Intense blogging events like the recent film festival are like going on a busy business trip. I'm still in Anchorage, but I'm constantly busy watching movies, meeting folks, and posting, and I act as if I'm out of town, passing up all other activities. But it's over and I have had time to think about where this is all going.
What To Do With All Those Posts?
But it also makes me wonder where all this blogging is going. Blogger says I have 3279 published posts. The clutter war moves out of the closets and onto my blog. I'm wondering if I should pause a bit and look back at what I have and whether I can do something with it all.
The Blogger label function (that long list of words on the lower right) would be a lot better if there could be a hierarchy of topics. For instance, I could have a Birds label and if you clicked that you could see Eagles, Ducks, Ravens, etc. Part of me thinks I should get rid of all the labels that only have one post. But then I see people finding that one post and linking to it. And Blogger doesn't listen to me when I suggest fixing labels up a bit.
I still have room for more pages on the tab bar on top (you can have ten.) I've used the current ones as annotated tables of contents to posts on specific topics - Redistricting and Film Festival. I thought I
might use a few more to offer links to some of my favorite posts now lost
somewhere in the 3279.
In a sense the blog has been a journal of what I'm seeing, doing, thinking, and people I'm meeting. It's been a place to jot notes on topics as the ideas come. It seems that going through my notes might be a good idea. Are there some ideas that could be combined into something longer - perhaps an article or two?
The Photos
What about all the photos? I sometimes make cards with them to send to friends and thought I might offer readers the opportunity to get cards, but would they want the ones I pick and would it be worth my time to let people pick the photos they want? Probably not.
I've been thinking of making calendars for friends too. But haven't yet. I could also make those available to readers. Then I could make some money off the blog, at least enough to buy a sound cards for my camera once in a while. But I'm not sure anyone is interested.
And the film festival has inspired me to try to use the video I've taken over five years of Anchorage International Film Festivals and make a movie for next year's festival. I know it's a bit incestuous, but it doesn't have to be in competition. I think I need to move up from iMovie to Final Cut for that. And looking at all the people in the credits of even the two minute movies, I'm going to have to reach out to others. But the film maker workshops let me know those others are out there waiting to do the same. I have video of Travis Betz' workshop and also Richard Cunningham's and I try to get those up before long.
Not Becoming Consumed By The Blog
I tend to rationalize that the blog is merely an electronic journal to record things that interest me anyway. I just take my camera with me when I go places. And blogging gives me an excuse to talk to folks I might not otherwise talk to. But it's also a good excuse to avoid other things I need to do. Longer writing projects mostly, but also liberating a room downstairs and the garage from the clutter monster.
Who Are You All?
Some people who visit here regularly I know because they sign their names when they comment - Jacob (aka Jay), Ropi, Dianne, alaskapi, Tomás, Mark M, m, Iatto, Kathy in KY, and many others now that I think about it. Some of these folks I've met only via the blog. But there are 33 followers listed and most of you I don't know. Or if I do, I don't know you by your blogger ids. Some folks have sent emails to say hi. (Thanks) Others leave friendly comments to say they've been by. Some people tell me when they see me that they read the blog.
Many visitors get to very specific posts via Google. It's nice to know that someone has found something helpful - like those who google "my linksys router was hijacked" or "snow leopard causes black screen." Or, "can you use fluorescent lights with dimmer?" Or "hiking trail to Doi Suthep." But those folks are coming for one thing and they probably won't be back.
But if you stop here more than once a month, when you feel comfortable, say hi - either in the comments or by email. (I know the comments aren't always that easy to use. There's an email link in the upper right side bar.)
And do give me feedback about cards and calendars. I'd do cards by hand and at cost plus shipping and a small profit. I'd do calendars through one of the online operations. It's a bit late for calendars for 2012, but in the future? Or if you have other ideas, let me know.
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
AIFF 2011: Landscape with Duck Filmmakers Patrick and Michele Neary
 |
| Screen Shot from Landscape with Duck |
I was able to catch Patrick and Michele at the Awards dinner of the Anchorage International Film Festival Sunday Dec. 11.
AIFF 2011 - Peter Pasyk's Dueling Posters in "The Pole"
[The Anchorage Film Film Festival ended Sunday, Dec. 11, followed by three more days of Best of the Fest. I'm trying to put up video I didn't get to during the festival.]
I got to see The Pole as part of the supershorts before the Awards Dinner/Ceremony Sunday Dec. 11. Then I met the director, Peter Pasyk, and got him briefly on camera. I don't know about Peter, but I was getting tired and I used up most of my questions on other folks. Thanks Peter for putting up with my camera in your face with grace and humor and not too big a smirk.
The Pole is a nice super short which shows the competitive spirit of two young men who work putting up posters on Toronto street poles. I can see it as a case study in a business or public administration class. It raises lots of questions about free enterprise and government regulation. The fact that I was totally absorbed in the story suggests that he did all the technical stuff just right. I didn't even think about it.
The Pole could also be a nice metaphor for the US Congress today.
The young men get so caught up in their short term goals, they lose all perspective and start engaging in self-defeating behavior in an attempt to out do each other. They pause and try a little cooperation, but that quickly falls apart too. If I were a better journalist, I would have asked him about whether he had intended this to be lesson for more than pole posters. If I remember correctly, he said this stemmed from personal experience.
Here's a clip of the movie from the YouTube site of the musicians Freres Lumieres.
I got to see The Pole as part of the supershorts before the Awards Dinner/Ceremony Sunday Dec. 11. Then I met the director, Peter Pasyk, and got him briefly on camera. I don't know about Peter, but I was getting tired and I used up most of my questions on other folks. Thanks Peter for putting up with my camera in your face with grace and humor and not too big a smirk.
The Pole is a nice super short which shows the competitive spirit of two young men who work putting up posters on Toronto street poles. I can see it as a case study in a business or public administration class. It raises lots of questions about free enterprise and government regulation. The fact that I was totally absorbed in the story suggests that he did all the technical stuff just right. I didn't even think about it.
The Pole could also be a nice metaphor for the US Congress today.
The young men get so caught up in their short term goals, they lose all perspective and start engaging in self-defeating behavior in an attempt to out do each other. They pause and try a little cooperation, but that quickly falls apart too. If I were a better journalist, I would have asked him about whether he had intended this to be lesson for more than pole posters. If I remember correctly, he said this stemmed from personal experience.
Here's a clip of the movie from the YouTube site of the musicians Freres Lumieres.
Do Americans Know More About Lohan than Pakistan?
 |
| Map from Lonely Planet |
Declan Walsh is a Guardian reporter who's been in Pakistan for the last seven years. Here are a couple paragraphs from an overview article he wrote for the Guardian on what's happening in the country December's Atlantic calls "The Ally from Hell."
But Pakistan is Afghanistan's neighbor as well as Iran's, India's, and China's. We need to know. And reading a few articles like this will at least get you to know more than 90% of Americans.
So I offer these excerpts of the article - emailed to me by a Pakistani friend - in hopes that you might be tempted to read the whole article. which is headlined:
Pakistan: bombs, spies and wild parties
After seven tumultuous years reporting from Pakistan, Guardian correspondent Declan Walsh reflects on the inspiring figures, the jaw-dropping landscapes, the deep corruption – and the day the Taliban came to town . . .
. . . Pakistanis swerve into heavy traffic without looking, don't stick to their lane or indicate, which makes it hard to predict where they are coming from or going to. Social graces are rare – horns honk, headlights are impatiently flashed – but social hierarchy is observed: hulking four-wheel drives (increasingly armour-plated) barge through the swarms of matchbox cars. Off to the side, the police are taking bribes.
But pull off the road and everything changes. Pakistanis are welcoming, generous and voluble. They insist you stay for tea, or the night. They love to gab, often with glorious indiscretion – national politics and local tattle, cricket scandals, movie stars and conspiracy theories. This is fun, and good for the business of journalism.
While Islam is technically the glue of society, you learn, the real bonds are forged around clans, tribes, personal contacts. To get anything done, the official route is often pointless – the key is sifarish, the reference of an influential friend. Journalists use sifarish a lot; occasionally they are called on to dispense it too. . .and further down
When I arrived in 2004, Islamabad was a somnolent, reliably dull city. By night, the sons of the rich drag-raced their daddies' cars along deserted streets, swerving to avoid wild boar ambling from the bushes. Foreigners mocked the capital for its provincial feel. "Islamabad – half the size of a New York graveyard but twice as dead" went the diplomats' tired gag as white-gloved waiters served gin and tonic on manicured lawns.
Then the Taliban came to town. It started with the bloody siege of the Red mosque complex in July 2007, just before Pakistan's 60th birthday. Bullets zipped through the leafy streets; I dusted off my flak jacket. Then came the bombs: at markets, checkposts, the Naval headquarters, UN offices, the five-star Marriott hotel. Up the street from my house, Benazir Bhutto gave speeches from behind barbed wire, during a brief-lived house arrest. Weeks later she drove out to Rawalpindi, where she was assassinated.
Today the blasts have stopped, mostly, but the city is cloistered in concrete. Fortified walls rise over the streets, vehicles slalom through elaborate checkposts, hotel entrances resemble prisons with gold-buttoned guards. Embassies are retreating into a sandbagged, Green Zone-style enclave; the presidency and even ISI headquarters are similarly isolated.
I suspect people are more inclined to check out rock stars than Pakistan. I did check Google Trends to see how many average hits Pakistan gets compared to Lohan. It's not a pretty picture.
 |
| Click to enlarge and see clearly |
We just got the last troops out of Iraq (or so they say.) From Fort Bragg via a South African television website (for a different set of reader comments):
The war killed 4 500 US troops and at least 60 000 Iraqis. Obama said on Tuesday the war would cost more than $1 trillion all told.Those are the costs we know now. How will having Mom or Dad gone for long periods affect their kids long term? What about all the medical costs for the veterans? And the costs for the families of the 60,000 dead Iraqis?
We went into that war, in part, because people knew more about 'personalities' like Lohan than they knew about Iraq. Pakistan isn't going away. It behooves us to know more about it than we do, so we aren't cowed by DC experts with classified proof of the need to go to war.
Of course I don't need to worry about regular readers at this blog. But for those who got here accidentally to learn about Lohan's trip to Pakistan, please try to read the whole Guardian article before you read your Facebook wall. And maybe the Atlantic article too. Then link to them on Facebook.
Monday, December 19, 2011
OK, You Hate Congress, But Are You Still Voting For Your Own Congress Member?
In a recent show, Morning Edition reporter Andrea Seabrook talked to Cincinnati voters about Congress.
None had anything good to say. Here's how it begins:
Here's the audio.
She asked all these people how they felt about Congress, but SHE DIDN'T ASK:
"Are you going to reelect your own Congress Member?"
That seems to be the key problem. All the other guys are bad, but we like our own Congress Member.
Let's remember that the people in Congress got more votes than the other candidates, so the people to blame for Congress are those who voted for the winning candidates and those who didn't vote at all.
I've been voting against my Congress Member for 30 years, so, while you might say I've been ineffective, at least I'm not part of the group that's responsible for re-electing Don Young. But people like me need to work harder to retire the problem Congress Members.
Of course, you can pull all the dandelions you want, but more still pop up. Getting rid of bad Congress Members and reelecting new bad ones isn't the answer. We need to plant Congress with representatives who promise NOT to take pledges that restrict their votes and promise to work constructively with ALL the other Congress Members for the public, regardless of threatened political consequences. Better yet, there should be negative political consequences for being a hack and good ones for being a mensch.
Not all incumbents are problems. When they campaign, make them demonstrate how they worked with others, how they bucked the party when its dictates weren't for the good of the public, how they advanced, rather than blocked, needed legislation and confirmation of appointed officials, and how they did NOT play brinksmanship with the US budget and our country's credit rating.
Hold all candidates to reasoned cooperation. (Ask them how many members of the other party they had over to their home for dinner this session.) Hold them to voting for the long term benefit of the United States (and the world) and not to voting based on how they think it might affect the next election cycle. (Did they vote against needed legislation or to add toxic amendments so the other side had to vote no?) Their only pledge should be to vote for the needs of the public, not of their party, not of the lobbyists and their clients.
Do your homework. Check out your representative and senators. Here are some websites that give you information. Check different perpsectives:
Vote Smart
The Washington Post's The US Congress Votes Database
Don't know who your congress person is? Who's My Rep? My Senator?
Big Marine Fish's Friend or Enemy of Fish?
C-Span's Researching Your Members of Congress
Congress Link's How Influential Is Your Member of Congress?
The American Conservative Union's Congressional Ratings
National Journal's Vote Rating 2010
ACLU's Congressional Scorecard
The Hill has Lists of Ratings from Different Groups for Each Lawmaker
Then ask your representative to explain his votes.
When you find a good candidate, you need to give her some money and some time.
Or, if there are no good candidates, run yourself.
None had anything good to say. Here's how it begins:
ANDREA SEABROOK, BYLINE: These days, when I stop people in the street, there's this thing that happens all the time.
I'm a reporter with NPR in Washington. Anyone interested in talking about Congress?
BILL BELLMAN: Congress - there's nothing good to say.
SEABROOK: People's instant reaction to the mention of Congress is: Ugh, what a mess; there's nothing good to say.
Here's the audio.
She asked all these people how they felt about Congress, but SHE DIDN'T ASK:
"Are you going to reelect your own Congress Member?"
That seems to be the key problem. All the other guys are bad, but we like our own Congress Member.
Let's remember that the people in Congress got more votes than the other candidates, so the people to blame for Congress are those who voted for the winning candidates and those who didn't vote at all.
I've been voting against my Congress Member for 30 years, so, while you might say I've been ineffective, at least I'm not part of the group that's responsible for re-electing Don Young. But people like me need to work harder to retire the problem Congress Members.
Of course, you can pull all the dandelions you want, but more still pop up. Getting rid of bad Congress Members and reelecting new bad ones isn't the answer. We need to plant Congress with representatives who promise NOT to take pledges that restrict their votes and promise to work constructively with ALL the other Congress Members for the public, regardless of threatened political consequences. Better yet, there should be negative political consequences for being a hack and good ones for being a mensch.
Not all incumbents are problems. When they campaign, make them demonstrate how they worked with others, how they bucked the party when its dictates weren't for the good of the public, how they advanced, rather than blocked, needed legislation and confirmation of appointed officials, and how they did NOT play brinksmanship with the US budget and our country's credit rating.
Hold all candidates to reasoned cooperation. (Ask them how many members of the other party they had over to their home for dinner this session.) Hold them to voting for the long term benefit of the United States (and the world) and not to voting based on how they think it might affect the next election cycle. (Did they vote against needed legislation or to add toxic amendments so the other side had to vote no?) Their only pledge should be to vote for the needs of the public, not of their party, not of the lobbyists and their clients.
Do your homework. Check out your representative and senators. Here are some websites that give you information. Check different perpsectives:
Vote Smart
The Washington Post's The US Congress Votes Database
Don't know who your congress person is? Who's My Rep? My Senator?
Big Marine Fish's Friend or Enemy of Fish?
C-Span's Researching Your Members of Congress
Congress Link's How Influential Is Your Member of Congress?
The American Conservative Union's Congressional Ratings
National Journal's Vote Rating 2010
ACLU's Congressional Scorecard
The Hill has Lists of Ratings from Different Groups for Each Lawmaker
Then ask your representative to explain his votes.
When you find a good candidate, you need to give her some money and some time.
Or, if there are no good candidates, run yourself.
AIFF 2011: Skype Chat from Holland With Best Animation Winners
All the animated films I saw were good in some way. This was the category I tried to know best and I've gotten some video on most of the film makers whose films were in competition. I had this conversation with Ru Kuwahata and Max Porter Dec. 7 (Anchorage time). They were delightful to talk to and they give us a sense of the life of serious animators. They are currently in Holland on a grant for animators.
Ru lived in Anchorage for a couple of years as a child when her father, who worked for Japan Airlines, was located here. She clearly was disappointed that she couldn't be here for the festival, but they promised to submit what they are working on now when it's done in 2013.
And you can see the film that won Best Animated Film at the Anchorage International Film Festival last week.
Ru lived in Anchorage for a couple of years as a child when her father, who worked for Japan Airlines, was located here. She clearly was disappointed that she couldn't be here for the festival, but they promised to submit what they are working on now when it's done in 2013.
And you can see the film that won Best Animated Film at the Anchorage International Film Festival last week.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
North Korea's Kim Jong-il Dead
From Thai Visa:
PYONGYANG (BNO NEWS) -- The Supreme Leader of North Korea, Kim Jong-il, died of physical fatigue on early Saturday morning, state-run media announced on Monday afternoon. He was 69 or 70 years old.
The state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said Kim died at around 8.30 a.m. local time on Saturday. It said he died of physical fatigue during a train ride, but gave no other details.
UPDATE 9:10pm - from Reuters:
From Wikipedia:
PYONGYANG (BNO NEWS) -- The Supreme Leader of North Korea, Kim Jong-il, died of physical fatigue on early Saturday morning, state-run media announced on Monday afternoon. He was 69 or 70 years old.
The state-run Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said Kim died at around 8.30 a.m. local time on Saturday. It said he died of physical fatigue during a train ride, but gave no other details.
UPDATE 9:10pm - from Reuters:
SEOUL |(Reuters) - North Korean leader Kim Jong-il died of a heart attack while on a train trip, state media reported on Monday, sparking immediate concern over who is in control of the reclusive state and its nuclear program.
A tearful television announcer dressed in black said the 69-year old had died on Saturday of physical and mental over-work on his way to give "field guidance."
Kim Jong-un, Kim Jong-il's youngest son, is seen as the leader-in-waiting after he was appointed to senior political and military posts in 2010.
North Korea's official KCNA news agency said the elder Kim died at 8:30 a.m. on Saturday (6:30 p.m. EST on Friday) after "an advanced acute myocardial infarction, complicated with a serious heart shock." Kim had suffered a stroke in 2008, but had appeared to have recovered from that ailment. . . [continue here]
From Wikipedia:
Soviet records show that Kim Jong-il was born in the village of Vyatskoye, near Khabarovsk, in 1941, where his father, Kim Il-sung, commanded the 1st Battalion of the Soviet 88th Brigade, made up of Chinese and Korean exiles. Kim Jong-il's mother, Kim Jong-suk, was Kim Il-sung's first wife. Kim Jong-il's official biography states that he was born in a secret military camp on Baekdu Mountain in Japanese Korea on 16 February 1942. Official biographers claim that his birth at Baekdu Mountain was foretold by a swallow, and heralded by the appearance of a double rainbow over the mountain and a new star in the heavens. In 1945, Kim was three or four years old (depending on his birth year) when World War II ended and Korea regained independence from Japan. His father returned to Pyongyang that September, and in late November Kim returned to Korea via a Soviet ship, landing at Sonbong (선봉군, also Unggi). The family moved into a former Japanese officer's mansion in Pyongyang, with a garden and pool. Kim Jong-il's brother, "Shura" Kim (the first Kim Jong-il, but known by his Russian nickname), drowned there in 1948. Unconfirmed reports suggest that five-year-old Kim Jong-il might have caused the accident. In 1949, his mother died in childbirth. Unconfirmed reports suggest that his mother might have been shot and left to bleed to death.. . [More here.]And the New York Times weighs in with a lengthy piece.
Only 24% of college graduates know the First Amendment prohibits establishing an official religion for the United States.
That's a finding from the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI).
A comment (6:47pm) on Immoral Minority led me to ISI's website with a civic literacy test.
One of their major findings was: College Adds Little to Civic Knowledge.
Red flags are starting to wave for me. One of the agenda items of the Right has been bashing American colleges and universities - because they've strayed from traditional Western Civilization curriculum and added women, non-whites, and studies of sexuality beyond the missionary position. Colleges are places where people are supposed to learn how to think independently. If the quality of this year's roster of Republican presidential candidates is any indication, independent thinking is not a quality conservatives want in the people who vote.
Just like No Child Left Behind was designed for public schools to fail by setting up a testing system that makes it very hard for schools to pass so they can imprint in people's minds that public education as a failure, there appears to be a similar agenda for the college level. For K-12, this destroying trust in public education is designed to get the public to vote for school vouchers and move public money into private schools.
It appears that part of the motivation of this test is to show that US Colleges are failing.
Is ISI part of this? I started checking.
The ISI declares itself "The Home of American Intellectual Conservatism."
A Katherine Forrest, in 2006, had the same sort of suspicions I'm having and posted Exposing the Intercollegiate Studies Institute.
ISI's veneer of objectivity and rationality disappears completely when you find their college rating pages. (You have to look carefully to find at the bottom of each page this note:
What the train wreck schools seem to have in common is courses on gay and feminist themes and other evidence of what ISI sees as far left ideological intolerance. Here are some examples:
#1 Train Wreck School, Wesleyan University:
#5 Train Wreck School, University of California Santa Cruz:
#9 Train Wreck is Occidental College.
What's the common theme for the top ten "Exceptional Schools"? Basically, conservatism, marked by traditional curriculum (mostly dead white male authors on the reading list, I'm guessing), religion (Christian) and/or military heritage.
1. Princeton University -
7. Providence College - " Dominican friars (Aquinas’s order) who are serious about Catholic education"
8. Texas A&M - "Originally an all-male military academy (it still has a large, influential corps of cadets. . . conservative churches and chaplaincies are thriving"
9. Gordon College - "New England’s only traditional, Evangelical Christian liberal arts college"
10. Christendom College -
I'd also note that while there were three colleges I noted on the Exceptional list that had been all male, the Train Wreck list has two all female schools.
But does all this make the test invalid? As with No Child Left Behind, you can set up a test that doesn't necessarily have questions that are critical to being good American citizens. Or a scoring system that guarantees failure. Some of the questions are clearly important. Others, while identifying significant points in American history, aren't necessarily indicative, overall, of whether the American public gets an F in civil literacy. These folks like traditional education, so they make up a test and use a traditional grading scale of >90%= A etc. But what makes these 33 questions the key ones that lead to the F for the average American?
And I still have trouble with their finding that "College Adds Little to Civic Knowledge" because:
I agree that Americans know way too little about how government works. I don't necessarily agree with ISI's reasoning why. I'd argue it has more to do with the annual assaults on school budgets for the last 40 years or the emphasis on research which focuses faculty attention away from teaching. Or the overemphasis on college education and away from vocational education.
I would guess that I could pick some 20 somethings in Anchorage who could come up with a similar test, focused on critical modern technical literacy, which the people at ISI would fail.
If you are interested, you can take their test here. How well will you score?
A comment (6:47pm) on Immoral Minority led me to ISI's website with a civic literacy test.
First, a random sample of 2,508 American adults of all backgrounds was surveyed, allowing comparisons to be made between the college and non-college educated. They were asked 33 straightforward civics questions, many of which high school graduates and new citizens are expected to know.The average score was 49% right answers. College professors got 55% right.
Of the 2,508 People surveyed, 164 say they have held an elected government office at least once in their life. Their average score on the civic literacy test is 44%, compared to 49% for those who have not held an elected office. (From additional finding.)But don't gloat too much. We don't know what level office they held and the 49% - the average - got an F grade from the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI) which created the test.
One of their major findings was: College Adds Little to Civic Knowledge.
Red flags are starting to wave for me. One of the agenda items of the Right has been bashing American colleges and universities - because they've strayed from traditional Western Civilization curriculum and added women, non-whites, and studies of sexuality beyond the missionary position. Colleges are places where people are supposed to learn how to think independently. If the quality of this year's roster of Republican presidential candidates is any indication, independent thinking is not a quality conservatives want in the people who vote.
Just like No Child Left Behind was designed for public schools to fail by setting up a testing system that makes it very hard for schools to pass so they can imprint in people's minds that public education as a failure, there appears to be a similar agenda for the college level. For K-12, this destroying trust in public education is designed to get the public to vote for school vouchers and move public money into private schools.
It appears that part of the motivation of this test is to show that US Colleges are failing.
Is ISI part of this? I started checking.
The ISI declares itself "The Home of American Intellectual Conservatism."
A Katherine Forrest, in 2006, had the same sort of suspicions I'm having and posted Exposing the Intercollegiate Studies Institute.
ISI's veneer of objectivity and rationality disappears completely when you find their college rating pages. (You have to look carefully to find at the bottom of each page this note:
They list ten "Exceptional Schools" and ten "Train Wreck Schools."
What the train wreck schools seem to have in common is courses on gay and feminist themes and other evidence of what ISI sees as far left ideological intolerance. Here are some examples:
#1 Train Wreck School, Wesleyan University:
". . .Wesleyan has been hollowed out by curricular decay and campus politics. Key requirements can be checked off by a vast array of questionable courses like “The Biology of Sex” (the textbook is a sex manual), “Key Issues in Black Feminism,” and “Queer Literature and Studies.” There is little intellectual diversity in the classroom or elsewhere. Shakespeare is optional for English majors, as is study of the American founding and Civil War for history majors"#3 Train Wreck School, College of the Holy Cross:
". . .The sole required religion course need not cover Jesuit, Catholic, or even Christian content: Islam or Buddhism will do. . ."
#5 Train Wreck School, University of California Santa Cruz:
Bastions of fanatical political correctness include feminist studies and also American studies, where representative courses include “Sexual Identities,” “Social Unrest,” and “Criminal Queer.” Santa Cruz boasts that it offers more than a hundred courses each year that focus entirely on race and ethnicity. It might save time simply to count the courses that don’t. The once-tiny Santa Cruz College Republicans chapter has simply disappeared, although there is a libertarian group, Slugs for Liberty. “This is a very liberal campus,” says a student, “[and] religion does not play a role.”#6 Train Wreck is Duke, which actually gets high praise for liberal but fair faculty and the quality of research and many programs. But it gets slammed for:
". . . the infamous lacrosse case of 2006, when an African American stripper falsely accused three Duke lacrosse players of rape—and eighty-eight Duke professors rushed to condemn the innocent students in the Chronicle of Higher Education. As one student tells us, faculty and administrators are still fixated on “race, gender, and class.” In the wake of the “rape” charade, Duke adopted a new, draconian sexual misconduct policy that “can render a student guilty of nonconsensual sex simply because he or she is considered ‘powerful’ on campus,” warned the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. "#7 Train Wreck is Bryn Mawr.
"History majors are not even offered—much less required to take—a basic Western civilization class. Many of the college’s humanities courses are dedicated to feminist issues and the politics of victimhood, such as “The Sociology of AIDS” covering the “social construction of AIDS”; “Anxious Masculinity” (an English class); and “African Childhoods,” which provides a “gendered perspective . . . Concerning indigenous cultural practices such as initiation ceremonies and sexual orientation.” Radical groups predominate on campus, presenting a feminist “May Hole” instead of a May Pole, and celebrating Wiccan Sabbats."
#9 Train Wreck is Occidental College.
Their study methodology includes frequent references like, "says a faculty member."“Gay Rights in the Era of Obama and Google”
That’s the title of a real, core curriculum course at this urban school, where President Obama went for two years and awakened his political consciousness. Students could find an excellent liberal arts education by carefully picking their courses, if they don’t mind immersion in an almost exclusively liberal, largely intolerant school.
What's the common theme for the top ten "Exceptional Schools"? Basically, conservatism, marked by traditional curriculum (mostly dead white male authors on the reading list, I'm guessing), religion (Christian) and/or military heritage.
1. Princeton University -
". . . Of all the elite colleges, Princeton is the least politicized. Issue-driven organizations are diverse and mostly high-minded, and chaplaincies of many denominations are active and faithful. While the faculty overall leans left, most keep their views out of the classroom. The school makes room for the excellent James Madison program, a conservative institute dedicated to American political philosophy. . ."2. University of Chicago -
". . .While some departments are slanted politically, this doesn’t seep into the classroom; students of a wide range of views describe the atmosphere as comfortable and open-minded. Strong disciplines include economics, social thought, political science, and the hard sciences. Chaplaincies are strong here, and opportunities to savor the fine arts abound. The gritty [code for "black"?] neighborhood surrounding the school doesn’t encourage much urban adventure: crime is a real issue. . ."3. University of the South
". . .Faculty lean to the left of students—a largely conservative, southern lot—but classroom bias is rare and free discussion the rule. Students form close, lifelong friendships in the charmed, safe isolation of Sewanee’s campus, and alumni are fiercely loyal. Religious life on campus is strong, extending well beyond the school’s official, high-toned Episcopalianism. . . ."4. US Military Academy
". . . The discipline and focus imparted through the school’s rigorous Military Program help form many future business leaders. West Point’s core curriculum is excellent, and the art, philosophy, and literature (APL) major provides an in-depth study of Western civilization. History and government majors are particularly strong, focused respectively on military history and the American tradition. . . Following our tradition of an apolitical military, the school keeps overt ideology out of the classroom, and students avoid partisan politics. Student debate, writing, and arts opportunities are strong. Religious life of many varieties thrives, with several historic chapels and talented choirs."5. Pepperdine University -
"This well-heeled, large university that overlooks the beach is affiliated with the Churches of Christ, and remains remarkably true to the entrepreneurial aspirations of its founder and namesake, George Pepperdine. It aims at cultivating a pragmatic graduate who infuses Christian values in a life of leadership. Pepperdine’s interdisciplinary curriculum is strong; its three-course core sequence, Western Heritage, takes students briskly from 30,000 B.C. up through the present. . ."6. Baylor University - "the world’s largest Baptist university'
7. Providence College - " Dominican friars (Aquinas’s order) who are serious about Catholic education"
8. Texas A&M - "Originally an all-male military academy (it still has a large, influential corps of cadets. . . conservative churches and chaplaincies are thriving"
9. Gordon College - "New England’s only traditional, Evangelical Christian liberal arts college"
10. Christendom College -
"Instead of political correctness, there is an absolute expectation of Catholic orthodoxy; debates on campus are among Republicans, anticapitalist agrarians, libertarians, paleoconservatives, and monarchists. Shared premises make such disputes more fruitful."
I'd also note that while there were three colleges I noted on the Exceptional list that had been all male, the Train Wreck list has two all female schools.
But does all this make the test invalid? As with No Child Left Behind, you can set up a test that doesn't necessarily have questions that are critical to being good American citizens. Or a scoring system that guarantees failure. Some of the questions are clearly important. Others, while identifying significant points in American history, aren't necessarily indicative, overall, of whether the American public gets an F in civil literacy. These folks like traditional education, so they make up a test and use a traditional grading scale of >90%= A etc. But what makes these 33 questions the key ones that lead to the F for the average American?
And I still have trouble with their finding that "College Adds Little to Civic Knowledge" because:
The average score among those who ended their formal education with a bachelor’s degree is 57%, or an “F.”Who picked the 33 questions? Look, I can criticize the low quality of American colleges as well as anyone. My students complained regularly about the amount of work I expected of them. And, just in case anyone is wondering, I did way better than the average on the test. But it was a subject I know a lot about and covered a lot of history I lived through.
I agree that Americans know way too little about how government works. I don't necessarily agree with ISI's reasoning why. I'd argue it has more to do with the annual assaults on school budgets for the last 40 years or the emphasis on research which focuses faculty attention away from teaching. Or the overemphasis on college education and away from vocational education.
I would guess that I could pick some 20 somethings in Anchorage who could come up with a similar test, focused on critical modern technical literacy, which the people at ISI would fail.
If you are interested, you can take their test here. How well will you score?
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Brilliant Stairs to Kitchen Homicide - Imaginations Pushing the Ordinary
I'm a sucker for things that cause my brain cells to shift. So here are a few links to websites that do that.
For example, stairs are pretty straightforward. Almost all are basically the same. There is some variation, like spiraling staircases, but the idea has pretty much been exhausted, right?
Well look at the 20 sets of stairs offered at Mdolla to remind you that there's always a new way to conceive of something we take for granted. Like these on the right.
I don't think you could legally put these in a house in Anchorage.
Divine Caroline makes us revisit logos to make sure we've seen the whole logo, like the images in the empty spaces in this logo for the Pittsburgh Zoo. There are 15 examples, some I see every day, but don't really see, like the hidden symbol in the Fedex logo. Do you know what's there?
A Crazy Bag of Hammers gives a sampling of these ordinary objects bent-wired into about 20 mini-dramas like this apparent kitchen homicide.
And it's well worth your while to go to Bent Objects itself for more and varied brain candy like a poster for any billionaires planning a protest.
Well look at the 20 sets of stairs offered at Mdolla to remind you that there's always a new way to conceive of something we take for granted. Like these on the right.
I don't think you could legally put these in a house in Anchorage.
Divine Caroline makes us revisit logos to make sure we've seen the whole logo, like the images in the empty spaces in this logo for the Pittsburgh Zoo. There are 15 examples, some I see every day, but don't really see, like the hidden symbol in the Fedex logo. Do you know what's there?
A Crazy Bag of Hammers gives a sampling of these ordinary objects bent-wired into about 20 mini-dramas like this apparent kitchen homicide.
And it's well worth your while to go to Bent Objects itself for more and varied brain candy like a poster for any billionaires planning a protest.
Friday, December 16, 2011
Don't Mess With My Stereotypes - The "All American Muslim" Ad That Lowe's Pulled
[UPDATE 6:50pm: Ha! Too good to be true. See the first comment. So what was the ad they removed?]
Does anyone not know that Lowe's pulled an ad on the tv show "All American Muslim" because a Christian group in Florida had a letter writing campaign protesting it?
I first thought they were simply protesting that Lowe's supported a show with positive views of American Muslims. But now I've seen the ad itself.
I can see why they would want it pulled. It plays to all their stereotypes about evil Muslim terrorists and then dashes them. Can't let people see such powerful hate antidotes.
Does anyone not know that Lowe's pulled an ad on the tv show "All American Muslim" because a Christian group in Florida had a letter writing campaign protesting it?
I first thought they were simply protesting that Lowe's supported a show with positive views of American Muslims. But now I've seen the ad itself.
I can see why they would want it pulled. It plays to all their stereotypes about evil Muslim terrorists and then dashes them. Can't let people see such powerful hate antidotes.
Thanks to Gryphen for posting it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)