, I just don't know all the specifics. And no, it isn't socialism. It is a market solution with government regulation. I want to give it a shot before I advocate its removal. I don't understand why others don't feel the same. The worst thing that can happen is that it works and that Obama looks good. If it sucks, then all the people who are against it can say "I told you so!" and then repeal it after they win in the next couple elections.
Finally, there are some people who don't want to increase the debt ceiling. This will tank the economy for sure. Don't increase the debt ceiling and there will be serious automatic cuts to spending and an increase in interest rates (because we will default on our loans). This means a massive economic slow down, which will certainly lead to another recession. Again, why can't there be Keynesian Republicans? There is nothing wrong with temporary government spending. It's not like we have businesses competing with the government for those loans. If they were, the economy would be doing just fine and there would be no need for the government spending.
It all seems very basic and simple to me. I really don't understand why educated people don't understand what is going on. Economics isn't religion. You can change your views if evidence supports the other side.
First, there is the Republicans love of cutting spending. This is fine when the economy is good, but it is terrible when the economy is slow. Why can't there be a Republican who is also a Keynesian? Can't someone be pro business but also support temporary government spending in a depressed economy? If spending is cut now, that means less money in the economy and it will slow down even further. The crazy thing is, if one looked at Europe, they would see what happens when spending is cut in a depressed economy (it gets worse). However, the people who advocate austerity in this country say we don't want to be like Europe, so we must cut spending. Do they really believe this crap?
Second, there is the "Obamacare is the worst thing ever in America" crowd. I wasn't big on Obamacare when it was first proposed because nobody tried to sell it as something that is good for America as a whole. It was always appealing to my desire to help some poor person with medical problems get healthcare. Well, I am a mean, heartless, bastard, who doesn't give a damn about someone I don't know suffering through some terrible illness without medical insurance. To me, a random person in Indiana is no different than a random person in Syria or North Korea. If I don't know them, I don't care about them. If you care about the random person suffering, then take a look around the world and then kill yourself, because there is no way to help these people.
Sorry, back to Obamacare... It has passed and it is law now. I have heard some economists like Paul Krugman say Obamacare will be good for most people and lower premiums. This is where my laziness comes in. The Affordable Care Act was something like 2,000 pages long. I didn't read it. I am not going to read it. I am just going off people who should know about these things and their explanations. I get the premise of Obamacare, I just don't know all the specifics. And no, it isn't socialism. It is a market solution with government regulation. I want to give it a shot before I advocate its removal. I don't understand why others don't feel the same. The worst thing that can happen is that it works and that Obama looks good. If it sucks, then all the people who are against it can say "I told you so!" and then repeal it after they win in the next couple elections.
Finally, there are some people who don't want to increase the debt ceiling. This will tank the economy for sure. Don't increase the debt ceiling and there will be serious automatic cuts to spending and an increase in interest rates (because we will default on our loans). This means a massive economic slow down, which will certainly lead to another recession. Again, why can't there be Keynesian Republicans? There is nothing wrong with temporary government spending. It's not like we have businesses competing with the government for those loans. If they were, the economy would be doing just fine and there would be no need for the government spending.
It all seems very basic and simple to me. I really don't understand why educated people don't understand what is going on. Economics isn't religion. You can change your views if evidence supports the other side.
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
People Should Know Better
It always amazes me how people believe some really dumb stuff. It is especially true with the internet, because these people can now brag about their lack of critical thinking skills by posting to facebook or sending emails about the various conspiracy theories or lies they have bought into. I wish it was indicative of a political ideology (crazy liberals or crazy conservatives) but they seem equally batshit.
Liberals like to talk about the conspiracy of corporations that control our government. We aren't talking having access to politicians so business friendly legislation gets passed at the detriment of the average worker. That would make some sense and I would respect that. No, these people believe that big pharma is poisoning people with vaccines and medicines that are designed to make you sick. Or, they think Monsanto is forcing everyone to eat GMOs that will cause cancer, and soon we will see all our loved ones die an early death. Now, these claims can easily be debunked by the scientific method. So it should be very easy to show these people the published research and kill the conspiracy theory. Wrong. Like all bad conspiracy theories, they get larger and larger as the evidence shows up against them. The people explain away the scientific evidence by claiming those corporations control the scientific world. So, not only do these corporations control government, they control our universities as well. It seems the only thing these corporations don't control is the random nut job with an internet domain. The funny thing is, that would be a lot easier and cheaper to control than the US government and universities around the world. Here is the strange thing... If I knew of a publicly traded company that was that powerful, I would invest all my money into buying their stocks. But, they don't. They continue to be poor and crying about being controlled by these corporations.
Now, with conservatives, I could go several ways. First, there is the religious conservative. But, I am not going to go there. Religion is superstition and I can be superstitious too. I will leave people to their religions and whatever goofy beliefs come from that. However, I will go after the conservatives that focus on politics outside of religion. There are people that believe everything they read from a conservative website or radio show about Obama. Anything bad about Obama they buy into 100 percent. Fact checking and common sense could debunk these claims, but they don't take the time. I really think they don't want to know they are wrong. It is easy to hate someone, and there is something inside us that likes that. We like to hate. It is a simple, clear emotion that makes us feel better about ourselves, because we can see people that are beneath us.
There is a guy I go round and round with on facebook. He is an educated man, who used to be a history teacher. He actually went to the same schools I did. Every other day it seems he posts something about Obama that he got from some email or website that is just really off the deep end. He doesn't post real criticisms of Obama, and there are plenty. He posts stuff like, "Obama knows everything that has happened in Syria, but still doesn't know what happened in Benghazi." Here is the kicker, I know what happened in Benghazi, and I have told this guy what happened. He ignores it, and I think because it would change his world view to accept it.
There are also the "economics is magic" conservatives. These can vary from the followers of Ron Paul (off the deep end batshit nuts), to the people who want to follow the fresh water economists, but have no idea what they are saying (can't be Keynesian, because then government might actually be able to do good). The Ron Paul nuts say they want to go back to the gold standard, or want to do away with the fed. To them, economics is so simple that macroeconomic theory shouldn't exist. I think it is because as soon as you start talking about macroeconomics, they get the thousand yard stare. It is way too complicated for them. They don't realize that the reason we created the fed, and got off the gold standard was that our economy was terrible, and these things helped correct that. That is as basic as I can be without having them take a class on economics. The other people who are less nuts are the austerity people. I understand what they are saying, but most have no idea why they are saying it. I am not talking about real economists who, while being wrong for the last several years about austerity, can explain why they think we need austerity. I am talking about the people who watch them on tv and parrot what they say without having a clue what they are actually advocating.
These are the sad people, because they should really know better. If they weren't lazy, they could educate themselves. But, then the world wouldn't be so simple.
Liberals like to talk about the conspiracy of corporations that control our government. We aren't talking having access to politicians so business friendly legislation gets passed at the detriment of the average worker. That would make some sense and I would respect that. No, these people believe that big pharma is poisoning people with vaccines and medicines that are designed to make you sick. Or, they think Monsanto is forcing everyone to eat GMOs that will cause cancer, and soon we will see all our loved ones die an early death. Now, these claims can easily be debunked by the scientific method. So it should be very easy to show these people the published research and kill the conspiracy theory. Wrong. Like all bad conspiracy theories, they get larger and larger as the evidence shows up against them. The people explain away the scientific evidence by claiming those corporations control the scientific world. So, not only do these corporations control government, they control our universities as well. It seems the only thing these corporations don't control is the random nut job with an internet domain. The funny thing is, that would be a lot easier and cheaper to control than the US government and universities around the world. Here is the strange thing... If I knew of a publicly traded company that was that powerful, I would invest all my money into buying their stocks. But, they don't. They continue to be poor and crying about being controlled by these corporations.
Now, with conservatives, I could go several ways. First, there is the religious conservative. But, I am not going to go there. Religion is superstition and I can be superstitious too. I will leave people to their religions and whatever goofy beliefs come from that. However, I will go after the conservatives that focus on politics outside of religion. There are people that believe everything they read from a conservative website or radio show about Obama. Anything bad about Obama they buy into 100 percent. Fact checking and common sense could debunk these claims, but they don't take the time. I really think they don't want to know they are wrong. It is easy to hate someone, and there is something inside us that likes that. We like to hate. It is a simple, clear emotion that makes us feel better about ourselves, because we can see people that are beneath us.
There is a guy I go round and round with on facebook. He is an educated man, who used to be a history teacher. He actually went to the same schools I did. Every other day it seems he posts something about Obama that he got from some email or website that is just really off the deep end. He doesn't post real criticisms of Obama, and there are plenty. He posts stuff like, "Obama knows everything that has happened in Syria, but still doesn't know what happened in Benghazi." Here is the kicker, I know what happened in Benghazi, and I have told this guy what happened. He ignores it, and I think because it would change his world view to accept it.
There are also the "economics is magic" conservatives. These can vary from the followers of Ron Paul (off the deep end batshit nuts), to the people who want to follow the fresh water economists, but have no idea what they are saying (can't be Keynesian, because then government might actually be able to do good). The Ron Paul nuts say they want to go back to the gold standard, or want to do away with the fed. To them, economics is so simple that macroeconomic theory shouldn't exist. I think it is because as soon as you start talking about macroeconomics, they get the thousand yard stare. It is way too complicated for them. They don't realize that the reason we created the fed, and got off the gold standard was that our economy was terrible, and these things helped correct that. That is as basic as I can be without having them take a class on economics. The other people who are less nuts are the austerity people. I understand what they are saying, but most have no idea why they are saying it. I am not talking about real economists who, while being wrong for the last several years about austerity, can explain why they think we need austerity. I am talking about the people who watch them on tv and parrot what they say without having a clue what they are actually advocating.
These are the sad people, because they should really know better. If they weren't lazy, they could educate themselves. But, then the world wouldn't be so simple.
Monday, September 23, 2013
Just Try To Do Well In School
Being a teacher, it is frustrating to see all these attempts at changing education to make it better, and seeing the real problem ignored. The problem isn't with curriculum, or testing, or keeping teachers accountable. It is with too many students being completely apathetic or even contemptuous towards their education. If a student doesn't have a desire to graduate, how can you motivate him to think critically? He has already failed to think critically about the most important aspect of his life. If he doesn't graduate, his life is going to be miserable. If he doesn't understand something he is living, how is he going to communicate abstract concepts about about a hypothetical situation from the information in reading or lecture?
So how do you get better performing students? The first thing is you have to expect them to perform at a higher level. I don't mean hope they perform at a high level. We have to expect it. That means there are some real consequences for poor performance. If a student doesn't want to try, get him the hell out of the school. Maybe he can try a continuation school, or maybe he needs to be sent home for a year and see if he changes his attitude next year. This may seem harsh, but if you do it when the students are young, they can get a second chance or third chance and realize what they are facing before it is too late. As of now, we hold our students' hands right until the time they drop out and then there is no second chance.
More people suffer than just the apathetic student. A deadbeat student tears down everyone around him. Struggling students see there is no consequences for failure and they try even less. Many students will adjust to a middle performance ranking in their classroom. I see it all the time. There are many students that judge their performance in the classroom as compared to those around them. If they are sitting amongst a bunch of F students, they will strive for Ds. If they are sitting with A and B students, they will be forced to work harder and get Bs. Just today in my class there was an F student arguing with a D- student over who was dumber. That D- student took great pride in the fact that he was better than the F student. I think if that F student was removed from school (he isn't going to graduate anyway), the D- student is going to work harder and be a C student. He won't ever be an A or B student, because he is lazy and only wants to do enough so he isn't the dumbest guy in the room.
We can save the D students. We can't save the F students. They F student has a reward system that they judge far greater than their prosperity as an adult. For many at my school, that reward is drugs. It is quite common for a kid to be busted with drugs. Nothing happens to them. They have to promise not to do drugs and go to a drug and alcohol class after school. Needless to say, recidivism is high. For others, that reward is a boyfriend or girlfriend. Nothing makes a kid forget about the consequences of his actions like sex. Getting some, or the prospect of getting some can be overwhelming for teens. Since many high school kids live in a bubble where future job prospects aren't considered, losers can score. There are others that get rewarded by their friends for bad behavior and don't get rewarded by their parents for good behavior. This leads to a self destructive adolescence. Again, this is something that is out of teachers' control, and it would be best to remove these types of students from a school until they change their life enough that they can be responsible about their academics.
Sorry for the rambling thought pattern. I just sat down and decided to type something out. This is first time writing, and definitely a rough draft, but that is what most of my posts will be. Hopefully I will get better at this.
So how do you get better performing students? The first thing is you have to expect them to perform at a higher level. I don't mean hope they perform at a high level. We have to expect it. That means there are some real consequences for poor performance. If a student doesn't want to try, get him the hell out of the school. Maybe he can try a continuation school, or maybe he needs to be sent home for a year and see if he changes his attitude next year. This may seem harsh, but if you do it when the students are young, they can get a second chance or third chance and realize what they are facing before it is too late. As of now, we hold our students' hands right until the time they drop out and then there is no second chance.
More people suffer than just the apathetic student. A deadbeat student tears down everyone around him. Struggling students see there is no consequences for failure and they try even less. Many students will adjust to a middle performance ranking in their classroom. I see it all the time. There are many students that judge their performance in the classroom as compared to those around them. If they are sitting amongst a bunch of F students, they will strive for Ds. If they are sitting with A and B students, they will be forced to work harder and get Bs. Just today in my class there was an F student arguing with a D- student over who was dumber. That D- student took great pride in the fact that he was better than the F student. I think if that F student was removed from school (he isn't going to graduate anyway), the D- student is going to work harder and be a C student. He won't ever be an A or B student, because he is lazy and only wants to do enough so he isn't the dumbest guy in the room.
We can save the D students. We can't save the F students. They F student has a reward system that they judge far greater than their prosperity as an adult. For many at my school, that reward is drugs. It is quite common for a kid to be busted with drugs. Nothing happens to them. They have to promise not to do drugs and go to a drug and alcohol class after school. Needless to say, recidivism is high. For others, that reward is a boyfriend or girlfriend. Nothing makes a kid forget about the consequences of his actions like sex. Getting some, or the prospect of getting some can be overwhelming for teens. Since many high school kids live in a bubble where future job prospects aren't considered, losers can score. There are others that get rewarded by their friends for bad behavior and don't get rewarded by their parents for good behavior. This leads to a self destructive adolescence. Again, this is something that is out of teachers' control, and it would be best to remove these types of students from a school until they change their life enough that they can be responsible about their academics.
Sorry for the rambling thought pattern. I just sat down and decided to type something out. This is first time writing, and definitely a rough draft, but that is what most of my posts will be. Hopefully I will get better at this.
Sunday, September 22, 2013
My First Blog
I have been thinking of creating a blog where I can post my rants about many things that would get people pissed off at me. I can't do this on facebook, because it doesn't seem to be a site for freedom of speech anymore. Actually, I am not sure it ever was, but whenever I post something or make a comment to someone's post, people get really pissed off. So I figure I can post long winded, but hopefully not meaningless rants here and satisfy my need to vent. I am pretty sure nobody will read this blog, but that never stopped me from writing anything before.
Now, the name "I Turned the Key" which I gave my blog simply comes from a card that is next to my keyboard. If you ever go to the Titan Missile Museum in Arizona, you get to go through a simulated Titan missile launch. This is a simulated nuclear missile strike at the former Soviet Union, which would have ended up in Armageddon. When you are one of the the people in the command chairs that turn the keys for this simulated launch, you get a card that says "I TURNED THE KEY". I guess I am using the symbolism that this blog is going to end up changing the world. It is far more likely that it will symbolizing the destruction of my world. Although if I was betting I would put my money on it symbolizing the fantasy of both of those things, but the reality of it being a waste of time and resources with no real effect on anything.
Regardless of the outcome, my hope is to post a few times a week on ideas that I have or on things that piss me off. This way, I might have something to reference as proof that I actually have ideas and that maybe one or two of them are not insane. I should start meaningful posts tomorrow... I hope.
Now, the name "I Turned the Key" which I gave my blog simply comes from a card that is next to my keyboard. If you ever go to the Titan Missile Museum in Arizona, you get to go through a simulated Titan missile launch. This is a simulated nuclear missile strike at the former Soviet Union, which would have ended up in Armageddon. When you are one of the the people in the command chairs that turn the keys for this simulated launch, you get a card that says "I TURNED THE KEY". I guess I am using the symbolism that this blog is going to end up changing the world. It is far more likely that it will symbolizing the destruction of my world. Although if I was betting I would put my money on it symbolizing the fantasy of both of those things, but the reality of it being a waste of time and resources with no real effect on anything.
Regardless of the outcome, my hope is to post a few times a week on ideas that I have or on things that piss me off. This way, I might have something to reference as proof that I actually have ideas and that maybe one or two of them are not insane. I should start meaningful posts tomorrow... I hope.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)