Reading For Treasure: Winter Break Reading

Reading for Treasure is my list of articles (and other readings) that are worth your attention. Click here for an introduction.

I started creating lists of articles because what I really wanted to do was either to email them to my teacher friends or post them on social media – but I didn’t want to be that retired guy who is always sending me articles I don’t have time (or desire) to read. I often do a short description of the article, but today I am trying only providing a quotation to whet your appetite. Let me know if that matters at all. Perhaps all we need is the title? Nonetheless, these are six good education-related articles worth your attention. 

“Trust the Teachers” by David W. Blight, The Atlantic 
 “What American teachers most need is autonomy, community respect, the right to some creativity within their craft, time to read, and, perhaps above all, support for their intellectual lives. Most would not mind a pay raise.” 

“When parents scream at school board meetings, how can I teach their children?” by Jennifer Wolfe, CNN
“My students know that to move forward toward understanding and engagement, we have to be willing to talk about the hard stuff….Our country deserves people willing to have difficult conversations and solve problems together. We need to turn toward each other, not away from each other into spaces where uncomfortable discussions are treated like a crime. Without civil discourse, we risk tumbling toward civil unrest.” 

“Parents slam state board’s proposal to triple number of annual standardized assessments for students: ‘We must keep testing at the absolute minimum’” by Karen Ann Cullotta, Chicago Tribune
“A state plan that could triple the number of federally mandated tests Illinois students must take in the coming years is being slammed by some educators and parents who say after the recent loss of classroom learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, the last thing kids need is more testing.” 

“Voice, Chat and DM: Remote Learning Tools That Make Sense In Person” by Caroline Smith, KQED Mindshift
"But Cohn discovered advantages to her students typing some of their assignments during virtual education. Watching her students’ writing appear on their respective Google Docs in real time meant she could provide simultaneous feedback. The process of editing on the computer — liberated from the messiness of revising on a piece of paper — made the process less burdensome and more enjoyable for her students."

“College Admissions Are Still Unfair” by James S. Murphy, The Atlantic
“There is also an important component of racial justice in dropping legacy preferences. The practice overwhelmingly benefits white applicants and harms first-generation, immigrant, low-income, and nonwhite students. A 2018 lawsuit against Harvard revealed that 77 percent of legacy admits were white, while just 5 percent were Black and 7 percent were Hispanic. At Notre Dame, the class of 2024 had five times as many legacies as Black students.” 

“School Stumbles Upon Chalkboards From 1917 During Renovation, Perfectly Preserved Lessons Provide Rare Look Into Past” Dusty Old Thing
“Construction workers were removing chalkboards– taking them down to replace them with new Smart Boards– when they stumbled upon some older chalkboards underneath. Luckily, they stopped to examine the chalkboards before destroying them, and they quickly realized that the boards were from 1917… Nearly 100 years ago! Stuck underneath layers of other boards, these antique chalkboards had been preserved with the chalk still on them, providing an amazing view of life in a mid-20th-century classroom.”

I am currently rereading The Parable of the Sower by Octavia Butler  

The News Is Not Netflix

“Remind me to write a popular article on the compulsive reading of news. The theme will be that most neuroses and some psychoses can be traced to the unnecessary and unhealthy habit of daily wallowing in the troubles and sins of five billion strangers.” 

- Robert Heinlein, Stranger In A Strange Land

There was no cable news, CNN, FOX, MSNBC when Heinlein wrote this. You couldn’t consume news twenty-four hours a day. Now, news is one of the most popular shows on television. 

And therein lies the issue. The pandemic has trapped us in our homes and we turned to our screens: Zooming, gaming, and online communications took center focus, but so did watching more and more and more TV. Really, this was not startling. The trends were going this way since Netflix decided not to send people DVDs. 

It is not surprising that people would immerse themselves in distractions on several screens. People become very connected to the stories and characters in the shows they watch, regardless of the quality of the entertainment. Whether this is enjoying people screaming at each other during daytime talk shows, the exaggerated highs and lows of soap operas or the rush of a good adventure series, the power of the video story can be nearly addicting. 

So why shouldn’t we see the news as just another kind of story? There are fascinating characters, great conflict, high stakes, and engaging visuals. No wonder we like to elect television and movie personalities to public office! Perhaps we don’t see the difference – or we don’t want to see the difference. 

In his 1985 book, Amusing Ourselves to Death, Neil Postman argues that, by presenting news through a medium that is best suited to entertainment, the gravity and complexity of the issues are diluted to such a degree that he refers to television news as “disinformation.” 

Similarly, in the 1976 Oscar award-winning movie, Network, the same idea is frighteningly dramatized as we see the conflict between journalistic television news, which is not entertaining enough to get good ratings, with an entertainment-focused news show that will do anything, including televising a suicide, to get people to watch. 

We are amusing ourselves to our democracy’s detriment. Today, our narrowcast news sources have gone far beyond what was satire in 1976! We watch the news with the same motives and engagement that we watch Tiger King, Squid Game, or Succession. The news is nothing more than another riveting television show. 

And we are the biggest fans! We look at our world through the perspectives, products, and spin of our news channels. There is no substantive difference in the way we consume the news than the way we interact with other television programming. 

Just as people name their children for media characters and personalities, we shape our choices around the feelings and fluff we get from the screen. We start to believe that the world really isn’t that complex. It can be reduced to a few quick sound bites from the anchorperson, legislator, or commentator. We trust these on-screen authorities for the same reasons we like watching actors in a fictional world: they look good, they sound good, they stroke parts of our self-image and make our drab lives more fun. 

Is that it? Could that be it? It used to be that watching Maury Povitch, Montell Williams, or Jerry Springer was a kind of schadenfreude. We got a perverse pleasure from watching others in pain. Now, our news has taken this a step further. We get that pleasure from seeing our political opponents in pain and our protagonist win every conflict –even if he didn’t really win. It’s all fiction anyway, so what’s the difference?  

It is not that different from following sports teams and, I fear, has about as much weight. Except that this team has far more influence over the fates of millions of people. We see ourselves as Team Republican or Team Democrat in the same way that we root for the Cubs or Cardinals, the Bears or the Packers. 

Political issues are hard to understand, so it is convenient that TV simplifies them for us. Politicians are masterful at manipulating facts and issues, so it is good to use the same tools to judge them that we use with fictional characters played by actors. 

Worst of all, we respond in similar ways: no one is asking you to save the character in danger during the series you are binging. Your vote doesn’t count for or against the fictional detective making an arrest or the lawyer in court on TV. 

But it does in the real world. When we are moved to action by our entertainment news, it is to play our roles in the drama we see unfolding. We get delusions of stardom and see ourselves as a piece of the story; we are characters in the tale, supporting our heroes and helping them vanquish our foes – if we are moved to action at all. 

Except the real world isn’t a story, and our heroes are fallible humans who are far more complex than comic book superheroes. Ultimately, all of the things we see on TV are trying to sell us something. They are not acting in our best interest – ever. By seeing the complicated and ever-changing world as a simple fable, perhaps one with a simple platitude at its heart, we become children again. 

The news is not Netflix. Politics are complicated. It is critically important to be aware of what is going on in the real world – but we have to be able to know what is real and what is just another made-up story. And taking political action is not as simple as posting on social media. 

What I Really Want to Say on our Holiday Card

I have never written a Christmas letter. This is not a Christmas letter, either. Read on and we’ll all figure out exactly what it is. Each year, finding photos for our family holiday card is not difficult, but writing the text is excruciating. The problem is more than a lack of real estate. It is trying to strike a balance between a positive holiday tone, acknowledging the big things going on in the world, acknowledging the things going on in our family, and trying to say something worth saying. Oh yeah, I also have three really discerning editors in my family. 

I want our holiday card to celebrate the friendships and connections with the many people for whom it is created. If I were to personalize each card, it would take me months to complete and I fear it would feel boilerplate anyway. I want to say to so many people, “I see you! I celebrate you! This card was created with you in mind – specifically!” 

Yet, I don’t want our holiday card to simply ignore what is happening in the world. It seems perversely ironic to send out smiling photos when children are losing their caregivers to COVID, the planet is unraveling, and people are being shot in wheelchairs and schools. But a woes-of-the-world card is not the idea, either. The balance is tricky. 

Could our holiday card be a kind of friendship card, a “we’re thinking of you and you bring us joy” card, a “your friendship is important” card? The values that the holidays represent work, just not all of them. When we get cards that seem steeped in religiosity, no matter what the religion, I always feel like the card isn’t really meant for us – or the sender doesn’t know us very well. 

We send our holiday card to a lot of people. We have been sending our holiday card via email since 2010. When we sent cards in the mail, I had to think about how many to print, get stamps, and take time to assembly everything. Things still take time, but it doesn’t cost more to send to more people. This is good; it allows us to be highly inclusive. However, it also means that our card has a larger audience – and how do you communicate well with a diverse group using such a small space? 

The photos are the important part of the card. That is why I take so many all year long: to get a few good ones! But I don’t want to be a show-off. My card is about communicating not posturing. 

I worry about those who don’t get my card. I post the card to Facebook so I can be as inclusive as possible. If we receive cards from people who were not on our list, we send them a card right away. That doesn’t happen much anymore. I know we are still missing people. Sorry about that. 

I don’t save all the cards I receive. I do save some of them, especially those that are particularly clever, powerful, or hit me in the feelies. These cards mark time, growth, and change. I may not write the Christmas letter, but I make sure that the landmarks are noted in the photos: driver's licenses, graduations, retirements, and important moments. 

Sometimes, I write a poem or short pithy statements on the card. They are never good enough. I would be a terrible greeting card writer. This year, I kept the main message to four words: Love, health, community, and family. That seemed to encapsulate 2021. 

May the year ahead be everything you hope. May you take lots of pictures that you want to save forever and share with the world. May this terrible disease pass over your family and community. And may you know that we are thinking of you, wishing you well, and sending you all our love. Think all that will fit on the card? 

Five Weddings and I Have Questions

In the past five weeks, my wife and I attended five weddings. The weddings were outdoor and indoor, big and little, religious and secular. We know the families well and we were outsiders. We traveled and stayed close to home. It has been rejuvenating and wonderful to share the joy of these couples and their families. Yet, as I reflect on these weddings, I have questions. 

Planning a wedding is rehearsal for marriage. The dynamics that will become the backdrop of married life are developing for most of these couples. The event itself is a reflection of the couple and, sometimes, their parents. Some weddings are big parties, others are an affirmation of tradition, and some feel like skating on silk. 

It has been more than thirty years since my wife, our families, and I planned our wedding. It is clear there is a continuum of involvement in wedding planning for the grooms. Some sit to the side and do as they are told. I am a theatre director and English teacher. I like control. I was actively part of putting together our wedding. Most of the grooms seemed involved in the wedding, although one joked about the triviality of his participation.  

Gender roles were very much on display at these weddings – and there are things that baffle me. Of course, I want to walk my child down the aisle. I can’t imagine NOT doing that. However, in several of the weddings we saw, only dad walked the bride down the aisle. Often the groom walked down by himself. Both parents walking their child down the aisle was the exception, which surprised me. One of the side effects of this is that certain parts of each family are more visible and others slip into the background.

What surprised me more was the line at the end of the ceremony: “Let me introduce for the first time, Mr. and Mrs.” Many of these weddings finished that with “Groom’s first and last name.” So the bride was just Mrs. That felt strange to me. Twice, it was “Mr. and Mrs. Groom’s last name.” I guess that is a little more egalitarian, but not much. Twice, it was Mr. and Mrs. Bride and Groom and Groom’s last name,” so at least the bride got her first name in there. One time, the bride and groom were introduced separately, although the bride was introduced with the groom’s last name. I did not take it as a given that my wife would take my last name. We discussed it. I know so many people who do not change their names when they get married, so maybe this was not a representative sample. 

I have only officiated at one wedding. While I hope I did an okay job, I am sure that our rabbi would have done it better. Weddings feel far too important to leave to amateurs. Two of the weddings had a friend officiate. They were fine. One had someone I assume they hired. He did better with the ceremony, but it was clear that he didn’t really know the couple. This is one of myriad reasons to be part of a community. The ceremonies that I thought worked the best were led by officiants who knew the couple and were experts on how to make a wedding work well. 

Most of the couples wrote their own vows or wrote letters to each other. In most cases, they read these, although once, the officiant read them. These were universally beautiful and the best part of the ceremonies. When this part was absent, the ceremony felt far less personal. The readings in the weddings were, for the most part, traditional, tried, and true. They felt routine. The music was highly varied and included both religious and pop as well as tunes that I had never encountered. In a few ceremonies, the music felt more meaningful than the readings. 

Several of the weddings were grounded in religion while others appeared to go to great lengths to minimize religious references. I wonder how the couples who come from different backgrounds will deal with religion. Will they avoid it, as they did in their wedding? I worry when the way we deal with differences is to push them to the side. Why not celebrate our different cultures? 

I have questions about the receptions. I am not fussy about the food (but I love it when someone cares enough to worry about us vegetarians) and I don’t drink much beyond the toasts. My wife and I like to dance a little. What is important to me is being able to connect with the people who invited me. I really appreciated it when the bride and groom and their families made it a point to greet their guests. I loved being able to meet family members I did not know – often very important people in this celebration! When some of these key people were inaccessible, I wondered if everything was okay. 

The toasts were very good. None of the weddings had those stereotypical horrible wedding embarrassments. The best toasts were obviously written in advance. The impromptu toasts, while clearly heartfelt, had less impact. However, a few times these toasts were written out and still ended up an unfocused ramble. I was curious about who did and did not speak. The bride’s father always spoke, but not always the bride’s mother. The groom’s parents sometimes spoke, but often, the mother less so. The best man and maid or matron of honor spoke in all but one, yet the other members of the wedding party, especially the siblings of the couple, didn’t always speak. When some of these important people did not toast the couple, I had questions. 

At the first and last of our five weddings, no one clinked glasses asking for the couple to kiss. I didn’t know how they managed that. It was brilliant. When I heard the clinking at the other weddings, it made me question the practice. Not only did I not miss it, but it gave the bride and groom the opportunity to move around more freely. 

I could list question upon question about the choices of song for the mother-son and father-daughter dances. There seems to be one that is clearly the standard choice for Christian families for the father-daughter dance. I did wonder about the father of the groom and the mother of the bride. Why not include them? Why not invite the families up to dance with each other after the traditional gendered dancing. 

Two of the weddings threw the bouquet and garter. Like the glass clinking, I didn’t miss these when they were absent and found it a bit jarring. One of these weddings seemed to take it seriously and the other played with them in a funny and sexy way. It was nice to have an activity that called people to the dance floor, but I wondered about the unspoken message about the importance of marriage. Okay, we were at a celebration of marriage. 

None of our five weddings was for a same sex couple. None of them was a second marriage. I wonder how these parts of the celebration would be seen in other forms of unions. 

Because symbols are so important to me, and I worked in a world where implied meanings reins, I was highly conscious of the combination of all the elements during my wife and my wedding. Not everyone appears to do this. As a theatre director, I think about my audience. But a wedding is not a play. It is for the couple and their families. The audience is as much witness as participant. For some, the real focus is on the couple, their experience, and how the wedding elements help them both celebrate and prepare for their life together. Still, I have questions. 

Reading for Treasure – Thanksgiving Leftovers

Reading for Treasure is my list of articles (and other readings) that are worth your attention. Click here for an introduction.

Here are some Thanksgiving leftovers: articles I have been saving, but haven’t neatly fit into a theme or category for the past few posts. 

One member of my family used to get very upset when another member of the family would reply to texts simply with, “k.” This article from Lifehacker makes the case for not sending quick and short text responses like this one for a simple reason: it comes off as rude: “Don’t Text ‘OK.’”

If it isn’t clear from the name of my blog, I am an enthusiastic fan of Fred Rogers. There has been some conversation that his tone and style would not work well with kids today. I disagree and so does Mary Pflum Peterson in this older article from The Washington Post, “What Happened When I Showed Vintage Mister Rogers to my 21st Century Kids.” 

One of my most recent posts questions some of the traditions of weddings – many of which focus on gender. This wonderful Valentine’s Day article from The Atlantic makes the point clearly, “If You Want a Marriage of Equals, Then Date as Equals.” Yup. 

Speaking of couples with some issues, how about Lord and Lady Macbeth? I laughed out loud reading, “A Letter from the Condo Association to Mr. and Mrs. Macbeth” from McSweeny’s. While we all might have had neighborhood issues, these are on a Shakespearean scale! 

While the above piece is satirical, this satire piece from last winter’s Chicago Tribune by Rex Huppke is right on point in its treatment of “deniers.” Whether it is the pandemic, insurrections, or other clear and verifiable events, Mr. Huppke joins them to cry, “A Major Chicago Snow Storm? That’s What the Media Want You to Believe!” Snowstorms? Hurricanes? Bah, humbug! They are all conspiracies. 

Finally, a wonderful and relevant discussion of an interesting dice game called “Drop Dead” in the fantastic blog, Math with Bad Drawings. This game, which you could certainly play, also demonstrates a lesson about complex systems and the idea that more is better: “When A Trillion Dice Are No Better Than A Dozen.” 

I am currently rereading Frank Herbert’s Dune before seeing the movie! 

Reunion Gratitude and Growing Up: A Reflection

Thomas Wolfe wrote that you can’t go home again. That is a good thing. Recently, I gathered with many of my college theatre classmates. I didn’t go to the university events. I didn’t go to a football game or tailgate or anything like that. I went to a small party at a classmate’s home as I have done every five or so years. There were about thirty or forty theatre alumni there. It was better than going back to our college home, thirty-five years ago. 

I chaired two of my high school reunions. I like reunions. Yet, there is something very special and different about this particular reunion and these people. We competed with each other in college. We may have continued that at our early reunions, but I don’t remember that. 

What I do know is, for me, that need to compete is gone. I look at my classmates and marvel and celebrate their outstanding work, spaning theatre and many other fields. I delight in their company in a way I did not in college. I appreciate them like I never could have imagined when we were in school years ago. Some of the folks who came were people with whom I spent a great deal of time. Some I knew in passing, and now I wish I had spent more time with them. 

Like my other reunions, some of my closest friends were unable to attend. None of the people present were at my wedding or my children’s mitzvahs. In other reunions, that might have been awkward or disappointing. That was not the case at all; it was an ideal chance to catch up, renew relationships, and celebrate.

I feel so grateful and fortunate to have second and third and fourth chances to meet these people. I am so grateful to the committee that worked hard to preserve our bond. Their work has allowed me to see so much more than a “reunion” version of our college selves. Each time we gather, I get a better glimpse of the more complex and real people we have become. 

At nineteen and twenty, I couldn’t get past myself. I was stuck and confused and struggling. I still am, but in my fifties the challenges are different. I am enjoying the confusion, choosing the struggle, and working hard to get out of myself and out of my own (and others) way. That was not true thirty-five years ago. Now, I have an opportunity to go beyond my college inadequacies, to present myself as I am now. To laugh at and, yes, even apologize for the sins of my college past. 

We hear about coming to terms with the past. We talk about forgiveness and putting the past in its place. At my reunion, I got to complement the past. I got to reconnect with my classmates, some of whom I have gotten to know far better in the years since college. And I appreciate them more each time I see them. 

This reunion made me long to see these folks again. I see many on Facebook and that whets my appetite. It enables me to see my classmates more fully and feel at least a little connected.

Everyone was not present. There were many people who were missed, talked about, or joined us via video call. While many of us have attended many of these reunions, it is wonderful when faraway faces are able to join us. When they are not, they are sincerely missed. These evenings are punctuated with the question, “What is happening with…?” 

I was not in love with everyone from my theatre program in college. However, that is meaningless now. Our relationship is now about a past we are rewriting, revising, revisiting, and renewing. 

College was never this good. Now it is. 

My Comments at the Township High School District 113 Meeting Discussing Budget Issues and Consolidation of the High Schools

Here is what I said to the Township High School District 113 Board at the meeting on October 19 regarding budget issues and possible consolidation of Deerfield and Highland Park High Schools. I have also included the video of the entire meeting below if you want to hear the entire meeting. 

Good evening.  I am David Hirsch. I joined the District 113 family in 1986 when I was hired to teach theatre and English. I met my wife at DHS and our two children went first to Deerpark and then returned as DHS students. 

The district had inspiring leadership in my first decades: Jim Warren, Linda Hanson, and Anne Reibock held the same value that was repeated constantly: first and foremost, we do what is best for kids. 

I am here to ask the board of education to make doing what is best for the children of District 113 the most important criteria when making all decisions, but especially when talking about consolidating schools, calling for referendums, and dealing with difficult and painful budget issues. 

In education, smaller is better: smaller class sizes, smaller schools, smaller systems. We want our students to be seen, known, and get what they need – before they have to scream for it. We want our schools to be supportive, nurturing, and safe communities. 

One more thing: I am a 1982 graduate of New Trier High School. Mine was the first class after New Triers East and West merged. I participated in the consolidation of the two schools. It may have saved money, but it was not what was best for kids. 

Four years after I graduated high school, I taught at a DHS that had fewer students than my entire New Trier class. Students thrived! Kids were on sports teams and in theatre. Leadership opportunities abounded. Students and staff knew each other even when they didn’t share classes or activities. There was a tight and supportive safety net below every child. 

During that time, our board of education and administration made choices, sometimes difficult and expensive choices, to do what was best for kids – FIRST! 

So tonight, I am asking three things of you: 

First, put the best interests of our children ahead of all other concerns. All decisions must pass the “is this what is best for our children?” test.  If the answer is anything other than a clear and resounding yes, then please find another way. 

Second, clearly and definitively take a stand that consolidating the two schools is NOT good for kids and unequivocally state that no such plans will move forward. 

Third, closely collaborate with your best resource for doing what is best for kids: your staff. The board of education, administration, faculty, and staff must be trusting allies, not adversaries. 

This collaboration has not been nurtured. Jim, Linda, and Anne were experts at bringing everyone together. They were dynamic and skilled teachers, administrators, and team builders. They are the reason we are the only non-union high school district in Illinois. We need that kind of leadership now. 

Glynis and I did not want our children to be swallowed by Stevenson or get lost at New Trier. We loved what we saw where we worked and we wanted it for our children – and yours. 

Do what’s best for kids. Strongly reject consolidation. Engage and embrace your staff as partners. 

Thank you. 

Reading for Treasure: Current Events Two By Two

Reading for Treasure is my list of articles (and other readings) that are worth your attention. Click here for an introduction.

Here are three sets of two articles dealing with some of the most pressing issues in the news today:  

Guns: 

Leonard Pitts, Jr. writes, “The Right to Bear Arms Does Not Extend to Black People” in an opinion piece in the Chicago Tribune. He talks about a new book that, “argues that the Second Amendment — which supposedly came about solely as a hedge against tyranny — had at its heart a much less noble concern: Southern states demanded the right to bear arms because they feared rebellions by enslaved Africans.” He goes on to say, “All that talk about “a well-regulated militia”? Anderson told me in a telephone interview that that was just the cover story. State militias had not performed well either in fighting off the British or in defending against a domestic uprising: Shays’ Rebellion. ‘What the militia was really good at, however, was putting down slave revolts.’”

David Frum asserts in The Atlantic that responsible gun ownership is a lie. In his article, “How to Persuade Americans to Give Up Their Guns,” he describes how gun ownership makes people far less safe than if they did not own a gun. He looks at how the group, Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense is following the path of Mothers Against Drunk Driving. He believes that, if properly informed, gun owners can be persuaded to give up their guns, “They need to hear a new call to conscience, aimed not at the paranoid and the extreme, not at the militiamen and the race warriors, but at the decent, everyday gun owner.” 

Education: 

Greg Rolasky reports about an “accidental experiment” in Boston where budget issues forced officials to have a lottery to see who would be admitted into the city-funded pre-schools. This created two groups: a group that got pre-school and a control group. Yup, economists then looked at the differences between these two groups. In this NPR article, “ The Case For Universal Pre-K Just Got Stronger,” Rolansky reports on what they found. 

On her blog, Diane Ravitch published a letter from Teresa Thayer Synder, former superintendent of a school district in upstate New York. In it, Dr. Synder encourages teachers and schools to focus on relationships and listening rather than “fixing” students who have fallen behind during the pandemic. 

Making Fun of Politicians! 

Finally, two wonderful pieces from the always wonderful online magazine, McSweeny’s. First, we hear from a Dickensian Republican, who says, “I Oppose the Democrats’ Plan to Lower Child Poverty. If Kids Want to Eat, They Should Work In Filthy Factories Like They Did in the Good Old Days,” and then, to be even and balanced, we hear from a doubting Democrat who says, “As a Centrist Democrat, I Ran on a Promise to Fix Killer Shower Clowns. But Now That I’m in Office, I Believe We Should Consider the Issue More Cautiously.” Read them and weep. 

I am currently reading Machine by Elizabeth Bear

Everlasting Gifts from Kathy Galvin

One of the gifts we receive from great teachers is that they continue to teach their students, even when they are separated by time and space; they continue to impact our lives. Their lessons become an integral part of our being. They are always with us. 

There is no one for whom this is truer than Kathleen Galvin. I met Kathy my sophomore year at Northwestern when I enrolled in Speech Teaching Methods class. I thought I might want to be a high school teacher. I thought I might want to be many things. I was a nineteen-year-old: part adult, part adolescent, part toddler, and part explorer. 

I found myself in a seminar room in the basement of Harris Hall with two dynamic professors: Pam Cooper and Kathy Galvin. They really had one name: PamandKathy. We sat in a circle and they guided us through far more than pedagogy and curriculum. They modeled how good teachers, good adults, and good people act. They overlooked our immaturity and gently guided us. They taught us to think like educators. They modeled phenomenal teaching and remarkable caring. 

With humor, creativity, and mountains of patience, they firmly and expertly helped us learn about communication, family dynamics, child development – and ourselves. They insisted we become outstanding learners and leaders – and, most difficult for me, listeners. 

They practiced what they professed. Every lesson worked on two levels: the content, of course, and the modeling from Pam and Kathy. Not every professor is a great teacher. Kathy and Pam were virtuoso teachers, pitch-perfect. 

Throughout my almost thirty-four years in the classroom, I lost track of the times I consciously thought, “What would Kathy do?” or “How would Kathy respond?” Over and over, I brought myself back to that seminar room and I recharged my patience and perspective. 

Pam and Kathy got me through a tumultuous student teaching experience. My cooperating teacher was magnificent and a fantastic role model. However, his mother became ill shortly after I arrived and he left for Florida for several weeks. I was on my own and way over my head. Kathy and Pam’s quiet and steady guidance helped me to thrive and learn to navigate solo in the classroom.

Whenever Kathy called me, I knew it was going to be life-changing. She called to tell me about a summer job at a prep school in New Hampshire, which started me on the path of teaching television, and eventually starting at TV class at my school a few years later. She called and told me about a job opening, which started an intense reflection of what I wanted to do and where I wanted to teach. When I decided to stay at my school and change positions, I called Kathy and she recommended my replacement!

Kathy guided my master’s process. Her family communications class not only helped me understand and empathize with my own family but also gave me new insight into hers. Kathy came and spoke to my wife’s professional group, the Lake County Counselors Association about the changing roles of parents in college. I remember Kathy going way beyond discussing helicopter parents and talking about attack and rescue helicopter parents. 

Even years after college, Kathy was still my teacher. I worked with student teachers and Kathy came to Deerfield and coached our pre-service teacher and me. The more time I spent with Kathy, the more I grew. Many years ago, we started having yearly summer lunches together. We shared what was happening personally and professionally.

When we had lunch the last time, I thought about all the students who had studied in that seminar room in Harris Hall - and other places. Many of us are teachers. Many of us have been teaching twenty, thirty- or more years. 

Our students are Kathy’s grand-students. Kathy’s legacy goes way beyond the people who studied with her. She was with me in the classroom every day. I have taught about Virginia Satir’s mobile, used cartoons to teach about communication, and tried to do my best Kathy Galvin impression when that talkative, awkward, slightly irritating, adolescent sidles his way into my room. 

And I kept calling Kathy for booster shots. Thank goodness I am retired. 

There is no way to quantify the gifts Kathy gave me, Northwestern, and the countless students who read her books, studied with her students, listened to her lessons, or were fortunate enough to share a lesson with her. 

Just before the pandemic, Kathy became ill and we could not see one another. Yet, truly, she is sitting beside me. In my teaching, parenting, and pursuit of all that is precious and beautiful, Kathy will continue to be my guide. I am so grateful I got to tell her this at her retirement party just before the pandemic. I just wish we could share retirement.

Learning Not Lecturing

As teachers and professors move back to in-person classes and distance learning becomes a last resort for special circumstances and snow days, we will see what no video chat camera could really show. We will see firsthand how much students have been struggling and families have been in crisis. We must not avert our eyes and pretend that the pandemic never happened. It will be hard work, but if we do not do it, our students will pay the price. So it is incumbent on anyone in a classroom to really reflect on learning strategies that worked and didn’t work during our time apart and before. 

One strategy that needs revision is the lecture. I love this piece from Math With Bad Drawings. It is an “origin fable” about how lectures came to be. Lectures were the way that professors and other instructors conveyed their ideas to their students before there were any other means of doing so. When it was too difficult to produce material to read or enough copies for the class before any form of recording could be made when the students were wealthy white men who going to run the world anyway. In fact, lecturing may be the oldest teaching strategy we have! 

As I researched the effectiveness of lectures, I found many articles discussed how to deliver an effective lecture. The advice was almost always the same: have meaningful slides, using engaging questions, speak in an entertaining and dynamic manner, and so on. In other words, lecture is effective when it is accompanied by other effective techniques. Look at this website from Iowa State!

This article from Edtopia and this one from the Washington Post cite research that should make any educator reconsider the lecture. NPR reported about physics professors at Harvard and other colleges who realized that all they were doing was repeating what their teachers did and their students did not really understand the concepts. All they did was parrot back the lecture! 

The NPR article is an extension of a fascinating radio documentary by American Radio Works called “Don’t Lecture Me” about college lecturing and a college that decided not to use them. If your hackles are up and you are feeling defensive about the lecture, I urge you to listen to this. 

There is a place for lecture in education. Lectures, done well and done for brief amounts of time, can be a good teaching tool. As with many other areas, all generalizations are false: lectures are not universally problematic. 

However, I will argue that the vast majority of lectures are ineffective because the lecturer is not using dynamic teaching techniques. According to research cited in the radio documentary referenced above, only about 10% of students will learn well from a lecture, and it is likely that those students would teach themselves the material no matter how it was presented. Is it possible that the people who most benefit from lectures are the lecturers (and perhaps the institutions they work for)? 

The traditional college lecture in an enormous hall with hundreds of students feels like mass education gone horribly wrong. Let’s not even talk about the tuition cost to the students for such an experience. What is the rationale for not simply recording these lectures and allowing students to view them online? In fact, why not get all these lectures recorded and then allow the teachers to really teach or go do research? 

Maybe there is something else going on here. Many students might love lecturing because it asks so little of them. They don’t have to do anything but listen – and sometimes not even that. I have had many students who prefer not to think, but to just repeat what the teacher said. It is easier. 

If you visit a crowded lecture hall, you might see many students taking notes. You might see others surfing the web, texting, or doing other things. You might also see some who were sleeping. For many of these students, attending the lecture is performative anyway. The professor is only reading from a Powerpoint, which they later publish. Perhaps they even include notes. Students fully understand that they don’t need to see the show, they can just read the script. Is this a good use of their time and tuition dollars? 

Lecturing does make teachers and professors feel professorial. It is great to get up before an audience and show off. It feels good to have children praise and adore you for your knowledge and wit. Of course, they also expect that you will pay them for their worship with grades, preferably good ones. It is fun to have fans, but let’s be honest, impressing children for ego gratification feels low indeed. 

While brief and focused lectures may be necessary once in a while, teachers and students would be far better served if the classroom were a place where learning was interactive and engaging. We used to sit in a little red schoolhouse and write down our lessons with chalk on slates. We don’t do that anymore. Students now have access to every piece of information on the planet. Reciting it to them is far less useful than teaching them how to evaluate and create it. 

Come down from your stage, teacher, and help kids to make their own meaning, forge their own education: more than that special 10% will benefit  - and your lessons will have far-reaching impact.

Reading for Treasure: Dealing with the Unvaccinated

Reading for Treasure is my list of articles (and other readings) that are worth your attention. Click here for an introduction.

My most recent blog post makes the metaphor that the unvaccinated are pissing in a pool in which all of us are swimming. It laments the current stalemate between those who want a COVID-19 free world and those who simply won’t get the vaccine. Here are some articles that further explore this topic. 

The Atlantic’s “Vaccine Refusers Don’t Get to Dictate Terms Anymore” This opinion piece makes a strong case that the unvaccinated should have to pay the price for their choice,  “Americans are entitled to make their own decisions, but their employers, health insurers, and fellow citizens are not required to accommodate them.” The time has come for vaccination mandates by schools, employers, agencies, and others or financial penalties as well as testing for the unvaccinated.  

John Banzhaf, a professor emeritus from George Washington University, goes one step further, “Vaccinated workers, students, airline passengers and others who go out in public should not have to bear the risks and huge financial costs that the unvaccinated are imposing on society.” In his opinion column for CNN,  “Make the unvaccinated pay out for their deadly decisions,” he argues that, “Vaccine refusers should pay more for life and health insurance,” as well as  “If the unvaccinated want to get hotel rooms or board cruise ships or fly on airplanes, they should have to pay more to cover the additional costs of thoroughly cleaning and sanitizing the places they may infect. They should also be charged more because of the added burdens associated with requiring all airlines, bus and train passengers to be masked.” Basically, if you don’t want to get vaccinated, you need to pay for the additional costs you are creating! Yes! 

Inverse provides a specific and highly scientific answer to the question, “How Immune Are You After Having COVID-19? Why You Still Need a Vaccine” The common sense answer is to get vaccinated no matter what. Doubt that. Read this! 

Here's an update to my blog post: CNN is reporting that, "New analysis estimates $5.7 billion price tag for treating unvaccinated Covid-19 patients in the last 3 months." That is a lot of money helping people, many of whom could have been vaccinated! 

Finally, a little hope from an older article from The Atlantic. In, “One Vaccine to Rule Them All,”  Dr. James Hamlin describes research to create a universal vaccine. May this research be successful! 

I am currently reading A Desolation Called Peace by Arkady Martine 

Pissing in the Pool: The Broken Social Contract

Recently, a doctor in Alabama stated he would not treat unvaccinated people. It was simply too painful to watch them die. Many of these people, says another doctor, ask for the vaccine as they are being put on the ventilator. 

It is appropriate to feel sorry for people who have made poor decisions like this. Certainly, there are people who, due to medical conditions or circumstances beyond their control, cannot get the vaccine. But what about the willfully and proudly unvaccinated? What about those who could and should be vaccinated, but won’t? 

What happens when people who have been hateful, hurtful, and horrible need help and those of us who have taken proper precautions pay the price of their poor choices? What is our obligation to the unvaccinated, unmasked, Clorox and Ivermectin taking folks? What happens when some people, who place their own desires, feelings, and “rights,” above the wellbeing of the entire community, fill hospitals to capacity so that there isn't even room for children with cancer?  Should we rush to Texas’s and Florida’s aid even if they are outlawing the very actions that would make their situation better?  

The idea of a social contract is  “(a)n implicit agreement among the members of a society to cooperate for social benefits, for example by sacrificing some individual freedom for state protection.” While you may never need the fire department, you pay taxes to have one because it helps the community as a whole – and if someday you should need it, it will be there for you. We all get this idea – or do we? 

“But I don’t trust the government,” someone replies. “It is my right not to wear a mask,” cries another. “You can’t make me get the vaccine,” says the third. Yet, people who have these views are treated in our hospitals like any other. Their children are going to school and potentially spreading COVID. They are making it impossible for children or teachers who are immunocompromised to return to school at all. 

At this point, arguing with them doesn’t seem like it is working. While loving responses and listening and acknowledging their fears may be a way to reach them, that does not address the current preventable crisis. And can that be scaled up to address all of them? They have made their choice clear: their individual choice (which they see as rights) are more important than the social good. Me first, us last. 

Last year, the folks making these claims said that COVID deaths were an acceptable cost for reopening businesses and that we should “sacrifice the weak.” More recently, a woman at a Trump rally compared this situation to “separating the sheep from the goats” which is a reference to a parable from the Gospel of Matthew. Ironically, the sheep are saved and the goats are lost. The unvaccinated woman identified herself correctly as a goat. 

Yet, we are paying for and cleaning up their messes – and it is quite expensive! We are spending billions of dollars to treat unvaccinated people and their choices may mean higher insurance premiums for all of us. Should we endorse their logic and put these goats out to pasture?  

We are an interdependent society; our choices significantly affect far more people than ourselves. We are not living in isolation. Regardless of whether you accept the social contract, we are still all swimming in the same pool.  

Why withhold help from those who need it? Why persist in holding a grudge against unfortunate and misinformed people? What good comes out of hurting those already in pain? Is the suffering of COVID a reasonable consequence for being arrogant and super selfish? 

I don’t think hospitals will stop treating willfully unvaccinated people. It is unlikely that large numbers of doctors will refuse to treat them. But there is an exodus of healthcare professionals leaving the field, and that will affect everyone. 

Here’s the issue: Should the willfully unvaccinated get care despite their disregard for the chaos they create or do we back off and let them suffer the consequences of their choices, even though that, too, could be deadly. 

If you run a red light, you get a ticket. If you leave your child in a hot car, that’s child abuse. If you drive under the influence…There are consequences when people flagrantly break the social contract. Defying mask mandates is against the law and prohibiting them is certainly a breach of contract. What about vaccination? 

It’s a lose-lose scenario if there ever was one. Thanks, assholes. 

Reading for Treasure: Looking for a Book to Read?

Reading for Treasure is my list of articles (and other readings) that are worth your attention. Click here for an introduction!

What book should I read? I often use award nominees and journalist recommendations as a way to find good books. So here several lists of books you could read. Many, but not all, are genre lists (my favorite catagory). Many, but not all, come from Tor.com (which is a great source for genre-based information). 

Of course, you could also look at my list of favorite books, but most of these lists are of books written more recently. 

The Hugo Awards are nominated and voted on by the science fiction and fantasy fans through the World Science Fiction Convention. I have found Hugo nominees to be one of the best sources of new authors and works to read. 

The Atlantic has a variety of book lists. Here is their summer reading list. 

The Nebula Awards are given by the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America. These are the awards given by  (and to) the writers themselves. 

The African Speculative Fiction Society’s Nommo Awards recognizes science fiction, fantasy, and horror authors and editors who are “part of the African diaspora.” This is their long list. 

Locus Magazine focuses on the profession of science fiction, fantasy, and horror writing. They have their own awards and provide a very inclusive reading list of books written each year. These lists are wonderful shopping lists for your next book! 

President Obama is a voracious reader. Here is what he recommends. 

Here are the nominees for the World Fantasy Awards. 

The LA Times Ray Bradbury Prize “honors and extends Bradbury’s literary legacy by celebrating and elevating the writers working in his field today.” And, of course, Bradbury is from Waukegan, Illinois! 

The Philadelphia Science Fiction Society along with the Phillip K. Dick Trust give the Philip K. Dick Award to ““distinguished science fiction published in paperback original form in the United States during the previous calendar year…” This article lists the nominees. 

Finalists for the Lambda Literary Awards which are for the best LGBTQ science fiction, fantasy, and horror literature. 

The Shirley Jackson Awards are for  “outstanding achievement in the literature of psychological suspense, horror, and the dark fantastic…”

NPR published this article on "Your 50 Favorite Science Fiction and Fantasy Books of the Past Decade" on the same day I published this list!  

Of course, there are many other awards - and awards in many genres! There’s a lot to choose from! Pick one and READ! 

I am currently reading Ring Shout by P. Djèlí Clark 

Advice for New Teachers

As another pandemic school year begins, I am concerned about those who are new to teaching. I worry about the first year and young teachers, our pre-service teachers, and newcomers to schools and communities. 

I wish I could go back in time and give myself the benefit of experience before I had any. I wish I could tell my younger self a few things that would have made my students’ and my experience far better. 

But I had to learn it on my own! 

I had mentors and guides who helped me along the way, and much of their wonderful wisdom stayed with me throughout my career. Sometimes I understood their advice and other times it took me years to realize what they were trying to teach me. I hope that, even with the problems of the pandemic, that our new teachers will find nurturing mentors, as I did. 

A little while ago, I was talking to some of my son’s friends who were either training to be teachers or just started teaching. I also had a long conversation with a man who is changing careers to become a teacher. I wanted to give them something practical they could use and straightforward strategies that could accelerate their growth as teachers. I wanted to help them avoid the mistakes I made early in my career. I am well aware they will make many mistakes, but I hoped they might not be the same ones I made. 

In the moment, it was difficult to prioritize – and not pontificate. Like our students, young teachers learn by doing, and words of advice have limited effect. With that limitation in mind, here are a few suggestions for those who are new to their roles in the classroom: 

It is all about relationships: building strong relationships takes time. It is easier to think about units, objectives, targets, tests, grades, and assignments. However, kids learn within the context of a social environment. Just as the presence of certain students can enhance or hinder learning, kids’ relationship with the teacher is the ground in which all learning grows. Like it or not, the kids’ feelings about their teacher are either moving learning forward or making it more difficult. There is no escaping this. We are not programming computers. 

This does not mean the teacher must be a namby-pamby pushover or a buddy-buddy friend. Nor do teachers need to manipulate their students by showing them how cool and connected they are. These are also traps that young teachers may fall into. There is a delicate balance between being a person and being a professional, between being distant and being close. While each teacher must navigate this on their own, they all must be aware that the creation of this relationship is crucial and the most powerful element in the classroom. 

The emotional environment teachers create in the classroom comes before any curriculum; it is the first curriculum. Without learning about the kids, the curriculum is handicapped. Teachers must create means of exploring each individual safely and simply. They might greet kids by name as they enter the room, learn their interests and hobbies, find out about their families and support networks, and look them in the eyes when they are speaking to them. Teachers must show students the respect they would want anyone to show a child anywhere – especially when the children least deserve it.  

Most of all, teachers must actively demonstrate to EVERY student that they like them – even (or especially) when they don’t. They must help EVERY student feel like they are the teacher’s secret favorite. Every student should see the teacher as an advocate and coach, a cheerleader and helper. This doesn’t mean we can’t disagree or discipline. A strong word from someone you respect has far more power than from someone who you think doesn’t like you anyway. 

The teacher must make it okay for kids to say, “I don’t understand,” “Please say that another way,” and “I need help with this.” Teachers should model those behaviors. Let kids teach and help the teacher, too! The classroom should be the safest of spaces and the place where it is okay to take off the teenage mask (even if retaining the one to prevent illness), if only for a few minutes. 

Which means the teacher must be their most authentic self: young teachers feel like they must establish their expertise and authority. Of course, they are unsure of themselves. They think they look weak if their students see them as less skilled than other teachers. The truth is that a new teacher is not as expert as a more experienced teacher. Trying to pretend to be one is a futile act that will certainly not fool students. Kids see through this kind of pretension and are eager to poke holes in the teacher’s false image – but they respect honesty. 

Instead, new teachers should lean into the fact that, like the students, they are learning as they go. They must be candid with kids when they are doing something new, scary, difficult, or complex. New teachers must embrace their neophyte status and enjoy it. I often encourage new staff members to use their “new kid” card as long as they can, “I was supposed to clear this with the assistant principal? I didn’t know that. I am new here,” “I have to call home? No one told me that. I’ll know better next time.” New kid permission goes away quickly. Enjoy it while it is still okay to make those errors. 

While I am clearly advocating being highly authentic in the classroom, there is an exception to this rule. Kids in a classroom are emotional mirrors. If the teacher is angry, soon there will be dozens of angry people in the room. If the teacher is distracted, sad, or anxious, the students will unconsciously amplify and respond to the teacher’s affect. So like the coach going into the locker room to give a pep talk to the team, teachers must have a good game face. To a certain degree, this is pure and simple professionalism. There is nothing wrong with starting a class by saying, “I am struggling today and I need your help.” That is authentic. However, the teacher must then do their best to put those challenges aside and be the best professional they can. While teachers shouldn’t fake the content, they must do their utmost to even out their emotions and put them aside until the kids leave the room. The worst classes I have ever experienced are almost always terrible because of my emotional state before the kids even arrive. A new teacher must ask themselves, “Would I want a classroom full of me right now?” If the answer is no, the teacher must become the person the students should be, if only for the class period! 

Part of teacher self-care is realizing when this is not possible. If my feelings are so powerful that I cannot hold it together in class, that is an indicator that I need to put my own needs first. A teacher’s mental well-being is at least as important as their students’. It is critically important that we take care of our own mental health needs. Just as one would not spread germs if one has a fever (or COVID), one should not come to school if one is in emotional or mental distress.  

Finally, kids come first, grades come second. New teachers get a ton of messages about the importance of assessment, specifically the all-important semester grade. It is often parents’ number one issue. However, the student comes before the grade. Almost without exception, if a teacher is asking themself, “Should I change this grade?” the answer is yes. I have already written, several times, that if ever a teacher thinks or says, “If I do this for you, I will have to do this for everyone,” then it is something that should be done for everyone right away. Grades, too. Grades feel so weighty and laden with meaning and import – and the truth is, they aren’t that important –except in how they reflect that emotional environment. Always round up on grades. Always give kids the benefit of the doubt. Always do what you would want the teacher of your child to do for them! 

Let’s say that again: If my child were in this situation, what would I want their teacher to do? 

Just to make this list too long. Here is an earlier piece I wrote about some things I learned by teaching in the same school my children attended. Some of these items are particularly applicable for new teachers. Some may be for later. 

If a traveler in a blue box comes by and scoops me up to go exploring through time and space, I will request a brief stop at Deerfield High School in the fall of 1986 to whisper a few words in my own ear. I hope I would listen to myself. I think I would. It would then take me a while to figure out how to put my advice in action, but there is no shortcut for that.   

How about a Consumer Reports for Candidates?

Beyond their party affiliation, how much do you know about the candidates for whom you vote? Who is funding their campaigns? Have they been in trouble in the past? How do you assess candidates’ integrity and trustworthiness? 

For most of us, we have relied on various forms of media to help us make informed voting decisions. Groups like the League of Women Voters will sometimes provide candidate’s answers to basic questions and stands on issues. We see lawn signs and read newspaper articles and endorsements. Yet, we are swayed by commercials, social media, and simplistic sound bites. 

What if there was another way to assess candidates? What if an independent organization, unaffiliated with any political party (and not taking money from them), could provide us with a report card on a candidate that would let us know what the candidate has done in the past, things about the candidate’s character and background, thus serving as a neutral credentialing source? 

There are several models for this; The Better Business Bureau serves as a vehicle for consumers to assess the trustworthiness of local businesses. They state their mission and vision on their website: 

Similarly, Underwriters Laboratories, which I think now only goes by UL, tests products to ensure their safety. Companies pay UL to put their products through rigorous testing both to improve their design and assure customers of the safety and integrity of what they are purchasing. UL states its mission on its website: 

While one of these is non-for-profit and the other commercial, they have significant similarities. They are both credentialing entities. Their purpose is to give a seal of integrity to products and businesses. They do not compete against these organizations or advertise for them. Rather, they are an independent impartial entity whose sole job is to help consumers make good choices.

Another example: Consumer Reports magazine tests products and services to help consumers make educated buying decisions. Their magazine is entirely funded by subscriptions and takes no advertising. They are a trusted source of impartial information about almost everything on the market. 

One more: Charity Navigator uses a straightforward rating system based on a charity’s financial health and its accountability and transparency. From that, they determine an easy-to-understand star rating. When looking up a charity, they provide a clear explanation about why the charity received the rating it did. 

While there is no news source that everyone can agree upon, could a group of people whose political backgrounds span the range of our current landscape come together and find a way to evaluate all candidates? Could they create a rubric upon which candidates would be evaluated that might include: 

Where and how they have received money with which to run their campaigns and how they are spending it. 

Their educational, political, and job histories; their resumes. 

Prior scandals or other issues and their resolutions

If this new organization listed its mission, it might sound a little like the missions of the Better Business Bureau or UL: 

• Help create an ethical election where voters and candidates trust each other
• Set standards for election trust
• Encourage and support best practices by engaging with and educating voters and candidates
• Celebrate election role models
• Calling out and addressing substandard election behavior
• Creating a community of trustworthy candidates
• Promote safe, secure, and sustainable election process
• Support candidates who demonstrate integrity by demonstrating respect and ethical behavior, intent, and working toward a fair, inclusive, and equitable election process.
• Improve elections through research and investigation
• Make voting safer, easier, and more trustworthy
• Work with integrity and focus to enhance the trust conveyed by this certification 
• Be a good example of election ethics and evaluation. 

Our democratic process could benefit from this kind of organization. Yes, building trust would be challenging. Yes, getting buy-in from both candidates and voters would take time and persistence. But the payoff would be massive. 

Anyone up for the challenge? 

Reading For Treasure: We Still Need to Talk – and Read – About Race

 Reading for Treasure is my list of articles (and other readings) that are worth your attention. Click here for an introduction!

We need to keep race foremost on our minds as we confront the variety of issues facing us right now. While COVID, the economy, education, voting rights, and many other issues are critical; race is intertwined with all of them. So let’s keep reading, talking, and taking action. Here are a few articles to help you do that.  

The Bitter Southerner published a powerful piece that directly addresses tourists at southern plantations who don’t want to hear the history of slavery. “Dear Disgruntled White Plantation Visitors” by author, culinary historian, and historical interpreter, Michael Twitty tears down the stereotypes and asks readers (and visitors) to directly face the horrible truth about the past.   

The New York Times opinion piece,  “I Don’t Need ‘Love’ Texts from My White Friends”  asks white people to do far more than just send emails and texts, hold memorials, and reflect. Instead, writer Chad Sanders provides three specific actions that have more positive impact. 

LifeHacker describes the National Museum of African American History and Culture’s online portal that, “contains tools, online exercises, video instructions, articles, and more than 100 multimedia resources tailored for educators and parents…”  in the quick article, “Get Help Talking About Race With This Tool From The Smithsonian.” It links directly to parts of this resource that might be useful for opening a conversation with your family, colleagues, or neighbors.

Leonard Pitts, Jr. writes in the Chicago Tribune  that “The Right To Bear Arms Does Not Extend to Black People.” He explains that the second amendment was really intended to make sure that the south could put down slave rebellions and goes on to question the NRA’s silence at the deaths of John Crawford III and Tamir Rice. 

Beyond articles, NewsOne provides a list of “5 Books Addressing Race That Every Teen Should Read” that includes titles like Angel of Greenwood, A Song Below Water, and Dragon Hoops. All of the books were written in either 2020 or 2021. 

Finally, three articles dealing with Critical Race Theory. The first is from Blavity, “Everybody’s Talking About It: What is Critical Race Theory?” In it, writer David E. Kirkland lays out the tenets of Critical Race Theory. Professor Ibram X. Kendi, writing in The Atlantic argues that “There Is No Debate Over Critical Race Theory.” Instead, using specific evidence, he makes the case that the critics of CRT, “are arguing against themselves.” Finally, and sadly, Colorlines reports that, “ Critical Race Theory Battles are Driving Black Educators Out of Their Jobs.” Not a shock there, but another part of this very disturbing issue. 

I am currently reading, The Wizard’s Guide to Defensive Baking by T. Kingfisher. 

Will We Still Zoom?

Slowly, things are opening up. I got a haircut, ate inside a restaurant, and shopped at Costco! Life is in person again (somewhat), and, slowly, it is feeling more normal. 

Yet the digital adaptations we made during this pandemic had advantages, too. The commute was fantastic. I loved being able to attend events wearing whatever I wanted. And those events were not restricted by geography.  

What parts of the digital quarantine will we keep? How will our immersion in Zoom and other video chat systems change now that it is safe to come together inside again (provided we are vaccinated)? 

We may see that many, if not most, events are hybrid. Some will merely stream so those who are not in the room can witness them. Others may go further and create ways that allow distant participants to be actively engaged. 

However, telepresence is not always an adequate substitute for physical presence; often, if you were on a screen and some of the other attendees are in person, you can become a second-class participant. Getting a word in is difficult when everyone is on Zoom. When some are sitting in a room and some are on Zoom, it is even harder for the Zoomers to cut into the conversation. While some meetings can be replaced this way, sometimes, traveling to be in person is going to be necessary. 

One of the most wonderful parts of Zoom culture was that participation was not hindered by geography or disability. I participate in a book club that now has members from all over the country. In addition, we have members who have physical difficulties that make attending in-person too challenging. Zoom lets everyone be together without the travails of travel. 

I attended a few virtual conventions. While I missed the social aspects, I thought the panels were great! Some of my pet peeves about panels vanish when they are on Zoom. My biggest pet peeve is that sometimes audience members think they are part of the panel. They speak up without being acknowledged by the moderator, comment freely, and often dominate discussion. Not on Zoom, they don’t! Audience members only get to participate when the moderator allows. I loved that. 

I also loved the commentary that went on in the chat during panels and events. I was used to sitting with my friends and whispering or texting each other occasionally. With Zoom, there is another layer of conversation that does not intrude on the primary event but can interact with it. I loved hearing, “Someone in the chat said…” or “An example of this was provided in the chat…” The audio/video was complemented by the text in the chat. It was a good outlet for that person who might be tempted to become the intrusive self-appointed panelist. 

Certainly, schools and colleges were changed by Zoom. While some may have liked learning online, getting back to “normal” school has been a primary goal. But might classes be streamed, especially large lecture-based classes in universities?  Since we can have remote and asynchronous learning days, does this mean school never needs to be canceled for snow or weather again? Could homebound students be connected to school resources through the computer?   

The fact that events could be recorded was also a benefit and one that we certainly could retain. Recently, I watched an interview from the Art Institute of Chicago that was streamed live during a time when I was unavailable. Since I was watching a recording, I couldn’t ask questions, but I am not sure I would have anyway. If not for the recording, I would have missed the event, but now I got to see it when it worked for my schedule. 

Accessing doctors and other medical resources by video was just starting to be offered before the pandemic. Now it has become a standard option for receiving services. For the same reason I noted above, telemedicine may not replace in-person examinations or consultations, but it certainly could help those who are too far away or for whom getting to the doctor is extremely challenging. And no one is sitting in a waiting room with sick people!  

I haven’t even begun to discuss how Zoom and its kin have facilitated the ability to work distantly for some. Zoom meetings, conferences, and calls are not perfect equivalents of the old normal, and they have both advantages and issues, but the option of working from home will be on the table far more than we ever imagined before the pandemic. 

Video engagement will now be an option for more and more of the activities that we used to assume had to be done in person. However, including disabled or distant participants, creating hybrid meeting structures, and navigating in-person events with both live and distant participants is going to take creativity and flexibility. 

We are not going back to the old normal. Our new routine will reflect the changes and innovations of the pandemic.  

Red Lights Oppress My Freedom: I am Declaring Independence!

Why do people – or should I say, sheeple - stop at red lights? Who gives anyone the right to tell me how to drive my car? It is my car, it does not belong to the state! Why should I be forced to give up my freedom just to make way for some idiot? Why should others be able to go while I am made to wait? That’s not fair!  

Stop signs and speed limits are against the constitution! Freedom and liberty for all doesn’t mean stopping and slowing down! Don’t tread on my right to go wherever I want however I want whenever I want. That is my right as an American! That is what makes America great! I don’t stop for anything! 

The government wants total control. Not only do they make me stop, they want me to give them my money in taxes. They are thieves and this is anti-freedom robbery! No one can tell me that I have to give MY money! I choose what I do with my money and if I decide I don’t want the government to have it, then it is my right as an American to say, no! No, taxation without represent – without anything!  

Why should I pay for electricity or water or wifi? Those things are natural resources which means they belong to everyone! Nature is mine because it is in America and I am an American! No one charges me for the air, but just wait! I shouldn’t have written that because that will give the regressive idiots in charge an idea for another way to try and put the squeeze on me! Cable is too damn expensive anyway! It should be free to everyone! 

I am sick and tired of people who think they are so high and mighty trying to tell me what I can or cannot do! It is my birthright as an American to have no limits, no rules, no restrictions at all! The army should come in and get rid of those morons who think that we should give everyone everything! They want healthcare, preschool, whatever they ask for! No way! Everyone should get what they deserve and I deserve freedom! 

It’s like what has been happening with voting. It is too easy to vote! People should not just be given ballots, they have to earn them! Only real Americans are worthy of voting and those who don’t agree with me shouldn’t be able to vote ever! That would take care of these liberal socialist government giveaways. 

I got this letter telling me I had to go to the courthouse for jury duty! Jury duty? Who asked you? I don’t have time for that! There are plenty of people who have nothing to do, let them take care of jury duty! You can’t make me! 

And they aren’t going to get my guns! Not a chance. I can have as many guns as I want and no one gets a say in that. The second amendment means that I can shoot anything I want. I can have automatics and shotguns and, hell, I might even get a tank! Try to stop my tank, red light! 

I didn’t sit in school for ten years to be told that I had fewer rights than someone who came here yesterday! So many special interest groups get special treatments. They kiss up to politicians and get fancy stuff. That is what is wrong with America today. Everyone is equal! Everyone has the same chances. If you made mistakes, suck it up and deal with that. If you don’t have the guts to grab what you can, then you don’t deserve it. That’s how all these rich guys got rich in the first place; they grabbed what they could and ran! We need more people like that. 

So take my advice, forget those red lights, throw away those tax bills, and do what you want. America is the home of the free and the land of the brave enough to take what is theirs. I don’t owe anything to anyone. I don’t have to do anything I don’t want to do. So there! Happy July Fourth! Give me fireworks!

Twenty Five Years In Our Home

I had to convince my wife that this was the house for us. She liked modern architecture with open floor plans and this house was a typical colonial. But, it had the right number of bedrooms, the space we needed to expand our little family, and was at the very top of our price range, and had all of our school first choices! It was very well kept and would make a wonderful home for us.

I remember our final walk-through before closing; we met the seller and his son, an English teacher at Lane Tech High School in Chicago (He later became my colleague and friend when we hired him to teach at his alma mater). The seller showed us where everything was and how they worked. He was gracious and helpful. We were overwhelmed and a little frightened. We had struggled to sell our old home. We had to move in the summer because since we were educators, moving during the school year was unthinkable. 

Oh, yeah. The local high school was in the backyard. This house backed up to our school, the one at which we worked. We weren’t just moving closer to work, we were practically moving in. We understood what work from home meant twenty-five years ago. 

We both spent way too many hours at school. My average day was eleven or twelve hours and my wife could compete with that many times during the year. So a shorter commune would be a good thing, even if it was just turning a seven-minute drive into a five-minute walk.    

We were already used to teaching and working in the same community. We tried to be graceful at the grocery store when parents wanted to do business. “We’re off duty,” we’d demur. “I can’t remember the specifics, call me at school,” I’d reply. Our students were startled when they saw us around town. High school students still don’t really believe that their teachers have lives outside of the classroom. Well, this new house would practically be living in a file cabinet drawer, just bigger. 

A lot bigger. Our new house was much larger than the little one we had moved into after we got married. We loved our first house, but if we were going to have another child, we needed more space. When one of my former students found out where we were moving, he said to me, “Oh, Mr. Hirsch, you’re not the North Trail type.” 

He couldn’t explain to me what the North Trail type was and, as we got to know our neighbors, we couldn’t either. We already met several sets of neighbors because we taught their children. Yet, our neighbors immediately across the street never came out or said hello or acknowledged us ever – not even when they moved. Others were very warm and came over and introduced themselves. 

Within a few months, there were several other new families nearby and our two-year-old made new friends as we all walked to school together: she went to the school daycare and preschool! We shared the great commute. 

After a year or two, I started a neighborhood newsletter. This was when a newsletter meant photocopies, envelopes, and hand distribution. At almost the same time, a neighbor initiated a renaissance of the homeowners association and we combined our efforts. While there had been a homeowners association, it had gone fallow. Now there was only a person paying landscapers to keep the common areas from looking too shabby from a checking account that was rapidly being depleted. 

So I took on the role of secretary in those pre-email days and we recruited a few others to help us. Most of those folks are still working together, but that is going to change soon. We had little kids, all of whom are in college or out of college. 

Now, we are empty nesters. The two of us live by ourselves in this house. When we retired, the most common question was, “When are you going to move?” We are not. This house still works wonderfully for us. When the kids came home during the pandemic, we were so grateful for the space. I transformed my daughter’s room into a combination office and entertainment room. My daughter calls it my man cave and I call it my ready room. 

While I could see why someone might downsize, I am optimistic that this house will work for us for another decade or so. For all the changes we have experienced as a family, this house still fits us, twenty-five years later.