I’m just too bored/busy for right now.  So don’t come around for a while and see if Ichange my mind.

Goodnight, Sweet Pod.

I recieved my invite to the closed Beta test for Prezi one day before it went public.  But now everyone can use it (even you)!

I have to give a presentation for one of the classes I am taking for my second masters degree in educational computing <insert rim shot here>.  The only guideline was that it had to be on a system.  So I took advantage of the opportunity and did something kind of science-y instead of the typical, educational technology pabulum that I am so often forced to dish out.  I also took the opportunity to force myself to learn how to use Prezi.  It is definitely different than the typical, Powerpoint-style interface, but it only took a few hours to acquire the fluency necessary to put together this presentation. Supposedly I can embed it on the blog, but as of right now, I haven’t figured out how to do it.

So there you have it. Prezi. A cool, free tool that serves as a refreshing break from the normal slideware.

For the life of me, I’ll never understand why people are against gay marriage.  Outside of a generalized hatred of homosexuals, of course.  Which brings me to this little website:  The National Organization For Marriage.  Technically, the organization should be named “The National Organization For Marriage Between One Man and One Woman,” as that seems to be the entire aim of the site.

Boring.

The minute someone can explain why two gay people getting married personally affects them in any way, or can supply me with demonstrable evidence that children raised in “straight” marriages are better off then children raised in “gay” marriages, maybe I’ll give a moment of condescending attention before politely excusing myself.

The point to all this:  only religion would make a person subscribe to such an irrational, bigoted line (again, excepting those folks who just hate homosexuals, though they seem to be overwhelmingly religious as well).  Please note, I’m not saying that if you are religious, you are de facto a homophobe.  All I’m saying is that the homophobes that I see with any regularity all seem to be religious.

I mean, you really have to be crazy with the god virus to buy into something like this:

Only obediance to an archaic religious text could ever bring so many different people together for something so stupid.  How are the rights of anyone ever going to be threatened by broadening the definition of marriage?

If you’re not in favor of gay marriage, don’t marry a homosexual.  Otherwise, leave the rest of us alone.

One thing that I firmly believe is that teachers should help students cultivate an interest in their entire world, not just the narrow domain of the particular discipline they teach.  With this in mind, I put bonus questions on exams that are completely unrelated to anything scientific, but require a demonstration of other, equally important knowledge by my students.

For those who might be interested, a list of previously used bonus questions:

• Who is the governor of our state?
• Name the two senators from our state.
• Who is the Attorney General of the United States?
• Name the three branches of government.
• Write the key signature for a G major scale.
• Translate the following phrase:  <insert simple phrase in french or Spanish here>.
• Solve for x:  <insert simple algebraic equation here>.
• List ten nations in <Africa/South America/Asia/Europe>.
• Provide students with an unlabeled map of North America and have them label the USA, Canada and Mexico.
• Provide students with an unlabeled map of the Middle East and have them label Iraq.

In all instances, the vast majority of students get them wrong.  Some people might find this sad, but personally I just get a good laugh from it.  Here are some questions from my most recent bonus, in the style of “name the countries on a different continent”:

• “Can we list rivers or desserts?”
• “Are you sure the Amazon isn’t in Africa?”
• “I didn’t know Egypt was in Africa”
• “Why would I care about what happens in Zimbabwe?”
• Offered as candidate nations on the Africa version:  Czechoslovakia, Bongo, Zemur, Toluloese
• Offered as candidate nations on the South America version:  Portugal, Lithuania, Saudi Arabia, Amazon, Spanish Republic.

You can never go hungry for amusement underestimating the general ignorance of the average American teenager.

I hear that the weather in Bongo is lovely this time of year.

Just back from another captivating Board of Education meeting in my work district, and what a pleasure it was.  Typically rote by most standards, but I was struck by one passing moment.  In his response to the questions raised by the public in the “public be heard” section, the president of the BOE referred to the granting of tenure to a teacher as a “job for life.”

Granted, the gentleman in question is not super up to snuff on all things education related.  Still, I have to hope that he was just being politically devious in his classification, trusting that the public did not know enough to know that he was, in fact, talking shit.  It’s a crappy thing to do, but  the alternative cognitive option is that the president of the BOE, arguably the most important “civilian” in the running of a multi-million dollar, taxpayer funded, educational venture actually thinks that tenure is a “job for life.”  And if that’s the case, than may non-existent god help us all.

Of course, tenure is not a “job for life.”  It is simply a guarantee that an individual will be granted a right to due process of law before being fired from a job.  It stems from an educational climate that really has disappeared in these comparatively more enlightened climes of the country, one where teachers were made to sign loyalty oaths to the nation before being hired and female teachers were fired the moment they became pregnant.  Those days no longer exist around here, but there is no guarantee that a particular administration still will not be staffed by lunatics who decide that a given teacher should be cast out not because of how they teach, but because of how they think.  In this way, tenure protects academic freedom.  To call it a “job for life,” is asinine and typical of how the more ignorant sector of the public thinks.

It is actually quite easy to fire a tenured teacher, as long as a district has actual cause as established in the laws of the state, and has followed the correct procedure.  While I have not ever seen a tenured teacher fired, this has always been due to a lack of aptitude on the part of the district, and not to any sort of tenure-based immunity from prosecution.  Consider the following example:  I come to work tomorrow, sit at my desk and begin to inject illegal drugs in to my arm.  A student from the class that I am teaching at the time comes up to inquire as to what is going on, only to be forcefully injected with same drugs by me.  I then take a rather large textbook and smack a second student with it squarely in the face…

…Goodbye “job for life.”  This example may seem extreme, but that is only because I have a colorful imagination.  A tenured teacher can be brought up on charges for much lesser infractions.  Simply doing something that you have been explicitly told not to do by the administration qualifies as “insubordination” in the legal eyes of the state.  This carries with it the threat of a hearing, though districts are admittedly less than eager to spend a legal fortune on what are typically trivial offenses.

Of course, I am not surprised that the BOE president was so thoughtless in his speech.  In fact, over the course of the evening, the gentleman in question “axed” several people various questions.  Fortunately, this did not cause any bleeding.

Somewhere along the line, I decided to take a side gig in union leadership at my building.  This has mostly not been a fun time.  Especially when we are blessed with a pretty quality administration this year.  This bonus has the unfortunate side effect of making my job like a giant mirror to reflect the occasional blemish of my faculty right back at them.

Consider the following example:  It is the policy of the union to tell teachers when they have been observed acting in ways that are in violation of the contract.  This is a precautionary principle, based firmly in a desire to keep problems “in shop,” rather than the alternative (getting the administration involved).  Usually (read:  every time but once), these polite discussions are acknowledged with a “thank you” and a glimmer of recognition that the member is getting slightly sloppy in some aspect of the job.  Most recently it was not.

Teachers make mistakes.  No matter how good you are at the gig, you are never perfect, and as such there are areas of the profession where even the most seasoned educator could pick up his/her game.  Sometimes these things are difficult to analyze and repair:  classroom techniques or pedagogical preference.  Some times these things are quite easy to diagnose:  lateness to work or duty periods and such.

Fortunately for all of us, the contract does not dictate our teaching.  Rather, it outlines particular responsibilities of our work day.  The time we must arrive by and stay until.  The number of classes we teach.  How to do our duty period task (typically study hall, hall duty or the dreaded cafeteria duty).  The bottom line is that deficiencies in the rote practices and procedures outlined in our contract are what the union spends most of its time occupied with at the building level.

As previously stated, most educators are more than happy to take a cautionary visit from the union in stride, agreeing that they are in the wrong and quickly remedying the situation lest administration get wind of it.  In fact, I can say that this is how all situations to this point in the school year had been resolved.  Until today.  At which point, a senior (and quite excellent) teacher took extreme umbrage at the temerity of the union to deign to point out a chronic inability to be at hall duty on time.  Rather than focus on the actual issue, anger was directed at the union for even broaching the subject.

How dare we be concerned with the contractual well being of a great teacher.  We really have some nerve.  I guess we should just keep our concern to ourselves.

Such is the life of those of us involved in union leadership.  It’s somewhat like herding cats who are too busy scratching your face to even think about moving to a better place.  It is not a job to be desired.

I can’t say that I was surprised by the news that  Sarah Palin’s daughter is not getting married.  Frankly, I’m surprised that they waited until this long to do what was obviously inevitable after McCain’s loss.  I mean, two high school seniors getting married is the kind of life-altering stupidity that you can only afford if your mom is Vice President.

It had to happen before the marriage, otherwise young Bristol would have gotten a divorce, and the good people in the small towns don’t get divorced.

Anyone even remotely literate on these things has to enjoy the remarkable hypocrisy coming from the catholic church on the Obama administration’s recent approval of embryonic stem cell research.  It would be hilarious if it didn’t involve people suffering from terrible diseases.

Cardinal Justin Rigali of Philadelphia, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ committee on pro-life activities, called Obama’s decision “a sad victory of politics over science and ethics.”

“This action is morally wrong because it encourages the destruction of innocent human life, treating vulnerable human beings as mere products to be harvested,” he added.

I understand that the cardinal in question probably doesn’t have an actual degree in anything non-divinity related, but give me a fucking break.  The degree of ignorance of what stem cell research actually entails is breathtaking.  An egg cell in a freezer is pretty far away from anything most of us recognize as a “vulnerable human being.”  Especially when one considers that said egg cell is going to be destroyed by the fertility clinic anyway.  Apparently it is better to pointlessly destroy it, than to do so with an aim to helping ease suffering.  This is apparently what the church’s definition of “ethics” has become.

An article in the Vatican newspaper on Tuesday said “a real democracy” should be founded on protection of human dignity in every phase of its existence.

Pardon me, I have to sneeze.  Oh shit!  I just shed a few hundred epithelial cells from my nasal linings!  I’m a murderer and unfit to participate in a “real democracy.”  Why don’t people think before they speak.

Monsignor Elio Sgreccia, a leading Vatican bioethics specialist, told Italian media: “The motive for this decision should be seen in the pressure for profits.”

Yeah!  Fuck you, terminally ill people.  We obviously are not interested in helping you.  All we care about is the LOOT!!!!

In 2001, the late Pope John Paul II urged Bush not to allow stem cell research.

Research that could eventually cure Parkinson’s…

Father Thomas J. Reese, senior fellow at the Woodstock Theological Centre of Georgetown University, suggested several ways the Obama administration could find some middle ground.

Reese’s suggestions include not creating embryos for the sole purpose of research but instead using only excess embryos produced at fertility clinics that are scheduled to be destroyed anyway.

He also said researchers should show that the research they are doing cannot be done with non-embryonic stem cells, and that research using embryonic stem cells should aim at advancing towards the goal of using only non-embryonic stem cells.

Someone please explain why I should give a crap about what a priest thinks about bioethics.  Might I humbly suggest that the good Father stick to subjects in his wheel house…like tacitly endorsing child rape

(Editors Note:  I know that the religion postings tend to bring out the Bible Zombies in the comments section.  So be it.  This kind of garbage is too remarkable to avoid comment.  I also know that the swearing has been a tad more plentiful recently, and I agree that it is lazy).

So, you couldn’t get to Hampton to see the first three Phish concerts in five years.  Well, take heart in the fact that the gentlemen have put all three shows up on phish.com for you to download for free!

Get up there and suck ‘em down.

This is the first Phish that I’ve heard in five years and I have enjoyed all three shows.  The recordings are super quality and the set lists are pretty sweet.  Some tracks are a bit rustier than others, but what’s a Phish show without a quality flub here and there.

I’m not sure how long the shows will be up for you to have, but I’m sure it will be quite a while.

Now, I have to wait until Jones Beach in June (it sure is nice to have friends who give you spare tickets).

The wife and I attended a lovely concert last night.  Leo Kottke is always a mind-blowing time, what with all of the insane guitar stylings.  However, we couldn’t help but notice that some of our fellow concert-goers seemed to have forgotten how to behave properly when attending live music.

Consider the gentleman who felt the urge to request songs.  Why?  Only he could tell you.  Mr. Kottke didn’t seem to particularly mind (though he did not play any of the requested tunes).  But I have a hard time understanding why I need to listen to said individual bray on like some sort of barnyard animal.

Or perhaps the person who felt the urge to video tape the performance, to the point that Mr. Kottke had to politely ask the individual to stop.  When the venue tells you not to and the artist tells you not to, don’t you imagine that you shouldn’t?

And then there were the people nearby who just had to talk…loudly and constantly.  Unfortunately, this is an all too common occurrence at most media exhibitions that I attend these days.  Still, it’s a very obnoxious thing to do.