My Beauty Best Teacher

"The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still function." F. Scott Fitzgerald

Check out the WTU legal opinion : http://www.dcpswatch.com/wtu/080801.htm

I encourage all to review a copy of the legal opinion which provides a critical survey of the WTU contract information packet. I hope this legal analysis helps DC teachers and providers as they weigh the pros and the cons of an upcoming tentative agreement. The legal opinion titled: "Seniority Rights"was rendered by O'donnell, Schwartz, and Anderson- the D.C. law firm under contract to the WTU. The WTU Executive Board passed a motion to secure a legal opinion on the contract proposal.

I have no problem listening to people who think differently than I do because they challenge my ideas and keep me from being complacent. My only rule of thumb is that if you expect me to respond to your posts - No personal attacks and No ranting PLEASE for obvious reasons ! Posted by Candi

At the February 14th WTU Executive Board meeting- I was saddened to learn that WTU President, George Parker sought a legal opinion on the union's liability for 'freedom of speech' statements made by any of its union officers including the leadership, board members and local school union representatives in the press or on blogs. The title of the legal opinion is 'Potential Liability For Speech.' I would argue that Parker did this in an attempt to try to block other meaningful dialogue about the critical issues that impact teachers. Listening to this legal presentation took away valuable time from other issues that needed to be discussed. It seems to me that Parker's other motive may have been to discourage board members from exercising their right to free speech in the press and on blogs.

Again without any input from the WTU Executive Board, Mr. Parker forged ahead in his typical dictatorial style. As a fiduciary agent of our union, I suspect and am concerned that this legal opinion may have cost our union membership thousands of dollars. What I gleaned from this presentation is that defamation lawsuits can prevail against unions, officers and individuals ONLY IF what members say is intentionally false and causes injury to a person's position within society. The truth is always an absolute defense as it should be. I think this is a no brainer for most of us.

What was even more troubling is that board members were not provided a copy of this legal opinion of which might I add union dues helped to pay for. The real travesty in this is that even if board members wanted to digest this document in its entirety they couldn't because they were requested to return the document to the WTU before leaving which was totally absurd.

I can think of better things that we as a union can spend our funds on like assisting our union members. This certainly is a matter that needs to come before the WTU Representative Assembly. All union members have a 'right to know' what our union dues are spent on and demand accountability from our union president. (Posted by The Washington Teacher).

DC Teachers vacation just ended on Monday. All DC Teachers started back to work officially today. Many attended pre-arranged staff development sessions. Ours was at the Kellogg Center on the campus of Galludet University. While I was glad to see faces that I hadn't seen for over nine weeks- hugs and kisses were exchanged while teacher contract talks were all the buzz amongst teacher and service provider colleagues during lunch and mini- break sessions.

Contrary to what our mainstream media reports, today many teachers young and old contemplated the validity of a teachers contract that takes away not only contractual rights but statutory job protections for hefty raises. One teacher argued "don't buy the hype" while she vehemently voiced her frustration at our lunch table over Chancellor Rhee's regular media campaigns which castigates veteran teachers leaving many feeling devalued to talks ranging from what is wrong with our union and why isn't George Parker representing our best interests and why must we lose tenure if we choose the green tier especially since we have earned tenure to why will excessing lead to termination ?

In our mist is much ado about our teachers contract and I contend that we are intentionally being fed a regular diet of distorted and inaccurate information in the mainstream media, by uninformed others and by DC teachers whose votes have been purchased for a motley sum of $1,000 per week. What we know is there has been a campaign funded by City Bridge to buy union members votes . Lauren Castillo, DCPS teacher at Jefferson admits in an email to accepting $1,000 weekly in exchange for lobbying teachers to vote yes on the Rhee/Parker tentative agreement. There are other un-named others. Bill Turque, Washington Post reporter uncovered that City Bridge has funded this campaign. What's wrong with this picture I ask you ?

While I am bothered by these unprincipled people , rather than criticize and complain - I have embraced a pro-active position to get out as much factual information to our DC teachers as I can. I am committed to encouraging our American Federation of Teachers (parent union) to release the 6 page legal opinion by O'Donnell, Schwartz and Anderson, P.C. - titled "Seniority Rights," dated August 1st to all DC teachers who are WTU members which states "... This proposal replaces teachers rights with automatic termination on the Green system and eventual termination on the Red system.... DC Teachers would lose their career status as tenured professionals and the characteristics of tenure...." (for additional excerpts from the legal opinion - see "Should DC teachers Swap Raises for Job Protections ?- post 8/18/08). For me, this legal opinion confirms/solidifies my belief that "information is power." Spread the word to a DC teacher that you know. Posted by Candi Peterson

This piece appeared in Gary Imhoff's Opposed In the Mail, dated August 17, 2008. I challenge all who drop by here to take a minute to consider: Should DC Teachers Swap Raises for Job Protections ? With the release of the AFT secured legal opinion- I ask if it were you - would you - sell your integrity for a bigger check that takes away ALL DC teachers due process rights on both tiers ? My goal here is to provide food for thought for those who make the argument, they desperately need more dolla' bills y'all- is it fair to the rest of DC teachers only to satisfy a small few ? I encourage my colleagues to request that AFT release the legal opinion to all WTU members so that our members can make an informed decision. Please join me by writing our AFT/WTU National Representative- Mr. George Bordenave @ gbordena@aft.org and our AFT President- Ms. Randi Weingarten @ rweingar@aft.org. In solidarity,
Posted By: Candi Peterson

Should DC Teachers Swap Raises for Job Protections ?

Written by: Candi Peterson

"WTU President George Parker caused a controversy by releasing an incomplete tentative agreement, which has caused many to weigh in and attempt to negotiate teacher contract talks on blogs, directly with Chancellor Rhee, and in the press. It is baffling that Mr. Parker demonstrates an unwillingness to heed the legal analysis of O’Donnell, Schwartz and Anderson, the DC law firm under contract to the WTU. He seems determined to release the Rhee/Parker Tentative Agreement by mid-September despite its many legal flaws.

On August 1, the American Federation of Teachers secured a six-page legal opinion at the direction of the WTU Executive Board. Attorney Jackson delivered the legal analysis to WTU Board members a week and a half ago. It refers to the WTU contract information packet, which was disseminated in recent informational sessions. This packet indicates that seniority would no longer play a role in hiring, excessing, or placement of DC teachers in both the Red or Green tiers (page 12). The legal analysis, titled “Seniority for Teachers,” specifically states, “this proposal replaces teachers rights with automatic termination in the Green system and eventual termination in the Red system.” The analysis notes “DC teachers would lose their ‘career status’ as tenured professionals and the characteristics of tenure” and concludes, “this proposal suggests a quick method to terminate teachers without due process.” Further, the legal analysis reveals that under the proposal, “excessing would seem almost always to lead to termination. Although excessed teachers could be placed in another position, this happens only if there is mutual consent between a teacher and a principal. If mutual consent cannot be reached what happens to the excessed teacher depends on whether he is in the Red system or Green system. If he is in the Red system, he has three options: early retirement with full benefits if he has more than twenty years of creditable service, a $25,000 buy out, a one-year grace period including salary benefits to secure another position. If the excessed teacher is in the Green system, however, he is automatically separated from the school system.” However, if the excessed teacher in the Red system does not find a job within one year, he will then be terminated.

Given that six hundred DC teachers were excessed this school year, many argue that we are headed down a very slippery slope should we choose to support this proposal. Should DC teachers swap pay raises for job protections? Whatever our members decide, it is imperative that teachers have as much information as possible before making an informed decision on whether to vote yes or no on a tentative agreement. "

Rina Okonkwo writes about the genesis of corruption in Nigeria:

When did corruption in Nigeria begin? In the words of a colonial government report of 1947, “The African’s background and outlook on public morality is very different from the present day Briton. The African in the public service seeks to further his own financial interest.” The colonial report concluded that only public opinion could deal with corruption. The problem was that there was no responsible public opinion to check corruption in Nigeria.1

From as early as 1947, commissions of inquiry were held to investigate cases of corruption. The purpose of the inquiries was to expose wrong -doing and to punish the culprits.

Today, we hear much of the rampant corruption at the local government level. As early as 1955, just seventeen months after the inception of Igbo-Etiti District Council in May 1954, the colonial government held an inquiry into the affairs of the Council. The inquiry judged that the “conduct of the Council’s affairs had become a public scandal.” The colonial officer who conducted the inquiry, FP Cobb, noted, “public indignation was widespread and strong.” 2 The public was outraged at the corrupt behaviour of their representatives.

The report on Igbo-Etiti District Council revealed that there was ‘systematic corruption” in the appointment and promotion of staff and in the awarding of contracts. Bribes of L80 to L100 were demanded for unnecessary appointments. The brother of the Secretary to the District Council was hired above a more qualified applicant. In one case, a man paid a L400 bribe to secure a post and was never refunded his money when he did not get the job.

Contractors routinely paid ten percent of the value of the contract as bribe. The contracts were not awarded to the lowest bidder or to the most experienced or competent persons. At the end of its first seventeen months of existence, the Igbo-Etiti District Council was L6000 in debt. There was great wasting of public money due to “gross dishonesty in handling council affairs.”3

The local government councils have continued to be notorious for corruption. Why do such grassroots organizations attract such widespread graft? The people are often not prepared to undertake public office. They have no training in the procedures and ethics of public service. They have minimal education. There is poor supervision of the affairs 9of the Local Government Councils. The history of corruption in local government councils can show no change for the better.

In 1956, the Foster-Sutton Tribunal investigated the Premier of the Eastern Region, Nnamdi Azikiwe for his involvement in the affairs of African Continental Bank (ACB). Under the code of conduct for ministers, a government officer was required to relinquish his holdings in private business when he assumed public office. The Foster-Sutton Tribunal felt that Zik did not severe his connections to the bank when he became a Minister. The Tribunal believed that Zik continued to use his influence to further the interests of ACB.

Zik, his family, and the Zik Group of Companies were the principal shareholders of the African Continental Bank. ACB loaned over L163, 000 to the Zik Group of Companies at low interest. The Zik group did not have to repay the loans until 1971. ACB was a distressed bank. The new registrar of banks in 1952 refused to grant ACB a license. Attempts to find partners for the bank in Britain failed because of the insolvency of the bank.
In the words of a colonial government official, “Were a UK minister to be involved in a series of transactions the result of which public funds were used to support an otherwise shaky institution in which he was directly interested, he would be forced to leave public life.”4 Why did not the colonial government prosecute Zik for his failure to observe the code of conduct for government officers? The colonial correspondence revealed that the government supported the NCNC as the only party to embrace national unity. Without Zik, the NCNC would collapse. The national interest of the country demanded that Zik continue as leader of the party.5

The Governor of the Eastern Region Sir Clement Pleass further observed, “The exercise of public power for private profit is established in the East.” “The aim of the colonial government was not to establish a standard of honesty in public life. Only time and education can do that.” “A number of sensible people realized that Zik had done harm in the East in the last two years, but the mass of the people, ignorant and uneducated, voted him back to power.”6

When Zik called for a general election in 1957, as an alternative to resigning in the face of the findings of the Foster-Sutton Tribunal, the people gave him their support. The Economist observed that Nigerians had a “sunny and tolerant mentality” towards corruption.7 The colonial officer hoped that “Eventually sufficiently honest and enlightened people will be thrown up to rebuild the prosperity and good government of the region.”8

Obafemi Awolowo, the first premier of the Western Region, was found guilty of corruption by the Coker Commission in 1962. In 1954, the Western Region Marketing Board had L6.2 million. By May 1962, it had to exist on overdrafts amounting to over L2.5 million. A loan of L6.7 million was made to the National Investment and Properties Co., Ltd. for building projects out of which only L500, 000 was ever re-paid. The Western Region Finance Corporation and the West Nigeria Development Corporation also received loans of millions of pounds, which were never re-paid. The Coker Commission found Awolowo responsible for the all the ills of the Western Region Marketing Board, and Awolowo “without a doubt has failed to adhere to the standards of conduct which are required for persons holding such a post.”9

The First Republic, with Zik as the President, was marked by widespread corruption. Government officials looted public funds with impunity. Federal Representative and Minister of Aviation, KO Mbadiwe, flaunted his wealth by building a palace in his hometown. When asked where he had gotten the money to build such a mansion, KO replied, ”From sources known and unknown.” Minister of Finance Chief FS Okotie- Eboh responded to charges of accumulation of wealth by government officers by quoting from the Bible, “To those that have, more shall be given. From those that do not have, shall be taken even the little they have.”10

Azikiwe did not surround himself with men of good character. Chinua Achebe maintained that the political thought of both Awolowo and Azikiwe was based on politics for material gain. Achebe quoted from the autobiographies of the two men to show that making money and living well were primary goals in life for both our nationalist leaders. “If we were a more discerning people, we should not have trusted them with our lives even in the fifties and sixties.”11


The popular acceptance and even admiration for corruption was highlighted in Chinua Achebe’s novel about the politicians of the First Republic, A Man of the People. “The people had become even more cynical than their leaders and were apathetic into the bargain. “Let them eat,’ was the people’s opinion . . . It may be your turn to eat tomorrow.” 12

To be continued.

There was something buried way down in the news, under Libya going up in flames, the Middle East collapsing, oil exploding in price, budget battles in DC, a looming Democratic-government shutdown, rioting and protesting in Wisconsin, pirates shooting American citizens off Somalia, and the economic forecasts being seriously downgraded. You probably missed it, and that's probably exactly what Democratic President Obama wanted you do to, because if you found out that he had just abandoned another important campaign promise and decided to let special interest groups legalize gay marriage at the federal level, you and many other moderate voters might be a little upset.

Via The Fix, I read Attorney General Eric Holder's announcement that the Justice Department would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act. The DOMA, for those of you who don't know, is an act of legislation that was passed in 1996 by the Republican Congress with considerable support from the Democrats and then signed into law by Democratic President Bill Clinton. It is an important act which candidate Obama said he would defend, but now President Obama is no longer going to. Although he himself is married to one woman and his wife would likely get pretty mad if he re-defined marriage to allow him to marry other men and women or animals or whatever, he is abandoning his stated principles and has decided to no longer fight in court for his views and beliefs.

In a practical sense, it means that lawsuits will soon go forward, unchecked by the executive of our nation who is supposed to execute and defend the laws of our nation, that will work to challenge the constitutionality of DOMA in courts that are favorable to liberal views.

In my humble opinion, Section 2 of the Act is clearly constitutional- it excludes same-sex marriages from the Full Faith and Credit Clause in language that quotes from the Constitution itself, which is important because otherwise one liberal state could have a single judge make it legal and thereby make it legal over our entire nation, while Section 3 is also constitutional, in that it defines the word marriage to mean a legal union between one man and one woman, which is the accepted definition of marriage since the beginning of time. In my opinion, there isn't a whole lot that lawsuits could attack, unless they feel that the language in the Constitution itself is 'unconstitutional' (only a matter of time until liberal judges start arguing that) or that the word marriage doesn't mean the union of one man and one woman and perhaps means anything at all (one rock and one man, three women and one man, one man and one man, three man and three dogs, a million men and a million women, etc).

Obama's stance on this issue is one more indication that when you put someone in the White House who believes in everything, you put someone in the White House who believes in nothing. He is an empty suit of a man, weak and unsure of his own beliefs and unwilling to defend or fight for that which he believes is right. America deserved to be punished for the mistake of electing him, it's just too bad that my kids and grandkids are also being punished too for voters stupidity in electing him President.

Featuring Candi Peterson, blogger in residence

Attached is a copy of the email that I sent to Mr. George Bordenave, AFT/WTU National Representative on behalf of WTU members. This email was copied to WTU President Parker, General Vice President Saunders, and members of the WTU Executive Board and Board of Trustees. Six WTU E Board members have joined along with me in this request.

August 15 , 2008

Dear Mr. Bordenave: I am writing to you in your official capacity as an AFT/WTU National Representative. It is my request that the 'legal opinion' secured by the American Federation of Teachers on behalf of the WTU be released to all WTU members via mail as soon as possible. In addition, I would like to request that the letters sent to President George Parker also be released to our WTU members as well.

Given that President Parker has advised local news sources that the tentative agreement will be provided to our membership by mid September for ratification, it is WTU's obligation to provide our WTU members with all of the information necessary to make an informed decision as possible. It is my request that your office provide me with an answer within 48 business hours and by no later than next Tuesday. Thanks for your attention to this matter and I await your timely response.

Candi Peterson
WTU Board of Trustee member, WTU Delegate, WTU Member

Often overlooked on this blog and others is foreign policy. Those who follow the War on Terror in Iraq and Afghanistan usually only do so as a reflection on US domestic policy. Events in North Korea or Georgia serve only to give citizens of the United States a chance to test responses by political actors. Few really truly appreciate that importance of foreign policy, but it was foreign affairs that dragged our nation into the War on Terror, the Cold War, Vietnam, Korea, WWII, WWI, etc. It was foreign policy that led to crisis in the Balkans, Rwanda, Somalia, etc. It was foreign policy that opened up markets to our products.

Walter Russell Mead never losses sight of foreign policy and its importance and today put together an excellent article that surveys the major challenges facing the world. Here are some highlights from his article Things Fall Apart, via The American Interest:

...There are times when the ideas of the world’s rulers and the institutions through which they govern are adequate to the needs of the era, and there are times–like the present–when they are not. It is not just the Obama administration that seems mentally and even culturally unprepared to understand much less to guide the events now sweeping through the world. In Brussels, Beijing, Moscow, Tokyo and Delhi — to say nothing of Washington – leaders seem equally clueless, equally committed to outmoded, inaccurate approaches to the issues of our time...

Europe

...The European Union is perhaps the most feckless of the world’s power centers. Its currency is built on a foundation of hopeful assumptions that haven’t panned out: for example that countries as disparate in culture and situation as Greece, Germany, Finland, Ireland and Italy can all live happily under a common currency. There has been no shortage of warning signs for the last decade: there was no secret about the housing bubbles in Ireland and Spain. The falsity of Greek statistics was well known, as were the imprudent habits of its governments and the dysfunctional nature of its economic culture....

...Meanwhile, Europe continues its relentless failure to manage urgent challenges at home and abroad. The Europeans are unwilling (and in some cases, unable) to make the investments that would keep NATO strong; the continuing refusal to take Turkey’s application for EU membership seriously further and decisively marginalizes Europe in the Middle East. Wishful thinking cannot substitute for policy when it comes to the question of immigration, and Europe’s deepening demographic crisis ensures not only a future of population decline but of economic decline and welfare state bankruptcy as well...

China

...Europe is not the only place where leaders don’t measure up to the problems. Although China is not as democratically governed as Europe, on the whole the technocrats of Beijing have handled the last twenty years better than the bureaucrats of the EU. Nevertheless Beijing is confronting a confluence of economic, environmental and social challenges that pose problems which even China’s leadership is unlikely to overcome. Arguments about China’s currency undervaluation, while real, miss the main point: Whether China revalues the renminbi or not, its model of rapid growth based on manufactured exports is reaching fundamental limits... Rising raw material prices combined with consumer fatigue in the malls is squeezing the profitability of Chinese industry just as workers are demanding higher wages. Meanwhile, food price inflation in China is triggering mass anxiety and the financial system appears vulnerable to the kind of bubbles that have wreaked such havoc in the West....

China’s problems go beyond economics. Chinese public opinion, smarting from what it sees as two centuries of humiliation, and now elated by (overblown) press reports of China’s rise, wants its government to follow a more assertive and even aggressive foreign policy. Disputes with Japan, Korea and Vietnam over offshore islands stir deep currents of emotion, and public opinion judges the Chinese government by its ability to prevail in these disputes.

...Looming environmental disasters threaten China’s future, with issues of water, air quality and the usual environmental devastation that accompanies communist governance on a massive scale already taking a toll. The consequences of the one-child policy threaten a demographic disaster as an aging Chinese population will place a growing burden on a society not yet affluent enough to support it...

Russia

Emerging from the sordid shadows of the Soviet Union, Russia faced four great challenges. It needed to come to terms with the horrors and failures of the past, recognizing the enormous evil that Russia both suffered and inflicted during the Soviet period... It has failed, and Russian life and culture remain poisoned by the residue of unrepented horrors and uncomprehended crimes.

...Second, Russia needed to build a modern and competent state that in turn could provide the framework for a new economy and a new society... but with every passing year the critical failure of the Putin presidency to build the stable institutions and solidify the rule of law that a genuinely strong Russian state would require becomes more clear — and more costly....

...The third task, of building the kind of capitalist economy that could provide its citizens with dignity and affluence, has also been left undone. There is no one who thinks that the rule of law is secure in Russia, or that investors (foreign or domestic) have any real security for their investments....

...The fourth task, of finding a suitable world role for a new Russia, has also been decisively botched. Russia has no real friends anywhere in the world; there are those it can bully and those (a much greater number) that it can’t...

Mead also touches on Japan ("a pale shadow of its former self"), India (scandals, poverty, political chaos), Israel, Turkey, etc. His conclusion is one that I also echo:

I hope and pray that the generations of today will not know the sick despair of September 1939; if we are to avoid that kind of fate under even uglier circumstances, we need to start demanding more of our leaders — and of ourselves.

For those interested, check out some books by Walter Russell Mead such as Special Providence: American Foreign Policy and How It Changed the World, God and Gold: Britain, America, and the Making of the Modern World (Vintage), or Walter Russell Mead.

Image via Wikipedia

Guest post by my student Michael C. This talented young eighth grader has a wit that I love and I thought you would too. Here, he takes a chance to write about his favorite game in his "opinion post." See my notes at the end.


by Michael C. 8th grade student, Westwood Schools.


Why is it that we kill the green pigs in "Angry Birds"? Some might say that it is because it is fun, but I have found that there is hardly any fun involved. Just anger at the pigs. What have they done to us? They have not done anything. 


Yet we often become addicted to causing their death. It can not be that we want to help the birds. If we wanted to help them then we would arm them with real weapons, but we launch them to their death instead. 


I believe that it is the frustration they cause us. They are like a puzzle we can not solve. Every waking moment we spend that they are still alive makes us so angry we want to destroy the device that gives them life, but our iphone or ipad is to expensive to destroy, so we destroy the pigs. 


It frustrates us they look so stupid. Such stupid things should be easy to kill, but they are so hard to kill. This makes us very angry. When we fail to kill them, they grin as stupidly as possible. This makes the failure worse, because they look even stupider. This makes us feel stupid, but we suddenly realize something. 


We are not stupid. The game is! We should not have bought it in the first place. But it is to late, for we will never forget the green pigs.


A note from Mrs. Davis


Students should have the chance to do all kinds of writing. Essay writing is not all there is. First person writing in blog style is important. At this point, this student has written three posts and is being challenged to find his voice and have an opinion. We're not working on hyperlinking or other skills, just having a voice and writing in a way that engages the reader. 


At first, I was going to mention about using the word "stupid" but it is interesting. With the way he ends up with the piece, I actually think it is making fun of the game and serves as a repetition of sorts just like we repeat the bird throwing silliness. Thought you would enjoy this.  Great work, Michael C. (thanks to his parents for giving me permission to share this with the world. I hope they let him create his own blog.)

One of my brothers recently was invited by the Michigan House Republican Strategic Task Force on Education to come and discuss the long range vision of education policy in the state of Michigan. This special task force composed of Republicans has been touring the state looking for both successes and failures in Michigan's education system. It was on the west side of the state and after talking to my brother about how it went, I have the following comments to pass on to you.

What the task force does is get input from parent teacher associations, student council members, administrator, teachers, board members, and students, from public schools, special education, alternative education, charter and private schools. The end goal is to develop ideas on how to improve the quality of the education system here in Michigan.

The result of these task force meetings is predictable and an indication of everything that is wrong with education in our state. Three hours of discussion produced all the wrong policy suggestions for education, suggestions politicians should not consider. The following account is a way for you to see how policy is created in our state and helpful in developing your own opinions about the future of education.

The first step in the discussion was to answer the question "What is the purpose of education?" Do that right now in your head- think about what you want the education system in our state to look like and do. Is it prepare students for college? Prepare them for future jobs? Mold good citizens? Give all students a broad base of knowledge? Or did you, like most people at this forum, say "everything!" The mission of education needs to be focused, clear, and consistent, and it can not be everything to everybody all at the same time. There is only enough time in the day, only enough resources to spend, and our state needs to think long and hard about what they want the goal of education to be.

In my opinion, our school system should move to a two-tier system- K-8 the goal is to provide a broad range of knowledge for all students, and 9-12 students will either go into a college-prep track or a job-preparation track. That's just my opinion though.

The next question the group that came to this task force meeting was asked is "what are we doing well right now in education?" Think about this question. Education is doing a lot of things well- babysitting students 8 hours a day, running great sports programs, educating a lot of top students, running a good special needs program, helping students learn how to think, giving students opportunities, offering many innovative learning styles, and nationally our K-5 program is the best in the world.

The next question the task force had us think about was "what do you want the education system to look like 10 years from now". I think the overall consensus of the task force was that we want education to do more to teach students critical thinking skills, to learn how to be innovative and creative, to teach entrepreneurship and job creation, and to have students focus more on the career paths that they are headed into after school rather than just focus on school.

The last step is the most important step, and the step that resulted in disaster for this task force and that produced information the Michigan House Republican Strategic Task Force on Education should utterly disregard. The question that was posed to us was "how do we build on what we are doing well to make our education system look like we want it to look 10 years from now?"

Here is the information the task force received, and it is a good lesson on why sometimes special interest groups should not be the ones designing the policies in our nation. The task force was told to drop all standardized testing and to just hand the money to districts with no more accountability. The task force was told that one way to increase the education levels in our state was to give more funding to teachers, have them work shorter hours, and give them more training. The task force was told that students should teach classes, as if they were subject matter and teaching experts. The task force produced a lot of garbage ideas, and in every hearing they conducted they pretty much got the same garbage.

This is why the state should not be trusted with running any sort of service industry. The failures in education are the failures of government planning and funding. The failures of education result from this idea that bureaucrats working in distant locations can issue rules and decrees and that will somehow make things better. And the failures of education and this process demonstrate that a system that ignores values and character will produce a valueless result.

The way to fix education is to increase choice, increase personal responsibility, increase local control, and increase the focus on value and character education. Students need to take classes that emphasise creativity and entrepreneurship and they need to buy into the system by making them realize just how much it is costing them to go to school (or at least their parents need to realize what the cost is for education and then demand the results to justify the cost). Standardized testing needs to be increased, but the information that comes from these tests needs to be disseminated throughout the system and analyzed and studied by everyone- teachers, students, and administrators.

Education needs to run more like a business, with the service provided being learning and the learning delivered by skilled professionals. It can not run like a government agency, answering to dozens of constituents and staffed by bureaucrats.

Please take a moment to look up your state Representative and pass on your thoughts to them about education and the types of policies that you would like to see put in place in this state. If you don't speak up, they will have only heard from others, and those others are pushing groups like that Michigan House Republican Strategic Task Force on Education to put in place policies that will only erode the educational quality of our great state.

UPDATE: Here is a story about the event... notice the utter lack of anything productive or useful mentioned in this article.

Funny how fast things change. I'm finding that some incredible information and graphics are coming to me via Tumblr (see the Beginners Guide to Tumblr I produced a few weeks a go.)

I sent out this quote yesterday:

In the nonstop tsunami of global information, librarians provide us with floaties and teach us to swim.

Linton Weeks, Washington Post (via mountainplainslibraryassociation)(via infoneer-pulse)

My posts from Tumblr automatically go to Twitter. So, then I got a tweet back this morning from Diane McKenzie, librarian extraordinaire in Hong Kong @dimac4:

.@coolcatteacher something I whipped up with inspiration from you http://t.co/qIoUTLC (with many other things to do as well!)

Thus was born the graphic above. Ah, how fast information moves and mashes up. I find that the graphics and videos often spread faster than plain text but perhaps that isn't the case.

There is no doubt that librarians have been taking a hit lately. I think that more librarians like Diane need to be telling their story: what are we doing? Why are we important? What are the amazing things happening through our work? Tumblr is just one way to do that. Flickr is another way. Hey, even youtube.

I believe that the people in a profession who embrace social media to speak the message of what they do should be hailed as heroes. Right now, social media mavens  ARE the media and influence public opinion much more than we'd like to think.

The very life and soul of a profession are now caught up in the social media megaphones lifted by the rank and file.  If your profession doesn't encourage the "average" person to speak out in positive ways then your profession may be headed for trouble.

If librarians provide people with floaties and teach them to swim, then social media mavens have the power to build islands in the middle of the ocean out of a Tweet. The tide of public opinion is at their fingertips and it is time to start taking notice that social media is Media.

Via the Volokh Conspiracy, there is this note from Stephen Henderson, Deputy Editorial Page Editor of the Detroit Free Press, who wrote in to note that Barack Obama gave a fairly detailed answer a few weeks ago to the Free Press editorial team on the question of what kind of Supreme Court Justice he would want to appoint. Here is the passage I want to focus on:

...the roles of the courts is to protect people who don't have a voice. That's the special role of that institution. The vulnerable, the minority, the outcast, the person with the unpopular idea, the journalist who is shaking things up. That's inherently the role of the court...

So, in Barry's opinion, and mind you, this is the opinion of a trained constitutional scholar (in his words) and possible future President of the United States, the inherent role of the court in our political system is not to be above the law, not to be fair and honest, not to rule based on the Constitution and the law, and not to blindly protect the justice of the United States- no, Barry thinks the role of the court is to protect minorities, unpopular people (liberals), poor people, and journalists. I may lack a degree from an Ivy League school, but I disagree with that statement and feel he is wrong.

Founded by Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, recently profiled in the FT, NOI Polls seeks to address a knowledge gap in opinion research within Nigeria.The company states that:

The lack of adequate information often hampers decision-making by both businesses and governments. Although there is a large domestic market and an emerging middle class in Nigeria, most businesses operating in the Nigerian environment know that it is difficult to assess market demand or even consumer preferences. Similarly, government policy-makers are often unable to ascertain genuine public opinion on important economic or social issues as well as important government policy changes, reforms or legislative actions.

This opinion article appeared in the Cornell Daily Sun and explains why students from Cornell University protested Rhee's speech.  

Searching for Facts image from Bigstock.

Social media impacts lives. When you have someone in a controversial matter like the wrong thing or say the wrong thing it can cause a snowball that can influence and even harm.

I've seen this first hand. I know people who've lost jobs, seen marriages destroyed, and organizations teeter on the brink of nonexistence through poorly thought-out likes, unfriending, and comments. Perhaps it is because I live in a small town where there are no secrets.

It makes me angry when people who should know better casually post or comment and assume things that just aren't true. So, I'm going to get these lies out on the table. Every one of these 11 has a example  that I have personally witnessed. This is real and real life. Please wake up and understand what social media is and is not.

#11 Social media is free.
Everything comes with a price. Facebook is funded by advertising. In the advertising model they need to sell advertising and need to have happy advertisers. To have happy advertisers the advertisements need to "work" so Facebook must make sure that the ads served on their site hit the proper target. Good companies know the ages, genders, and even more details about their target market. This means that as you use Facebook you are being tracked through the use of cookies (a tiny file on your computer that stores information) and your profile data (all that data you give your "friends" also belongs to Facebook.)

Although the FTC has now required Facebook to allow users to "opt in" for Facebook privacy changes, you are giving up quite a bit of freedom as you surf, particularly when you log into Facebook. What I've seen happen to students is that if a student surfs to a somewhat inappropriate site or goes to a site that they would never go to for research projects, it can effect the kind of ads they start seeing on their page.

Ads on my Facebook page today.

So, for example, a child logs into Facebook with parents over shoulder - now the child is getting seedy ads or things showing on their page that aren't age appropriate because of some iffy searching habits from earlier in the week. Parents should notice the ads coming up on Facebook pages because it tells you a lot about your child's interests. The same is true for us adults.

The result is that the ads that show on your Facebook page tell a lot about you. Shown to the right are the ads I have on my facebook page today. First of all, I'm a coupon clipper and a Mom and I do shop online - so I have two ads relating to the fact that I shop. Another ad is for an event in Tallahassee - I do like cultural events and I live close to there. Finally, I am a bit of a health conscious person and I have recently shopped for some new vitamins online and do buy green matcha tea online. I have acupuncture atlanta showing up. See how this works?

Of particular interest is an article that will be in Forbes magazine on December 5, 2011 (Facebook's new advertising model: You) that talks about how your likes of a product will now be shown in ads for your FRIENDS. So, a movie ad may show a friend who has liked that ad. Or, a store may actually show someone who "likes" that store. Their research shows that a person is more likely to remember an ad with the name of a friend in it! I see a whole new set of privacy concerns coming with this advertising model.

Just how deeply they will dig into your shopping and buying habits or if this is just being generated off of likes is anyone's guess. Personally, I don't want my "endorsement" on anything without my permission. Just because I buy it doesn't mean I "endorse" it. I buy male sports garments for my 16 year old athlete, for goodness sakes - I could only imagine how that would turn out.


#10 Social media is just social

Jane Hart's Top 100 Tools for Learning survey results

Social media has a real impact in all areas of our life. Professional, personal, educational. In fact Twitter was listed as the top educational resource for the last two years in Jane Hart's annual poll of the top 100 tools for learning.

You may use a website socially but if you go home and make a comment about a bad day (See how to lose your job in 140 characters or less) or obnoxious client or sucky boss or give out private information and everyone knows who you're talking about you will have very real consequences in your life that can extend to your pocketbook, where you live, your job and all aspects of your life. The sooner people realize that social media is life media the better off we'll all be.

Likewise if you learn something powerful or make a connection, you can reap big dividends in your life both financially, personally, and in positive learning experiences for your students.

#9 People understand context.
Imagine kids doing a project about cyberbullying and they take a photo and upload to their Facebook to grab a screenshot and film (instead of using photoshop.) It gets uploaded in school, looks like an awful event, and everyone thinks it is really happening. The students take it down but the damage is done.

Every photo you use should be real. Be careful about using your social media sites for a "project" especially on a controversial topic. If it isn't real, don't upload it. Period. Don't experiment in places where you can do permanent damage. This is why people studying to be doctors operate on cadavers not real people as they begin.

I know a student who posted a fake status update to "see what would happen." Another student posted an April fool's joke that his house was robbed only to have the neighbors show up at their door 10 minutes after the post was made from his cell phone.

This is especially important for teachers to tell students if you allow the use of social media at your school.

#8 Profiles are accurate
People use photos from 10 years a go. They lie about their age. They may even lie about who they say they are or what they are doing for a living. Be a smidge wary when you first "meet" people particularly if you don't "know" them and decided to friend or follow because of mutual "friends." (See #2.)

I have students who are presenting at the Global Education conference who are filming an expose called "Cute little liars" where they created a fake profile and friended kids they knew to be under 13. Over half the students accepted the request. They are doing investigative reporting to uncover why.

Facebook Terms of Service

Right now, people can make fake profiles and enter fake data, but interestingly, here in the US, the Department of Justice wants to make it a federal crime to violate a website's terms of service. If that is the case, they may have to lock up half of the 10-12 year olds I know who are all lying to get a Facebook profile. (In my opinion, this is a slippery slope- who is watching those who write terms of service to make sure that they are fair to users and how many users take the time to read the TOS anyway? They are important they are just so long the average person doesn't read or understand them.)




#7 People not on that site don't see your stuff
In fact, I've seen things people posted printed out and handed around. Just because someone is not on Facebook or Twitter does not mean they cannot see your stuff. Someone can print it out or screenshot it and everyone can see it as it is handed around at the local gas station. The fact that someone is social media illiterate gives you no protection at all from their prying eyes. (See also #2.)

Reporting requires a Facebook account.

#6 You don't HAVE to have a page on their site to be treated fairly.
In fact, you do if you're going to protect your identity. I had a student here at Westwood who didn't want to get on Facebook. However, someone on Facebook with lots of pornographic links snagged her photo from a project and uploaded it as his profile picture.

She had named her picture her first name so it turned up in google search when her name was typed. Facebook would not let her report it and would not respond to her until she had a profile for a month with multiple pictures of her on it proving that she was that person in order for them to get the other person to stop using her photo. In effect, you have no right to complain about content unless you are on that site and a "real person" to them.

It says that you can have your friend report it and her friends did report it. However, they said because my student wasn't on Facebook and didn't have any photos of herself uploaded, that they couldn't verify that those photos were actually stolen from someone because she didn't exist to Facebook.

I heard an 80 year old woman call into Leo Laporte "the Tech guy" complaining that people were making things up about her on Facebook and his answer was that if she wasn't online and didn't use the Internet that there wasn't really anything she could do about it.

#5 You have a license to your work
Screen snipping software comes with every operating system I know of. It is easy to take photos. It is easy to PhotoShop off watermarks. Licenses should be respected, yes, but know that there are always pirates. It is no reason to run to the hills but remember that if you don't want it stolen that you should take some steps to protect it - especially photos of you and your children. Those are photos that you may have problems with people taking (at least I would.) I take steps to protect those photos.


Also, if you use just about any site that lets you upload photos, you may have lost the license already. For example, did you know that on Facebook according to their Terms of Service:

1. "For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy and application settings: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it. 

2. When you delete IP content, it is deleted in a manner similar to emptying the recycle bin on a computer. However, you understand that removed content may persist in backup copies for a reasonable period of time (but will not be available to others)."

This was brought to light when a woman who shot a picture and video of a shuttle launch from the air was surprised to see her video used without permission. They had contacted Twitpic, the place she uploaded the content, an according to their terms of service if Twitpic gives permission - they can have it without contacting the user. Sites like flickr support and have licenses but remember that you may not have the license you think you have if the terms of service claim rights for the service.

#4 Your password is secure
Many people use the same password for everything. Some websites have protection measures in place and others do not. You are only secure as the least secure website you have used that password on. You should have unique passwords for banking, Facebook, and email in my opinion. So what if it is a pain. What is your identity and reputation worth?

See also Lifehacker's Guide to Sniffing Out Passwords and Cookies (and how to protect yourself against it.)  If you're not logging in using https, your password is easy to intercept. Also make sure your web browser is updated. Many sites don't support https and if they do not, your password can be easily intercepted. (One suggestion worth taking in the article is: "Everywhere is that it only redirects sites in its list, so if you'd like to be able to redirect any site to HTTPS, you may want to check out Force-TLS for Firefox or HTTPS Everywhere for Chrome. Both of these extensions allow you to add new sites to the automatic HTTPS redirect.")

#3 Delete will delete something
Delete doesn't really happen. Some companies (like Facebook) keep the original photo and just delete the link to your account. The permalink is still there. Plus you have the fact that files when deleted are still there - either in the recycle bin on on that hard drive or on a backup. Someone on this planet can always get to it.

Friends photo from Bigstock

#2 Your friends are really friends
Just because Facebook calls them friends doesn't mean that they are. If you tick the wrong person off, they'll screenshot your "private" rant faster than you can open and shut your back door.

A companion to this statement is that "your friends friends are really their friends." Overfriending is a problem and many people got online and started friending. Although they may be more selective now, people tend to not want to unfriend people. Just because you have mutual friends doesn't mean a thing. If you accept on the basis of "mutual friends" you are leaving your vetting up to people who just may not care or were uneducated at some point about how to friend.

#1 You have privacy settings
Yes, you can "lock down" your account, but truly nothing is really private. If anyone besides you is on your page, you still have all those anonymous administrators or hackers who can get to your account through the back door or a security hole. Sure, set your private settings and "lock it down" but remember that if you don't want it shared that you shouldn't share it.

Plus, it is easy to cross post from one platform to another. You may have protected tweets on Twitter but if you cross post to Facebook and are set to Friends of Friends EVERYONE can read your tweets.

Nothing is private if it is online.

Why use social media at all?
All this being said, I am a huge social media fan. My life has been improved by social media. I have received book contracts, new friends from around the world, new best practices for my classroom, and trips to incredible places. Social media has been a very positive influence in my life. I've had my own share of gaffe's and mess ups -- that is a fact!

But I think it is time to wake up and realize that this stuff is for real and that offhand comments can crush and hurt people.

Be careful what you say especially when it is in writing or electronic format. A like can have just as much impact as if you said it yourself. Like means you agree in the eyes of many because of the word that Facebook chose to use.

From the WSJ comes this impressive and timely post about how we USED to deal with the pirate issue compared to how we deal with it now, and it once again shows that as we try to be more politically correct and more fair, we create a world that is both more unfair and less right. With some editing, here is the article (try this link too), by Bret Stephens:

Year-to-date, Somalia-based pirates have attacked more than 90 ships, seized more than 35, and currently hold 17. Some 280 crew members are being held hostage, and two have been killed. Billions of dollars worth of cargo have been seized; millions have been paid in ransom. A multinational naval force has attempted to secure a corridor in the Gulf of Aden, through which 12% of the total volume of seaborne oil passes, and U.S., British and Indian naval ships have engaged the pirates by force. Yet the number of attacks keeps rising. Why?

The view of senior U.S. military officials seems to be, in effect, that there is no controlling legal authority. Title 18, Chapter 81 of the United States Code establishes a sentence of life in prison for foreigners captured in the act of piracy. But, crucially, the law is only enforceable against pirates who attack U.S.-flagged vessels, of which today there are few.

What about international law? Article 110 of the U.N.'s Law of the Sea Convention -- ratified by most nations, but not by the U.S. -- enjoins naval ships from simply firing on suspected pirates. Instead, they are required first to send over a boarding party to inquire of the pirates whether they are, in fact, pirates. A recent U.N. Security Council resolution allows foreign navies to pursue pirates into Somali waters -- provided Somalia's tottering government agrees -- but the resolution expires next week.

As for the idea of laying waste, Stephen Decatur-like, to the pirate's prospering capital port city of Eyl, this too would require U.N. authorization. Yesterday, a shippers' organization asked NATO to blockade the Somali coast. NATO promptly declined.

Then there is the problem of what to do with captured pirates. No international body similar to the old Admiralty Courts is currently empowered to try pirates and imprison them. The British foreign office recently produced a legal opinion warning Royal Navy ships not to take pirates captive, lest they seek asylum in the U.K. or otherwise face repatriation in jurisdictions where they might be dealt with harshly, in violation of the British Human Rights Act.

In March 2006, the U.S. Navy took 11 pirates prisoner, six of whom were injured. Not wanting to set a precedent for trying pirates in U.S. courts, the State Department turned to Kenya to do the job. The injured spent weeks aboard the USS Nassau, enjoying First World medical care.

All this legal exquisiteness stands in contrast to what was once a more robust attitude. Pirates, said Cicero, were hostis humani generis -- enemies of the human race -- to be dealt with accordingly by their captors. Tellingly, Cicero's notion of piracy vanished in the Middle Ages; its recovery traces the recovery of the West itself.

By the 18th century, pirates knew exactly where they stood in relation to the law. A legal dictionary of the day spelled it out: "A piracy attempted on the Ocean, if the Pirates are overcome, the Takers may immediately inflict a Punishment by hanging them up at the Main-yard End; though this is understood where no legal judgment may be obtained." Severe as the penalty may now seem (albeit necessary, since captured pirates were too dangerous to keep aboard on lengthy sea voyages), it succeeded in mostly eliminating piracy by the late 19th century -- a civilizational achievement no less great than the elimination of smallpox a century later.

Today, by contrast, a Navy captain who takes captured pirates aboard his state-of-the-art warship will have a brig in which to keep them securely detained, and instantaneous communications through which he can obtain higher guidance and observe the rule of law.

Yet what ought to be a triumph for both justice and security has turned out closer to the opposite. Instead of greater security, we get the deteriorating situation described above. And in pursuit of a better form of justice -- chiefly defined nowadays as keeping a clear conscience -- we get (at best) a Kenyan jail. "We're humane warriors," says one U.S. Navy officer. "When the pirates put down their RPGs and raise their hands, we take them alive. And that's a lot tougher than taking bodies."

Piracy, of course, is hardly the only form of barbarism at work today: There are the suicide bombers on Israeli buses, the stonings of Iranian women, and so on. But piracy is certainly the most primordial of them, and our collective inability to deal with it says much about how far we've regressed in the pursuit of what is mistakenly thought of as a more humane policy. A society that erases the memory of how it overcame barbarism in the past inevitably loses sight of the meaning of civilization, and the means of sustaining it.

This is a pretty good article, and matches my thoughts on it. I really do think that what we need is an awesome pirate war to clear out all that bothers us- a good old fashioned butt-whooping of real bad guys. Let's see the liberals spin that as a bad thing! As Commodore Decatur declared "We shall offer them liberal and enlightened terms, dictated at the mouths of our cannons." That's how we should take care of this problem. Here is what a liberal is going to say- we're being mean terrorists. William Eaton, commander of the Marines' march to Tripoli, said this about dealing with real terrorists: "There is but one language that can be held to these people, and this is terror." Chew on that.