Sunday, October 25, 2009
My First Appearance on YouTube
I had a wonderful time appearing in this short film about America.
I hope you all like it.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Olbermann interviews Grayson
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
http://congressmanwithguts.com/
My Hero
I will be honest, my congressman is McDermott, my senators are Murray and Cantwell.
I will say that this Congressman Alan Grayson CARES ABOUT ME!!! He represents me.
He is so great, it's almost worth it to move to Florida.
HURRAH FOR ALAN GRAYSON!
BTW, his re-election campaign needs more money: http://congressmanwithguts.com/
Monday, October 19, 2009
Strengths-Based Living I
I first watched Marcus Buckingham on Oprah.com and I learned about what things really constitute our strengths and our weaknesses. His definition is unique and novel, at least to me. A strength is doing a task which lends a sense of invigoration to the one doing the task. A weakness is doing a task which causes negative feelings of loathing and disgust.
For too long in my life, I had been working in the teaching profession where I have had limited freedom to pursue my strengths. Too often I had been burdened down with working my weaknesses. And lately, with No Child Left Behind, the tasks that are my weaknesses have become the emphasis in education. Buckingham says that working more and more on weaknesses is common in most professions, and doing that is the main cause of burnout.
I wanted to get this much down so that I could remember what I am thinking about. I will add more to this thread later.
Non-revocable Choices & Happiness
I really love watching ted.com!
I just finished re-watching a video by Dan Gilbert of Harvard about happiness.
He talked about synthesized happiness. He gave evidence of when a person has an event in their life that they will synthesize happiness in consequence. And the synthesized happiness can happen whether the precipitating event is positive or negative.
I am thinking of certain non-revocable choices in my life. One biggie is that I decided to teach elementary and to stick with it for SOOOOOO many years.
In the past two years, I have looked upon my teaching career with a modicum of regret. By doing that I have denied myself many of the things in life that I really wanted. I have denied myself of happiness.
However, I do have the choice to respond to my past career with happiness. Though I am not sure how that is done, I will think long and hard about how to make that happen. I just bought Dan Gilbert's book, Stumbling on Happiness. I am looking forward to reading it.
And if Dan Gilbert ever reads my blog, I must say, "Dan, I think that you are really cute!" LOL
I just finished re-watching a video by Dan Gilbert of Harvard about happiness.
He talked about synthesized happiness. He gave evidence of when a person has an event in their life that they will synthesize happiness in consequence. And the synthesized happiness can happen whether the precipitating event is positive or negative.
I am thinking of certain non-revocable choices in my life. One biggie is that I decided to teach elementary and to stick with it for SOOOOOO many years.
In the past two years, I have looked upon my teaching career with a modicum of regret. By doing that I have denied myself many of the things in life that I really wanted. I have denied myself of happiness.
However, I do have the choice to respond to my past career with happiness. Though I am not sure how that is done, I will think long and hard about how to make that happen. I just bought Dan Gilbert's book, Stumbling on Happiness. I am looking forward to reading it.
And if Dan Gilbert ever reads my blog, I must say, "Dan, I think that you are really cute!" LOL
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Philosophy and Living
This weekend, I had the most wonderful conversation with a person whom I consider one of the most erudite persons I know, my good friend Carl.
His background is in philosophy, which is a topic I always had eschewed in my early life.
I learned so much from my conversation with him, but as yet, have not internalized the information.
He stated that his life has metamorphosed from a philosophical base to a more quotidian existence. Just takin' care of business.
Conversely, I have discovered that my life has gone from an emphasis on the day-to-day, to more of a philosophical emphasis. Perhaps having more time to think leads me to just think ruminatively. Bring up a new thought, chew on it a while, etc.
I have come to realize that I have informally applied the Socratic method in discussion before, but I find that I want to become more skilled at the method.
I know that others have viewed grasping the Socratic method as a means of dominating a conversation. In my case, it is one method where I can better ascertain what it is I should be doing, and where I should be going.
His background is in philosophy, which is a topic I always had eschewed in my early life.
I learned so much from my conversation with him, but as yet, have not internalized the information.
He stated that his life has metamorphosed from a philosophical base to a more quotidian existence. Just takin' care of business.
Conversely, I have discovered that my life has gone from an emphasis on the day-to-day, to more of a philosophical emphasis. Perhaps having more time to think leads me to just think ruminatively. Bring up a new thought, chew on it a while, etc.
I have come to realize that I have informally applied the Socratic method in discussion before, but I find that I want to become more skilled at the method.
I know that others have viewed grasping the Socratic method as a means of dominating a conversation. In my case, it is one method where I can better ascertain what it is I should be doing, and where I should be going.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Interconnectiveness & Independence
I have just watched a great webcast:
In it, David Logan, a professor in Business at USC, says there are five stages in tribal development: 1] "Life Sucks; 2] "My Life Sucks"; 3] "I Am Great, But You Are Not"; 4] "We're Great"; and 5] "Life Is Great".
There appears a distinct parallel to Kohlberg's stages of moral development, progressing from self-centered to principled. I like that Logan's schema is more applied to daily life, and that one can use it in his interpersonal interactions.
He states that a leader perceives all stages of tribal development, is able to monitor the status of his tribe, and is able to motivate growth up to the next stage of tribal development. Logan states that a person in a tribe can only understand the stage above or below his own status. Thus it is the leader's responsibility to "nudge", as Logan says, the level of the tribe members to the next higher level.
I look back upon my teaching career, and see how this tribal schema applies to where I was at certain times.
At my teaching career zenith, twenty years ago, I was in an organization that was level 4, and we were great. My most effective teaching took place in that situation, and I was my most successful, and I now can see that it was because of the great support I had from my colleagues and superiors. We openly perceived each other's strengths in the organization, and built on, and encouraged those strengths.
One of the very bad situations in my teaching career was in a district when I taught in stages 2 and 3. In one case I could see that the parents inculcated the attitude in their children, "I am great, but you are not", where both the parents and students condescended to me. The administration colluded in allowing the parents and students having control over us of perceived lower status in the "customer driven district." After all, isn't the customer always right? Even when they are wrong, they are right.
My absolute worst teaching situation was in California, another district where the administration bought into the stage 2 belief that "my life sucks", i.e., that the teachers in the educational system are broken (a fallacious assumption from the neo-cons, and the basis of "No Child Left Behind"), and that they were going to autocratically impose an arbitrary new method of pedagogy on all teachers and students. The worst part was that this district indiscriminately recruited teachers, giving us NO disclosure of the pedagogy, myself included, with the assumption that the admin could intimidate all new staff to teach effectively according to the new pedagogy. The admin hired us regardless of whether we agreed with the methods, or willing or able to conform to them; we were simply kept in the dark until we arrived. They treated us like mushrooms: kept us in the dark, and fed us a lot of horse manure. After all, we were probationary, and therefore expendable; that particular district got rid of half of the rate of new hires every year, i.e., hire eighty newbies, get rid of forty, like a quota. This is the form of intimidation the admin put on new hires.
On a daily basis, I remember that the admin reinforced their intimidation to motivate conformity to the new teaching methods. Basically, the threat was, "either do it our way, or we will show you to the highway." The admin took a philosophical base of stage 2, "my life (you teachers screwed up the educational system) sucks" and implemented an instructional strategy based on stage 3, "I (the admin) am great, but you (teachers) are not," i.e., we were perceived as too incompetent to know what to do instructionally.
It makes me shudder to think about this again. The only conclusion I can come to is that the district there was highly dysfunctional. My response was simply, "OK, let me out on the side of the road, thank you."
I will need to think on this schema, and find other applications for this in my personal life.
In it, David Logan, a professor in Business at USC, says there are five stages in tribal development: 1] "Life Sucks; 2] "My Life Sucks"; 3] "I Am Great, But You Are Not"; 4] "We're Great"; and 5] "Life Is Great".
There appears a distinct parallel to Kohlberg's stages of moral development, progressing from self-centered to principled. I like that Logan's schema is more applied to daily life, and that one can use it in his interpersonal interactions.
He states that a leader perceives all stages of tribal development, is able to monitor the status of his tribe, and is able to motivate growth up to the next stage of tribal development. Logan states that a person in a tribe can only understand the stage above or below his own status. Thus it is the leader's responsibility to "nudge", as Logan says, the level of the tribe members to the next higher level.
I look back upon my teaching career, and see how this tribal schema applies to where I was at certain times.
At my teaching career zenith, twenty years ago, I was in an organization that was level 4, and we were great. My most effective teaching took place in that situation, and I was my most successful, and I now can see that it was because of the great support I had from my colleagues and superiors. We openly perceived each other's strengths in the organization, and built on, and encouraged those strengths.
One of the very bad situations in my teaching career was in a district when I taught in stages 2 and 3. In one case I could see that the parents inculcated the attitude in their children, "I am great, but you are not", where both the parents and students condescended to me. The administration colluded in allowing the parents and students having control over us of perceived lower status in the "customer driven district." After all, isn't the customer always right? Even when they are wrong, they are right.
My absolute worst teaching situation was in California, another district where the administration bought into the stage 2 belief that "my life sucks", i.e., that the teachers in the educational system are broken (a fallacious assumption from the neo-cons, and the basis of "No Child Left Behind"), and that they were going to autocratically impose an arbitrary new method of pedagogy on all teachers and students. The worst part was that this district indiscriminately recruited teachers, giving us NO disclosure of the pedagogy, myself included, with the assumption that the admin could intimidate all new staff to teach effectively according to the new pedagogy. The admin hired us regardless of whether we agreed with the methods, or willing or able to conform to them; we were simply kept in the dark until we arrived. They treated us like mushrooms: kept us in the dark, and fed us a lot of horse manure. After all, we were probationary, and therefore expendable; that particular district got rid of half of the rate of new hires every year, i.e., hire eighty newbies, get rid of forty, like a quota. This is the form of intimidation the admin put on new hires.
On a daily basis, I remember that the admin reinforced their intimidation to motivate conformity to the new teaching methods. Basically, the threat was, "either do it our way, or we will show you to the highway." The admin took a philosophical base of stage 2, "my life (you teachers screwed up the educational system) sucks" and implemented an instructional strategy based on stage 3, "I (the admin) am great, but you (teachers) are not," i.e., we were perceived as too incompetent to know what to do instructionally.
It makes me shudder to think about this again. The only conclusion I can come to is that the district there was highly dysfunctional. My response was simply, "OK, let me out on the side of the road, thank you."
I will need to think on this schema, and find other applications for this in my personal life.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Modus Vivendi
I have been a bit tortured over what is the role of the individual in society.
I know that benefaction runs so deep in my soul, that I cannot ignore it.
On the other hand, I have also learned that I need to care well for myself, so that I can be well and prosper.
Recently in my experience, I have been forced to encounter a cadre of devotees to Ayn Rand, whose philosophical constructs served as the basis of the neo-conservative movement. She had an absolutist perspective that believed that an individual had only one obligation: to act for one's own happiness. She also stated that altruism, which she refers to as a tribal phenomenon that human society has outgrown, is a betrayal of self-care.
I believe that a corollary stemming from that indicates that if anyone else suffers while one is providing for his own happiness, then that is just tough for them. Too bad that you are in my way. Is an individual just collateral damage? Circumstantial? I don't believe that any individual deserves being relegated to the status of obstacle rather than a person. Because in their fulfilling their need for happiness, are they not dehumanizing those other than themselves?
I don't think I like that idea much. I have always held to the Hippocratic ideal, "Do no harm."
The Daoist in me craves finding a balance between proper self-care v. altruism.
I am becoming interested in the topic of ethics. I need to sort out all of this information.
I need to find what it is that I should do.
I know that benefaction runs so deep in my soul, that I cannot ignore it.
On the other hand, I have also learned that I need to care well for myself, so that I can be well and prosper.
Recently in my experience, I have been forced to encounter a cadre of devotees to Ayn Rand, whose philosophical constructs served as the basis of the neo-conservative movement. She had an absolutist perspective that believed that an individual had only one obligation: to act for one's own happiness. She also stated that altruism, which she refers to as a tribal phenomenon that human society has outgrown, is a betrayal of self-care.
I believe that a corollary stemming from that indicates that if anyone else suffers while one is providing for his own happiness, then that is just tough for them. Too bad that you are in my way. Is an individual just collateral damage? Circumstantial? I don't believe that any individual deserves being relegated to the status of obstacle rather than a person. Because in their fulfilling their need for happiness, are they not dehumanizing those other than themselves?
I don't think I like that idea much. I have always held to the Hippocratic ideal, "Do no harm."
The Daoist in me craves finding a balance between proper self-care v. altruism.
I am becoming interested in the topic of ethics. I need to sort out all of this information.
I need to find what it is that I should do.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)