Head these guys a while back at the Station Inn. I love the clever pacing of this lyric:
"Our hopes are high for that big break/
That, and magic, is all it'll take."
Friday, June 29, 2012
Thursday, June 28, 2012
Earworm of the Day: Primal Scream
"Give Out But Don't Give Up" was my favorite album to steal from my older brother.
Health Care: We Are All Going to Die
From Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution:
[Highlighting is mine.]
Q: Guess which one points at a moral failing?
A: Both.
***
We are all going to die.
You, me, Mitch McConnell, John Roberts, Barack Obama, that guy who cut you off, the teenager who chunked a firecracker at me -- all will die. Someday.
Given that, here's what health care does:
Tier 1: Treats illnesses & injuries that would kill you quickly if left untreated -- heart attack is the most common; however, many types of trauma would also fall into this category
Tier 2: Mitigates symptoms for illnesses that will eventually kill you, but will kill you much more slowly if treated -- many forms of cancer & diabetes
Tier 3: Mitigates symptoms for chronic conditions or injuries that severely impact a patient's quality of life -- Parkinson's disease, Crohn's, some types of diabetes, ligament and bone damage, arthritis
Tier 4: Treats or corrects issues that have a mild to moderate impact on a patient's quality life -- nearsightedness, warts, morbid obesity
Tier 5: Corrects cosmetic issues -- nose jobs, liposuction
Note that the top three tiers are diseases or injuries no one wants under any circumstances. Sure, some lifestyle choices accelerate the development of some of these illnesses (tanning leads to skin cancer; a diet of steak and burgers leads to a heart attack; etc...). I can think of no rational person, though, who consciously wants to experience anything in the top three tiers.
Yet, at some point, we are going to experience a deadly and/or debilitating injury or illness. Until then, we will have no need for any of the necessary treatment. (Something no one says: "Let's get a bypass, then top it off with some chemo!")
This is why the normal supply/demand curve is useless when applied to health care. Until I have a need most types of health care, I won't purchase it. Once I have a need, there's nothing I wouldn't spend. A doctor could ask me to go into indentured servitude in order for him to treat me when I'm having a heart attack and I'd have to agree or die. No time to shop around for a better deal.
What is lacking is choice. Most consumers don't choose to enter the health care market and they don't control when they leave. Whatever is trying to kill us will dictate our "consumption" needs -- not our socioeconomic status.
Arguments that we should ration health care according to income, that people should bear a "responsibility" for getting a life-threatening or life-altering illness are morally unacceptable. Even for those who made poor choices -- too many Mountain Dews and cigarettes, too few early morning runs -- should the consequence be an early death because of lack of treatment?
If you believe that, then visit a Remote Area Medical free clinic* when it's in the area. (Heck, visit any local free clinic.) Look at a patient like Robin Layman and all of her dependents in the eyes and tell them that yes, sustained and successful treatment is possible, but you must learn a lesson first.
****
The blown supply/demand curve is why we have health insurance. The status quo has been private insurance for some; decent government insurance for the elderly; lesser government insurance for the young or extremely poor; and pool of 40 to 50 million who are one trip to the ER away from financial ruin.
Today's Supreme Court ruling paved the way for nearly all Americans to be covered for illnesses in the top three tiers list above. It also gave desperately needed consumer protections to us. (Ask Robin Layman how important that is.)
To those who argue against this ruling on the grounds that it infringes on some notion of freedom or that it's a tax increase, again, I invite you to visit a free clinic and make your case.
Look them right in the eyes.
* Some may argue that the very nature of a free clinic is that its services are, well, free. I could offer a long rebuttal about how receiving care at a free clinic is a far cry from the comprehensive treatment afforded by health insurance. Or you could, again, take my advice to visit one and offer that argument. This is what will happen to your logic:
2. A rejection of health care egalitarianism, namely a recognition that the wealthy will purchase more and better health care than the poor. Trying to equalize health care consumption hurts the poor, since most feasible policies to do this take away cash from the poor, either directly or through the operation of tax incidence. We need to accept the principle that sometimes poor people will die just because they are poor. Some of you don’t like the sound of that, but we already let the wealthy enjoy all sorts of other goods — most importantly status — which lengthen their lives and which the poor enjoy to a much lesser degree. We shouldn’t screw up our health care institutions by being determined to fight inegalitarian principles for one very select set of factors which determine health care outcomes.From a New Republic article about Remote Area Medical:
(Robin) Layman and her family offer a stark example of the law’s potential impact. Two years ago, her son, then 16, was hit head-on by a speeding driver high on drugs. Her son’s girlfriend was killed; he suffered severe internal injuries and recently underwent colon surgery. Now 18, he will soon age out of Medicaid coverage.
And Layman, a gregarious 38-year-old, recently lost coverage for her own considerable problems. She suffers high blood-pressure, for which she takes three medications, purchased at a discount from the county health office. She suffers sciatica stemming from the time eight years ago when a co-worker at a dollar store let slip a heavy box of wrapping paper Layman was handing up to her. Layman lunged for it and badly hurt her back, for which she takes the nerve-pain medication Lyrica.
[Highlighting is mine.]
Q: Guess which one points at a moral failing?
A: Both.
***
We are all going to die.
You, me, Mitch McConnell, John Roberts, Barack Obama, that guy who cut you off, the teenager who chunked a firecracker at me -- all will die. Someday.
Given that, here's what health care does:
Tier 1: Treats illnesses & injuries that would kill you quickly if left untreated -- heart attack is the most common; however, many types of trauma would also fall into this category
Tier 2: Mitigates symptoms for illnesses that will eventually kill you, but will kill you much more slowly if treated -- many forms of cancer & diabetes
Tier 3: Mitigates symptoms for chronic conditions or injuries that severely impact a patient's quality of life -- Parkinson's disease, Crohn's, some types of diabetes, ligament and bone damage, arthritis
Tier 4: Treats or corrects issues that have a mild to moderate impact on a patient's quality life -- nearsightedness, warts, morbid obesity
Tier 5: Corrects cosmetic issues -- nose jobs, liposuction
Note that the top three tiers are diseases or injuries no one wants under any circumstances. Sure, some lifestyle choices accelerate the development of some of these illnesses (tanning leads to skin cancer; a diet of steak and burgers leads to a heart attack; etc...). I can think of no rational person, though, who consciously wants to experience anything in the top three tiers.
Yet, at some point, we are going to experience a deadly and/or debilitating injury or illness. Until then, we will have no need for any of the necessary treatment. (Something no one says: "Let's get a bypass, then top it off with some chemo!")
This is why the normal supply/demand curve is useless when applied to health care. Until I have a need most types of health care, I won't purchase it. Once I have a need, there's nothing I wouldn't spend. A doctor could ask me to go into indentured servitude in order for him to treat me when I'm having a heart attack and I'd have to agree or die. No time to shop around for a better deal.
What is lacking is choice. Most consumers don't choose to enter the health care market and they don't control when they leave. Whatever is trying to kill us will dictate our "consumption" needs -- not our socioeconomic status.
Arguments that we should ration health care according to income, that people should bear a "responsibility" for getting a life-threatening or life-altering illness are morally unacceptable. Even for those who made poor choices -- too many Mountain Dews and cigarettes, too few early morning runs -- should the consequence be an early death because of lack of treatment?
If you believe that, then visit a Remote Area Medical free clinic* when it's in the area. (Heck, visit any local free clinic.) Look at a patient like Robin Layman and all of her dependents in the eyes and tell them that yes, sustained and successful treatment is possible, but you must learn a lesson first.
****
The blown supply/demand curve is why we have health insurance. The status quo has been private insurance for some; decent government insurance for the elderly; lesser government insurance for the young or extremely poor; and pool of 40 to 50 million who are one trip to the ER away from financial ruin.
Today's Supreme Court ruling paved the way for nearly all Americans to be covered for illnesses in the top three tiers list above. It also gave desperately needed consumer protections to us. (Ask Robin Layman how important that is.)
To those who argue against this ruling on the grounds that it infringes on some notion of freedom or that it's a tax increase, again, I invite you to visit a free clinic and make your case.
Look them right in the eyes.
* Some may argue that the very nature of a free clinic is that its services are, well, free. I could offer a long rebuttal about how receiving care at a free clinic is a far cry from the comprehensive treatment afforded by health insurance. Or you could, again, take my advice to visit one and offer that argument. This is what will happen to your logic:
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Earworm of the Day: Of Monsters and Men
Amidst the wreckage of one of the first countries to be affected by the financial crisis, Iceland did manage to produce some fine indie/pop:
Bonus points for the sort-of John Steinbeck reference....
Bonus points for the sort-of John Steinbeck reference....
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
'The past is never dead. It's not even past.'
...so writes William Faulkner in one of the great lines, ever.
Some fantastic journalism from the Chattanooga Times-Free Press on how a Baptist minister loved his gay son who died from AIDS.
Andrew Sullivan writes about surviving AIDS.
I was alive during the plague years, but barely aware of its extent. As with the Holocaust, this is a topic we must study and revisit because we can't let anything like it ever happen again.
Some fantastic journalism from the Chattanooga Times-Free Press on how a Baptist minister loved his gay son who died from AIDS.
When he and Frances walked into the hospital room, Stephen was lying in the bed in a thin gown. His body white and weak. The same blue eyes, but hollow underneath.
Stephen looked at his father. The room felt tight with fear and embarrassment. Matt knew his son was waiting to hear his voice, listening for reassurance.
And Matt began to cry in front of his son. Frances held her hands over her mouth and cried, too.
"Son, it's OK," Matt said. "We are going to love you the way you are."
Stephen sobbed. He crawled out of bed and into Matt's lap and Matt held him like he did when he was just a boy. Stephen put his arms around his father's neck and kissed him on the cheek.
"Son, don't worry," Matt said softly. "Nothing between us is going to change."
Andrew Sullivan writes about surviving AIDS.
People forget that HIV decimated the immune system - but people actually died from the opportunistic infections. These "OI"s were something out of Dante's Hell. So many drowned to death from pneumocystis. Or they would develop hideous KS lesions, or extremely painful neuropathy (my "buddy" screamed once when I brushed a bedsheet against the tip of his toes), or CMV where a friend of mine had to inject himself in the eyeball to prevent going blind, or toxoplasmosis, a brain degenerative disease where people wake up one day to find they can't tie their shoe-laces, and their memories are falling apart. Within the gay community, 300,000 deaths amounted to a plague of medieval dimensions. Once you knew your T-cells were below a certain level, it was like being in a dark forest where, at any moment, some hideous viral or bacterial creature could emerge and kill you. And for fifteen years there was nothing to take that worked, just the agonizing helplessness of waiting to die, and watching others get assaulted by one terrifying disease after another.
I was alive during the plague years, but barely aware of its extent. As with the Holocaust, this is a topic we must study and revisit because we can't let anything like it ever happen again.
Earworm of the Day: The New Pornographers
Hockey, Tim Horton's, and The New Pornographers -- Canada really gives more than it gets, doesn't it?
Update: Better version of the song. Live is always more fun.
Update: Better version of the song. Live is always more fun.
MNPS District 5 Candidate Forum: The chief issue is...
These type of forums usually perform two functions:
1. Offer voters a chance to make sure that all of the candidates are, on some level, suitable for public office
2. Give different candidates' campaigns a chance to show how well-organized they are
After last night's District 5 forum at Rosebank Elementary, I can attest that all of the candidates have the ability to speak in public and have some clue as to what the school board does.
Given that I support Elissa Kim for this office, you can take further observations with that bias in mind. That said, I will be as empirical as possible.
On the issue of item #2, about 40 Kim supporters were there, most wearing T-shirts. I saw a few people Gracie Porter stickers -- maybe 6 to 8? Four or five people were wearing John Haubenreich T-shirts. I saw no one wearing Erica Lanier stickers or T-shrits. She did have palm cards, though, as did the other candidates.
I assume that most of the non-adorned members of the crowd were likely affiliated on some level with a campaign and not expressing it publicly for one reason or another. That, or they had some professional interest in being there.
(N.B. I saw Rachel Bell for the first time. I hope she will be a decent judge because the guy she defeated, Mike Jameson, is one of the smartest and most humane public servants I've met.)
Out of the 150 or so people there, my (completely non-scientific) guess is that fewer than 20 were genuinely undecided and seeking knowledge. My reasoning is that most of the people who show up for these things have 1) been encouraged by a campaign and/or 2) have some other type of vested interest and thus have already made up their minds, at least privately.
****
I have no idea what those hypothetical 20 undecided voters thought after last night. It's hard for me to hazard a guess as to which issues actually would spark one of the voters to choose one candidate over the others. Obviously, though, the candidates definitely made plays for different perceived segments of voters. Harnessing my inner Google, these are the themes I picked up on:
Haubenreich: community-based schools; supporting teachers; supporting staff; seek input from entire community
Kim: student achievement; best practices; attract and retain talent; measure, track, and stategize
Lanier: parent communication; transparency from leadership; involve parents; reach out to community
Porter: district on a good trajectory; stay on the path; experience; district has shown a lot of improvement; speak for kids who don't have a voice
Please note that these impressions are highly subjective. Other people who listened to the same forum I did undoubtedly came away with different takeaways.
****
For this election, I'm far from a persuadable voter.
I've spent the past seven years either teaching students, teaching teachers, earning a master's degree in education, working for public officials who are trying to improve schools, organizing in low-income communities for better schools, organizing to put candidates in office who will push for better schools, or some combination of the above. In addition, I'm married to one of the best teachers in the state. (I may be biased, but that doesn't mean I don't think it.)
N and I spend nearly every waking moment on something related to improving education. I don't mean to sound self-righteous. (One day, I'll tell the story of how just how much I struggled as a teacher.) This is just meant to be evidence that the topics being discussed last night are not just items on agenda to me. My life is pretty much consumed by the question of how we improve the life trajectory of all students.
It is my firm belief, backed up with mounds of evidence*, that our public education system is damaging the potential of the overwhelming majority of our students. Since I have an equally firm belief, backed up with years of working with hundreds of Nashville students, our kids are as capable of learning as any student anywhere, I conclude that we are in a crisis.
District 5, in particular, is in a crisis.
That said, I looked last night for any candidate to convey a sense of understanding where we are, a sense of urgency, a sense that this is unacceptable.
I wasn't looking for anyone to pound on a table, yell, or jump up and down. Hysteria, anger, and any other wild emotions are a detriment to actually getting anything done. But I wanted some sense that candidates believed that things are not OK, that we are not just a few steps off, that this district graduates some 4,000 students a year and less than a third are college-ready and this is a disaster for our kids, our families, and Nashville as a whole.
Increasing student achievement is the chief issue facing MNPS and everything else should be dealt with in terms how it affects it. Support staff work rules, how to spend the tax money, charter schools, neighborhood schools, who the next superintendent will be -- does it improve student achievement? How much? How fast?
If another candidate had done a better job than Kim of convincing me that he or she understood this, that he or she was willing to focus on this every board meeting, I would've returned my "Kim for School Board" T-shirt and headed out to knock on doors for that candidate.
That didn't happen.
Elissa Kim remains the best choice for District 5.
* Fact of the Day: MNPS has made the state's "High Priority Systems" systems list every year since the list started in 2005-2006. Even Memphis hasn't made it that many times.
**
11:59 update: edited for clarity and link troubles
1. Offer voters a chance to make sure that all of the candidates are, on some level, suitable for public office
2. Give different candidates' campaigns a chance to show how well-organized they are
After last night's District 5 forum at Rosebank Elementary, I can attest that all of the candidates have the ability to speak in public and have some clue as to what the school board does.
Given that I support Elissa Kim for this office, you can take further observations with that bias in mind. That said, I will be as empirical as possible.
On the issue of item #2, about 40 Kim supporters were there, most wearing T-shirts. I saw a few people Gracie Porter stickers -- maybe 6 to 8? Four or five people were wearing John Haubenreich T-shirts. I saw no one wearing Erica Lanier stickers or T-shrits. She did have palm cards, though, as did the other candidates.
I assume that most of the non-adorned members of the crowd were likely affiliated on some level with a campaign and not expressing it publicly for one reason or another. That, or they had some professional interest in being there.
(N.B. I saw Rachel Bell for the first time. I hope she will be a decent judge because the guy she defeated, Mike Jameson, is one of the smartest and most humane public servants I've met.)
Out of the 150 or so people there, my (completely non-scientific) guess is that fewer than 20 were genuinely undecided and seeking knowledge. My reasoning is that most of the people who show up for these things have 1) been encouraged by a campaign and/or 2) have some other type of vested interest and thus have already made up their minds, at least privately.
****
I have no idea what those hypothetical 20 undecided voters thought after last night. It's hard for me to hazard a guess as to which issues actually would spark one of the voters to choose one candidate over the others. Obviously, though, the candidates definitely made plays for different perceived segments of voters. Harnessing my inner Google, these are the themes I picked up on:
Haubenreich: community-based schools; supporting teachers; supporting staff; seek input from entire community
Kim: student achievement; best practices; attract and retain talent; measure, track, and stategize
Lanier: parent communication; transparency from leadership; involve parents; reach out to community
Porter: district on a good trajectory; stay on the path; experience; district has shown a lot of improvement; speak for kids who don't have a voice
Please note that these impressions are highly subjective. Other people who listened to the same forum I did undoubtedly came away with different takeaways.
****
For this election, I'm far from a persuadable voter.
I've spent the past seven years either teaching students, teaching teachers, earning a master's degree in education, working for public officials who are trying to improve schools, organizing in low-income communities for better schools, organizing to put candidates in office who will push for better schools, or some combination of the above. In addition, I'm married to one of the best teachers in the state. (I may be biased, but that doesn't mean I don't think it.)
N and I spend nearly every waking moment on something related to improving education. I don't mean to sound self-righteous. (One day, I'll tell the story of how just how much I struggled as a teacher.) This is just meant to be evidence that the topics being discussed last night are not just items on agenda to me. My life is pretty much consumed by the question of how we improve the life trajectory of all students.
It is my firm belief, backed up with mounds of evidence*, that our public education system is damaging the potential of the overwhelming majority of our students. Since I have an equally firm belief, backed up with years of working with hundreds of Nashville students, our kids are as capable of learning as any student anywhere, I conclude that we are in a crisis.
District 5, in particular, is in a crisis.
I've worked for enough campaigns to appreciate the difference between what a candidate thinks about what's possible in an office, what a voter thinks about what an elected official can do, and how a candidate crafts a message to a voter. These forums aren't academic conferences. I realize that I'm not the target audience.
I wasn't looking for anyone to pound on a table, yell, or jump up and down. Hysteria, anger, and any other wild emotions are a detriment to actually getting anything done. But I wanted some sense that candidates believed that things are not OK, that we are not just a few steps off, that this district graduates some 4,000 students a year and less than a third are college-ready and this is a disaster for our kids, our families, and Nashville as a whole.
Increasing student achievement is the chief issue facing MNPS and everything else should be dealt with in terms how it affects it. Support staff work rules, how to spend the tax money, charter schools, neighborhood schools, who the next superintendent will be -- does it improve student achievement? How much? How fast?
If another candidate had done a better job than Kim of convincing me that he or she understood this, that he or she was willing to focus on this every board meeting, I would've returned my "Kim for School Board" T-shirt and headed out to knock on doors for that candidate.
That didn't happen.
Elissa Kim remains the best choice for District 5.
* Fact of the Day: MNPS has made the state's "High Priority Systems" systems list every year since the list started in 2005-2006. Even Memphis hasn't made it that many times.
**
11:59 update: edited for clarity and link troubles
Monday, June 25, 2012
Earworm of the Day: Fun.
Fun. (yes, that is the correct spelling) sounds an awful lot like Queen, particularly in this song.
That is unquestionably a Good Thing.
Also, Civil War re-enactors?!
That is unquestionably a Good Thing.
Also, Civil War re-enactors?!
MNPS District 5: A snapshot
Tonight at 6 p.m. at Rosebank Elementary, the four candidates for the District 5 school board seat will participate in a forum. Before the forum, I thought it would be useful to take a look at all of the schools in District 5. (Special schools like Johnson, Cora Howe, and Murrell are excluded because of a lack of data.) All of the data is available on the TVAAS public data website.
The candidates are John Haubenreich, Elissa Kim, Erica Lanier, and Gracie Porter (incumbent). District 7 Councilman Anthony Davis will moderate.
All of these scores reflect 3-year averages of composite scores of the most relevant tests (TCAP for elementary and middle schools and the ACT for high schools). I chose to focus on growth scores because I think that is the best way to judge an individual school (and eliminate the excuse of "these kids came to me not knowing how to read/add & subtract/write/etc.")
The one place where I included something other than growth scores was the ACT Mean Student Score for the high school because it offers an absolute judgment as the whether students are college ready. The minimum ACT score for most colleges is 19. What is more meaningful is the ACT composite score considered the standard for "college-readiness": 21. (The average of the four major subscores is 21.) East Lit, Nashville School of the Arts, Pearl-Cohn, and Stratford all fall short of this. While those schools don't deserve all of the blame for those scores falling short, the fact is that every non-academic magnet in District 5 is producing an average student that will most likely flunk out of college, if he or she even get there in the first place. The average student at Pearl-Cohn and Stratford doesn't come close to making the minimum ACT score to attend their local public university, Tennessee State.
Bottom line: Most of the students in District 5 attend schools that negatively impact their academic growth. Those who graduate aren't likely to qualify to attend a 4-year college or university. Those who are able to attend aren't predicted to graduate.
This is where we are, folks. If this isn't a crisis, I'm not sure what is.
(Disclosures: I'm supporting Elissa Kim in this election. Separately, I teach at LEAD Academy High School, which is a part of a network that includes Cameron College Prep. My wife teaches at KIPP, though she didn't teach there during the years reflected in this data. None of this affects any of the data presented above, but I like being upfront about these sorts of things. )
****
11:14 a.m. update: Some typos fixed.
 |
| Key for Elementary & Middle Schools |
 |
| District 5 Elementary Schools |
 |
| District 5 Middle Schools |
 |
| District 5 High Schools |
All of these scores reflect 3-year averages of composite scores of the most relevant tests (TCAP for elementary and middle schools and the ACT for high schools). I chose to focus on growth scores because I think that is the best way to judge an individual school (and eliminate the excuse of "these kids came to me not knowing how to read/add & subtract/write/etc.")
The one place where I included something other than growth scores was the ACT Mean Student Score for the high school because it offers an absolute judgment as the whether students are college ready. The minimum ACT score for most colleges is 19. What is more meaningful is the ACT composite score considered the standard for "college-readiness": 21. (The average of the four major subscores is 21.) East Lit, Nashville School of the Arts, Pearl-Cohn, and Stratford all fall short of this. While those schools don't deserve all of the blame for those scores falling short, the fact is that every non-academic magnet in District 5 is producing an average student that will most likely flunk out of college, if he or she even get there in the first place. The average student at Pearl-Cohn and Stratford doesn't come close to making the minimum ACT score to attend their local public university, Tennessee State.
Bottom line: Most of the students in District 5 attend schools that negatively impact their academic growth. Those who graduate aren't likely to qualify to attend a 4-year college or university. Those who are able to attend aren't predicted to graduate.
This is where we are, folks. If this isn't a crisis, I'm not sure what is.
(Disclosures: I'm supporting Elissa Kim in this election. Separately, I teach at LEAD Academy High School, which is a part of a network that includes Cameron College Prep. My wife teaches at KIPP, though she didn't teach there during the years reflected in this data. None of this affects any of the data presented above, but I like being upfront about these sorts of things. )
****
11:14 a.m. update: Some typos fixed.
Sunday, June 24, 2012
You are not who you're supposed to be
It's hard for me to convey how excited I was to get the assignment. My boss at the Vicksburg Post told me to cover a speech by James Meredith. THE James Meredith. The one who integrated Ole Miss with the help of the National Guard. The one who got shot marching along a highway. One of a handful of civil rights legends where one merely must give a name or phrase: Rosa Parks, Montgomery Bus Boycott, King, Selma, Freedom Riders, the Little Rock Nine, and James Meredith.
Even though I grew up in Mississippi (and read my Mississippi History textbook cover-to-cover) and knew the basics of Meredith's story, I was surprised to know that he was still alive. More than that, he was out giving speeches. I idly wondered why I had never heard of him visiting during any Black History Month celebrations I attended in Tupelo and later, MSU. (N.B. There still isn't a significant biography of Meredith. If there's another significant American historical figure who's more ripe for the Robert Caro treatment, I don't know who he is.)
The address led me to a tiny Missionary Baptist church in outside of Vicksburg. I got there, expecting a crowd. Maybe 20 people ended up showing to hear him.
Meredith resembled what I imagined a civil rights hero to look like: tall, a proper amount of grey, alert and skeptical eyes, a deadly serious demeanor. The topic, the plight of the modern black youth, was also what I would expect to hear from a man who'd risked his life more than once to achieve equal rights in the eyes of the law.
Everything else about the speech surprised me.
His speech could've come out of the mouth of so many white people I've heard all my life. Single motherhood has ruined black families. Things were better generations ago. Black kids need to learn how to speak proper English and pull up their pants. Government programs, particularly welfare, have ill-served black people. (His message today is pretty much the same.)
Meredith's audience didn't take kindly to what he said. Respectful clapping gave way to stony silence. Being the only white person in the pews, I caught a few glances at me, followed by glares at Meredith. The expression seemed to be one given when a family member airs dirty laundry in mixed company. Are you forgetting yourself?
He said things that I'd heard from white people all my life. The difference was that these were people whose primary acquaintance with the black community was through alarmist newspaper headlines. As a headstrong, rebellious, liberal-minded teenager in a conservative town, I'd easily tuned out those opinions as so much stereotyping. You have no interest in actually helping black people. You're just pining for a time when black people could be ignored.
Meredith could not be dismissed so easily.
****
One of the best pieces of advice I've heard came from Sid Salter, then the Clarion-Ledger's political columnist. When I was an intern at the C-L, he told me that the people he respected most where the ones who'd "gotten their hands dirty."
I thought I was doing that by taking a low-paying job covering six of the poorest counties in the country. I'd been in jails, chatted with felons, and had once been on stakeout the Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics.
I had nothing on Meredith. I have nothing on Meredith.
I disagreed with him then. Now, after several years working in mostly poor, mostly minority communities, after years of getting my hands dirty, I still think his critique is off-target, that he mistakes symptoms for a disease.
But I could be wrong.
I keep questioning myself because any sacrifice of mine, any work that I've put in to make our society more just and equal, pales in comparison to what Meredith did, not just at Ole Miss, but in later years, too. His journey was never a sure thing. He really did risk his life before integrating Ole Miss, during the riots (two people were killed), and in subsequent marches and protests.
I can't just dismiss him. He's earned the right to his opinions in a way few in this world ever have. Moreover, he's earned the right to have those opinions considered, tested, and reconsidered. He didn't come across as an idealist or even particularly hopeful. His thoughts were borne of brutal experience.
****
Meredith, at a great personal cost, believes many things have ended up altering what his legacy could have been. That night in the Delta, he had definite ideas about what he wanted his legacy to be, but he had little interest in that being what people would assume it would be.
His message didn't influence much about my policy views. What I learned that evening was much more useful: that reputation, stereotype, appearance, and experience are all poor substitutes for actually going to the trouble to learn what a person thinks.
That wasn't Meredith's explicit or implicit message that night. However, that lesson has what's stayed with me these past several years. It, more than any other, has helped me battle the demons of racism, of stereotyping, of confusing what I see with what I know.
I hope he would approve. Of course, I have no way of knowing. I'd like to ask him, though.
Even though I grew up in Mississippi (and read my Mississippi History textbook cover-to-cover) and knew the basics of Meredith's story, I was surprised to know that he was still alive. More than that, he was out giving speeches. I idly wondered why I had never heard of him visiting during any Black History Month celebrations I attended in Tupelo and later, MSU. (N.B. There still isn't a significant biography of Meredith. If there's another significant American historical figure who's more ripe for the Robert Caro treatment, I don't know who he is.)
The address led me to a tiny Missionary Baptist church in outside of Vicksburg. I got there, expecting a crowd. Maybe 20 people ended up showing to hear him.
Meredith resembled what I imagined a civil rights hero to look like: tall, a proper amount of grey, alert and skeptical eyes, a deadly serious demeanor. The topic, the plight of the modern black youth, was also what I would expect to hear from a man who'd risked his life more than once to achieve equal rights in the eyes of the law.
Everything else about the speech surprised me.
His speech could've come out of the mouth of so many white people I've heard all my life. Single motherhood has ruined black families. Things were better generations ago. Black kids need to learn how to speak proper English and pull up their pants. Government programs, particularly welfare, have ill-served black people. (His message today is pretty much the same.)
Meredith's audience didn't take kindly to what he said. Respectful clapping gave way to stony silence. Being the only white person in the pews, I caught a few glances at me, followed by glares at Meredith. The expression seemed to be one given when a family member airs dirty laundry in mixed company. Are you forgetting yourself?
He said things that I'd heard from white people all my life. The difference was that these were people whose primary acquaintance with the black community was through alarmist newspaper headlines. As a headstrong, rebellious, liberal-minded teenager in a conservative town, I'd easily tuned out those opinions as so much stereotyping. You have no interest in actually helping black people. You're just pining for a time when black people could be ignored.
Meredith could not be dismissed so easily.
****
One of the best pieces of advice I've heard came from Sid Salter, then the Clarion-Ledger's political columnist. When I was an intern at the C-L, he told me that the people he respected most where the ones who'd "gotten their hands dirty."
I thought I was doing that by taking a low-paying job covering six of the poorest counties in the country. I'd been in jails, chatted with felons, and had once been on stakeout the Mississippi Bureau of Narcotics.
I had nothing on Meredith. I have nothing on Meredith.
I disagreed with him then. Now, after several years working in mostly poor, mostly minority communities, after years of getting my hands dirty, I still think his critique is off-target, that he mistakes symptoms for a disease.
But I could be wrong.
I keep questioning myself because any sacrifice of mine, any work that I've put in to make our society more just and equal, pales in comparison to what Meredith did, not just at Ole Miss, but in later years, too. His journey was never a sure thing. He really did risk his life before integrating Ole Miss, during the riots (two people were killed), and in subsequent marches and protests.
I can't just dismiss him. He's earned the right to his opinions in a way few in this world ever have. Moreover, he's earned the right to have those opinions considered, tested, and reconsidered. He didn't come across as an idealist or even particularly hopeful. His thoughts were borne of brutal experience.
****
Meredith, at a great personal cost, believes many things have ended up altering what his legacy could have been. That night in the Delta, he had definite ideas about what he wanted his legacy to be, but he had little interest in that being what people would assume it would be.
His message didn't influence much about my policy views. What I learned that evening was much more useful: that reputation, stereotype, appearance, and experience are all poor substitutes for actually going to the trouble to learn what a person thinks.
That wasn't Meredith's explicit or implicit message that night. However, that lesson has what's stayed with me these past several years. It, more than any other, has helped me battle the demons of racism, of stereotyping, of confusing what I see with what I know.
I hope he would approve. Of course, I have no way of knowing. I'd like to ask him, though.
Boozin': I'm a heterosexual man who isn't afraid to say I enjoy a rosé
Wine: Rosé d'folie by Jean Paul Brun
Type: Rosé
Purchased: Woodland Wine Merchant
Price: $16
Ninety-eight degree days don't go well with big, fruity, tannic Cabs, yet sometimes a white just doesn't feel right. You feel like you need a bit more taste, a bit more depth. Even though "Sex and the City" and Nicki Minaj have given rosés a bad name, you need to get over your pop culture sensibilities and give this wine a try.
You should chill it to 50 or 60 degrees. For us, a few minutes in the freezer did the trick. A sommelier may puke at this technique, but it worked in a pinch.
The fruit is present, yet mild at first taste. It stays in a nice midrange on the palate, not becoming saccharine or losing flavor. The finish is really pleasant -- where most rosés fade or become a little too sweet or sour, this wine fades with a pleasant note. I thought I detected a little bit of peach, but to be honest, I have a lot of trouble distinguishing different types of fruit. The main thing is that this is a fantastic summer wine. It goes well with most types of food (maybe not steak, but I'd give it a shot with a burger). You can also sip it solo on the porch as you try to identify which song is coming from the speakers of passing cars. Whatever works.
****
Truth be told, you hate summer. The remnants of happy summer vacations, the thrill you felt as you left school on the last day, the unfocused joy of lazy afternoons during summer school in college, are far behind you. The heat smacks you in the face as you walk to your car, reminding you that your shirt will be glued to awkward places on your shoulders for the rest of the day. As you sit in your office, the sunlight beckons you outside, a mirage that will be shattered at lunchtime, when you optimistically eat your sandwich in the picnic area conveniently located near the acre of black asphalt separating your office from the neighboring strip mall. You remember looking at the original landscape designs for this development, which are now passing for art in the lobby. You distinctly remember that the development was supposed to include trees. Massive, magnolia-like trees. You imagine that those trees have gone to the same place your employer-sponsored supplemental health insurance has gone.
Separately, the pain for your carpal tunnel has subsided.
That's because you've been therapeutically drinking rosé since the 9 a.m. staff meeting. It doesn't have the deep crimson that's a dead giveaway, yet also doesn't look like you've absconded with your child's apple juice. The afternoon is starting to look better. The heat reflecting off the rows of sedans and SUVs gives the strip mall a trippy look. You think about popping over to REI to get one of those the water bottles that isn't transparent. Someday summer will end and a rosé simply won't be appropriate. You're not in college any more, after all.
Type: Rosé
Purchased: Woodland Wine Merchant
Price: $16
Ninety-eight degree days don't go well with big, fruity, tannic Cabs, yet sometimes a white just doesn't feel right. You feel like you need a bit more taste, a bit more depth. Even though "Sex and the City" and Nicki Minaj have given rosés a bad name, you need to get over your pop culture sensibilities and give this wine a try.
You should chill it to 50 or 60 degrees. For us, a few minutes in the freezer did the trick. A sommelier may puke at this technique, but it worked in a pinch.
The fruit is present, yet mild at first taste. It stays in a nice midrange on the palate, not becoming saccharine or losing flavor. The finish is really pleasant -- where most rosés fade or become a little too sweet or sour, this wine fades with a pleasant note. I thought I detected a little bit of peach, but to be honest, I have a lot of trouble distinguishing different types of fruit. The main thing is that this is a fantastic summer wine. It goes well with most types of food (maybe not steak, but I'd give it a shot with a burger). You can also sip it solo on the porch as you try to identify which song is coming from the speakers of passing cars. Whatever works.
****
Truth be told, you hate summer. The remnants of happy summer vacations, the thrill you felt as you left school on the last day, the unfocused joy of lazy afternoons during summer school in college, are far behind you. The heat smacks you in the face as you walk to your car, reminding you that your shirt will be glued to awkward places on your shoulders for the rest of the day. As you sit in your office, the sunlight beckons you outside, a mirage that will be shattered at lunchtime, when you optimistically eat your sandwich in the picnic area conveniently located near the acre of black asphalt separating your office from the neighboring strip mall. You remember looking at the original landscape designs for this development, which are now passing for art in the lobby. You distinctly remember that the development was supposed to include trees. Massive, magnolia-like trees. You imagine that those trees have gone to the same place your employer-sponsored supplemental health insurance has gone.
Separately, the pain for your carpal tunnel has subsided.
That's because you've been therapeutically drinking rosé since the 9 a.m. staff meeting. It doesn't have the deep crimson that's a dead giveaway, yet also doesn't look like you've absconded with your child's apple juice. The afternoon is starting to look better. The heat reflecting off the rows of sedans and SUVs gives the strip mall a trippy look. You think about popping over to REI to get one of those the water bottles that isn't transparent. Someday summer will end and a rosé simply won't be appropriate. You're not in college any more, after all.
Saturday, June 23, 2012
In which I somewhat praise Mark North
Disclosure: My wife is a KIPP employee. I was a KIPP employee three years ago. Obviously, we have close connections to the entire school.
A few weeks ago, N and I attended a school board meeting. This was the meeting where Mark North went in to beast mode on KIPP's charter application for a middle school in Whites Creek. He cited poor science and reading scores and convinced the other board members to deny, for now. 7-0 against (two board members went on vacation during charter approval time, apparently).
Some things I know:
• KIPP's scores in some subjects weren't great for the 2010-2011 school year. The information that North cited was correct. I won't discuss the "taken out of context" issue for now, as it's not germane to the point I want to make.
• Many factors caused those scores to not be so great.
• KIPP's overall record over student growth is very good. It isn't excellent and it isn't average. The average student achieves much more in a given year than in attending their zoned school. This was true in 2010-2011, as well as most every other year.
• KIPP's scores for 2011-2012 are vastly improved from 2010-2011, particularly in the problematic subjects. Mark North had access to this information when he spoke against KIPP's charter application.
• Many factors caused the rise in scores. Among others, KIPP brought in many new teachers and several new support staff that dealt with coaching teachers and better processing student data. All teachers finished the school year.
Some things I don't know:
• Mark North's motives
• Mark North's heart
• Mark North's previous interactions with KIPP -- whether he's visited the school, whether he previously aired his concerns vis a vis student achievement with KIPP's leaders/board of directors
****
Since I don't know North's motives or heart, I will take what he did at face value.
Most of what he did is what I would like to see from all school board members. Namely, aggressive oversight of public schools, particularly in regards to student achievement. School board members should do more in holding district administrators and principals accountable for student achievement. At least part of this should be a public process. Parents should be able to get the full picture of where their child's school is and what its plan is for improving achievement.
Public schools, district and charter alike, are funded by public dollars and are accountable to the public. Mark North, as an elected representative of the public, has not only the right, but the obligation to diligently oversee all of MNPS' schools on their raison d'etre: student achievement.
Each school, not just ones applying for a new charter, should be held to a high standard. Especially in a district that has record of struggling in student achievement, this should be what every MNPS employee at every school thinks about morning, noon, and night. They should be doing that because the elected board responsible for MNPS should be putting incredible pressure on them to do so.
****
Now, there is some question about the timing of this presentation. It strikes me that at the end of the charter approval process is a rather auspicious time to raise a bunch of supposed red flags. If North felt so strongly that KIPP is a terrible school, why didn't he raise these concerns with KIPP when he first had access to the scores, which was at least a year ago?
OK, maybe he was busy then. Perhaps the result of one school -- that, to be fair, wasn't in his district -- was lost in the sea of test scores from eighty-some-odd other schools (many of which had far worse scores). Did he raise these concerns when KIPP initially applied? Throughout the review process? (The process which, it should be noted, resulted in KIPP getting one of the few recommendations for approval.) He is, after all, an elected supervisor of all things Metro Nashville Public Schools. He could've aired his concerns much earlier if he wanted to make sure that KIPP was making the big changes necessary to increase student achievement.
North, to my knowledge, did not do that. Nor did any other school board member. (Please let me know if I'm misinformed on this point.) North gets my attention on this point, as he did chose to bring all of this up at the charter approval hearing.
North's actions are analogous to driving by a burning house, driving by it again, wondering if you should take a walk near the house, reading about the burnt house in the newspaper next day, then calling the owner of the house to inform that his house burned down.
****
KIPP did what a school should do when it gets test scores that are the educational equivalent of a house on fire. New teachers were brought in. Processes were re-examined, particularly those that focused on supporting teachers and improving student achievement. The schools faculty and staff (trust me on this) put a lot of pressure on themselves to improve.
And they did. Drastically. It's one of the best turnaround stories in the district -- and probably the state, too.
While these scores weren't available to the general public (they are now), North had access to them as soon as they were available. He chose not to include the most recent data in his presentation. The other board members, including board chair Gracie Porter, in whose district KIPP resides, chose to present no additional information. Instead, they voted with North.
(N.B. KIPP's second-in-command was sitting next to me in the audience that day. All of board members knew he was there because earlier, when discussing a different topic, they had asked if representatives of the different charter organizations were in attendance. Why North, nor any of the board members, chose not to invite Rick to speak is something else to ponder.)
****
The meeting demonstrated that a school board member can focus a great deal of attention on student achievement, when motivated to do so.
Therefore, it matters a great deal who is on the board.
It would be useful to have people on the board who use their position to keep student achievement at the forefront of every decision the district makes.
It would be even more useful to have school board members who acted early enough to make a significant impact on student achievement.
A few weeks ago, N and I attended a school board meeting. This was the meeting where Mark North went in to beast mode on KIPP's charter application for a middle school in Whites Creek. He cited poor science and reading scores and convinced the other board members to deny, for now. 7-0 against (two board members went on vacation during charter approval time, apparently).
Some things I know:
• KIPP's scores in some subjects weren't great for the 2010-2011 school year. The information that North cited was correct. I won't discuss the "taken out of context" issue for now, as it's not germane to the point I want to make.
• Many factors caused those scores to not be so great.
• KIPP's overall record over student growth is very good. It isn't excellent and it isn't average. The average student achieves much more in a given year than in attending their zoned school. This was true in 2010-2011, as well as most every other year.
• KIPP's scores for 2011-2012 are vastly improved from 2010-2011, particularly in the problematic subjects. Mark North had access to this information when he spoke against KIPP's charter application.
• Many factors caused the rise in scores. Among others, KIPP brought in many new teachers and several new support staff that dealt with coaching teachers and better processing student data. All teachers finished the school year.
Some things I don't know:
• Mark North's motives
• Mark North's heart
• Mark North's previous interactions with KIPP -- whether he's visited the school, whether he previously aired his concerns vis a vis student achievement with KIPP's leaders/board of directors
****
Since I don't know North's motives or heart, I will take what he did at face value.
Most of what he did is what I would like to see from all school board members. Namely, aggressive oversight of public schools, particularly in regards to student achievement. School board members should do more in holding district administrators and principals accountable for student achievement. At least part of this should be a public process. Parents should be able to get the full picture of where their child's school is and what its plan is for improving achievement.
Public schools, district and charter alike, are funded by public dollars and are accountable to the public. Mark North, as an elected representative of the public, has not only the right, but the obligation to diligently oversee all of MNPS' schools on their raison d'etre: student achievement.
Each school, not just ones applying for a new charter, should be held to a high standard. Especially in a district that has record of struggling in student achievement, this should be what every MNPS employee at every school thinks about morning, noon, and night. They should be doing that because the elected board responsible for MNPS should be putting incredible pressure on them to do so.
****
Now, there is some question about the timing of this presentation. It strikes me that at the end of the charter approval process is a rather auspicious time to raise a bunch of supposed red flags. If North felt so strongly that KIPP is a terrible school, why didn't he raise these concerns with KIPP when he first had access to the scores, which was at least a year ago?
OK, maybe he was busy then. Perhaps the result of one school -- that, to be fair, wasn't in his district -- was lost in the sea of test scores from eighty-some-odd other schools (many of which had far worse scores). Did he raise these concerns when KIPP initially applied? Throughout the review process? (The process which, it should be noted, resulted in KIPP getting one of the few recommendations for approval.) He is, after all, an elected supervisor of all things Metro Nashville Public Schools. He could've aired his concerns much earlier if he wanted to make sure that KIPP was making the big changes necessary to increase student achievement.
North, to my knowledge, did not do that. Nor did any other school board member. (Please let me know if I'm misinformed on this point.) North gets my attention on this point, as he did chose to bring all of this up at the charter approval hearing.
North's actions are analogous to driving by a burning house, driving by it again, wondering if you should take a walk near the house, reading about the burnt house in the newspaper next day, then calling the owner of the house to inform that his house burned down.
****
KIPP did what a school should do when it gets test scores that are the educational equivalent of a house on fire. New teachers were brought in. Processes were re-examined, particularly those that focused on supporting teachers and improving student achievement. The schools faculty and staff (trust me on this) put a lot of pressure on themselves to improve.
And they did. Drastically. It's one of the best turnaround stories in the district -- and probably the state, too.
While these scores weren't available to the general public (they are now), North had access to them as soon as they were available. He chose not to include the most recent data in his presentation. The other board members, including board chair Gracie Porter, in whose district KIPP resides, chose to present no additional information. Instead, they voted with North.
(N.B. KIPP's second-in-command was sitting next to me in the audience that day. All of board members knew he was there because earlier, when discussing a different topic, they had asked if representatives of the different charter organizations were in attendance. Why North, nor any of the board members, chose not to invite Rick to speak is something else to ponder.)
****
The meeting demonstrated that a school board member can focus a great deal of attention on student achievement, when motivated to do so.
Therefore, it matters a great deal who is on the board.
It would be useful to have people on the board who use their position to keep student achievement at the forefront of every decision the district makes.
It would be even more useful to have school board members who acted early enough to make a significant impact on student achievement.
Friday, June 22, 2012
I was a victim of 'drugs in small towns'
When I took my first reporting job out of high school, I landed at the Vicksburg Post, covering crime and the regional beat, which spanned 6 counties and parishes in Mississippi and Louisiana. After a few weeks on the beat, I noticed a trend in what I was seeing in the small-town lockups, so I proposed an ambitious series to my managing editor.
"I want to write about the effects of drugs in small towns."
"Knock yourself out," she said.
I worked on this for weeks. Weeks. I scheduled interviews with sheriffs, addicts, district attorneys, anyone who touched this topic. Which, I soon realized, was a lot of people. I wrote exploratory essays -- I think I had 5,000 words at one point. And I still hadn't wrapped my mind around the scope of the issue. Each Tuesday in our reporters meeting, I mentioned that I was still working on the series. (I'm sure that behind my back, it became a running joke among the other reporters and editors.) It became an albatross -- I had told my boss that I was going to do something, but it just wasn't working out. The issue was so large, so hard to pinpoint themes beyond the obvious. (As Mr. Mackey from "South Park" frequently says, "Drugs are bad. Mmm-kay?") Not to mention that I had interviewed all of these people, yet no story had come forth. I was still seeing many of the sources on a daily basis (since, as my boss pointed out, "The newspaper is published every day," and it was my job to make a good chunk of it was filled with news under my byline). I felt awkward every time I called the Claiborne County sheriff, though he never asked me about the status of the story.
The stress got to be too much. I told my boss that the story wasn't going to come together.
"Of course," she said. "Drugs in small towns? Are you kidding me? But I thought it would be good for you to get out there and meet people."
I was 22 at the time, so forgive my naivete: "Haven't I hurt my relationship with these same people? What's going to happen when I don't publish anything from the interviews?"
"Nothing," she said. "They don't care about you. It was just another interview with an ignorant reporter for them. Get used to it."
****
I think a lot of stuff about a lot of different topics. I keep telling myself that I should write about it, if nothing else, to help me sort out my thoughts. What's kept from it is the sheer size of many of the topics that interest me: How can we radically increase student achievement? What are the best structures for learning environments? Why is our country so polarized? Why are we cruel to each other?
These, and many others, are big topics. Therefore, expect a lot of commentary on country music, football, and bourbon. Not necessarily in that order.
"I want to write about the effects of drugs in small towns."
"Knock yourself out," she said.
I worked on this for weeks. Weeks. I scheduled interviews with sheriffs, addicts, district attorneys, anyone who touched this topic. Which, I soon realized, was a lot of people. I wrote exploratory essays -- I think I had 5,000 words at one point. And I still hadn't wrapped my mind around the scope of the issue. Each Tuesday in our reporters meeting, I mentioned that I was still working on the series. (I'm sure that behind my back, it became a running joke among the other reporters and editors.) It became an albatross -- I had told my boss that I was going to do something, but it just wasn't working out. The issue was so large, so hard to pinpoint themes beyond the obvious. (As Mr. Mackey from "South Park" frequently says, "Drugs are bad. Mmm-kay?") Not to mention that I had interviewed all of these people, yet no story had come forth. I was still seeing many of the sources on a daily basis (since, as my boss pointed out, "The newspaper is published every day," and it was my job to make a good chunk of it was filled with news under my byline). I felt awkward every time I called the Claiborne County sheriff, though he never asked me about the status of the story.
The stress got to be too much. I told my boss that the story wasn't going to come together.
"Of course," she said. "Drugs in small towns? Are you kidding me? But I thought it would be good for you to get out there and meet people."
I was 22 at the time, so forgive my naivete: "Haven't I hurt my relationship with these same people? What's going to happen when I don't publish anything from the interviews?"
"Nothing," she said. "They don't care about you. It was just another interview with an ignorant reporter for them. Get used to it."
****
I think a lot of stuff about a lot of different topics. I keep telling myself that I should write about it, if nothing else, to help me sort out my thoughts. What's kept from it is the sheer size of many of the topics that interest me: How can we radically increase student achievement? What are the best structures for learning environments? Why is our country so polarized? Why are we cruel to each other?
These, and many others, are big topics. Therefore, expect a lot of commentary on country music, football, and bourbon. Not necessarily in that order.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)