If You Can Get Your Dog's Teeth Cleaned, You Can Afford Donating to Human Dental Care

I was asked today in a survey if I have my dog's teeth cleaned at the vet's.

My answer was polite but an emphatic "No."

But if I love Marley, why wouldn't I?

This is the start of a screed because, to me, paying to have my dog's teeth cleaned is just another sign that we live in a dying, teetering hulk of a culture.

Marley's a dog. Of course, humankind's first and best friend among the animals but let me repeat, he's a dog.

First off, do wolves have their teeth cleaned? No. Why? I mean, besides the obvious of the cost and difficulty of getting one into the vet in the first place.

Because they don't need it. Their diet, which includes chewing through hide and bones (regularly scrubbing their pearly whites), makes the practice irrelevant.

Same for Canis Domesticus although I grant a Pug is about as far removed from a wolf as Homo Sapiens is from Australopithecus.

I see commercial after commercial on TV, touting the latest "balanced" dog food that includes vegetables and every other enticement to hook humans but have little to nothing to do with required canine nutrition. Of course, feeding a dog a human diet will result in dental problems among other things. If a dog is fed correctly and allowed to chew rawhide toys and bones, their teeth should last them through their lives. And be white enough, dammit.

This doesn't mean that doggy dentition should be ignored. Of course not. Disease and injury should be promptly and effectively handled just like any other medical problem.

The veterinary industry has managed to provide the pet-owning segment of the population one more useless service as a solution to a manufactured problem. Even my own father, who at 90 years old should know better, regularly has Fritz' teeth cleaned. At $40 per cleaning.

And, seriously, unless you're there holding Fido's head, do you have any assurance that the vet accomplished any good at all?

But it's symptomatic and totally in keeping with the trends of American pet ownership. I hear more and more people comfortable with being called their pet's "Mommy" or "Daddy." I love Marley but I ain't no damned dog's "Daddy."

However, I will concede, living in Madison where there are mobile vet clinics, ambulances for pets, and pet funeral services available, this really isn't the worst of the gross and squalid wastes of money on animals. My personal favorite, although I haven't seen it here in Madison, is the Poop Patrol where you can have your pockets fleeced by a service because you're too damned lazy to pick up after your pet.

Last, it seems to me if Fido's "Mommy" or "Daddy" have the income to pay for regular tooth cleaning, they really ought to be donating that money to helping human children get elementary dental care.

Liberals Fear Snow!

"It's true. I'm absolutely fearless except for this one small thing," said Lindsey Bowden quietly, "I can prove it. I've never voted a split ticket in my life. I had a Nader bumper sticker before anyone else. I was donating to Oxfam before it became trendy. I tried Australian wines when no one else would. I bought my first Pottery Barn vase in 1991. I've marched in pro-abortion rallies. I've never even thought of supporting a Republican."

But the "this one small thing" that the 42-year-old social worker from Middleton, WI, fears has come upon her as it does every year at this time - driving on snowy roads.

"I just cringe when it gets to be November. I just curl into a ball when the weather report comes up with snow," she added, "I just know that I'm just going to be terrified in the morning. I have to extend my yoga routine for an hour just to be able to sleep."

However, like the thousands of other liberals who feel and behave as she does, the white, divorced mother of one child gets into her Subaru with its obligatory Obama-Biden, I Brake for Animals and Darwin bumper stickers on these winter mornings.

Then, like the thousands of other liberals who feel and behave as she does, she puts on her seatbelts, locks the doors, puts her free-trade-organic-beans-ground-that-morning coffee in the cupholder, turns on National Public Radio and makes sure there aren't any squirrels in the driveway behind her.

Lindsey then joins the thousands of other liberals who feel and behave as she does in their Subarus with their own set of obligatory declarations of liberal fealty on the highway.

There, like the thousands of other liberals who feel and behave as she does, she drives at what she calls a "safe and sane 37 miles per hour," regardless of weather conditions. Or traffic. Or posted speed limits. Or common sense.

"It's hard," she admits, "I know I'm not doing the popular thing. All of those SUVs with the 'W' stickers zoom by me, shaking their fists or giving me the finger. I can see their mouths moving and I know they're saying all sorts of unkind things. It hurts but, deep down, I know I'm doing the right thing."

WTF on "Quality of Life"

News Flash: children of Baby Boomers will not have the quality of life that their parents did.

WTF?

Seriously, what do we mean by "quality of life"? How can that concept be meaningfully applied across generations and among groups of people? Certainly demographers, sociologists, and politicians dance on the head of that pin constantly but that doesn't make them right.

Problem is that "quality of life" seems to be popularly translated into "how much stuff can I possibly accumulate just because it's new or my friends don't have it regardless of my ability to pay for it or the costs to the environment."

The holiday season, especially Christmas, crystallizes this distinction with frighteningly clarity. We're called on to buy-buy-buy so that the thirsts of our collective "quality of life" can be slaked.

If a high "quality of life" demands slavering, blind entitlement to the next big (usually expensive) thing that some advertiser has bamboozled you into believing you need, then by all means, join the herd of cattle who trample a Wal-Mart worker to death on Black Friday.

If a slip in "quality of life" translates into having only a 42, 46, and 48-inch flat panel Plasma TV from each of eight different manufacturers to choose from, then I'm all for that fall.

If the body politic's "quality of life" is dependent on being able to choose from a slew of SUVs all with abysmal MPG ratings, then I willingly seek a drop in "quality of life."

If "quality of life" means that I have to save up for an item, rather than heedlessly put it on a credit card, then put me down as a self-denying ascetic.

If "quality of life" is tied to having the "Poop Patrol" come to my home to scoop up my dog's excrement (for a price) or if I have to get someone come to my home to sanitize my garbage cans (for a price) then, great, fine, count me among the economic Luddites.

If a slip in "quality of life" means even fewer people can get meaningful healthcare at an affordable price, then that's a tragedy and not a slip I'm willing to accept.

If "quality of life" means acceptance of poisonous air and water, then that's also not acceptable.

If "quality of life" entails a selfish, callous disregard for the planet and the fragile systems on which we all depend, well, is that really a question?

My Journey of Hope

My journey? Do I dare to answer this series of questions honestly? This journey has been one of hope – hope that I would eventually, actually get to information/skills/techniques that helped to fulfill my responsibility in workforce development as a teacher. The class description was particularly intriguing as I had thought it would be the capstone to my classwork and provide some needed insights/skills/techniques that would be directly applicable to my research project.

That is, what are my responsibilities as a teacher attempting to guide a class drawn from a population that is:
· Increasingly diverse in its ethnicities and cultures
· Respectful of the continuing progress of women in the workplace
· Respectful of language considerations
· Respectful of religious considerations?

I’m pretty sure that hope was not fully realized. Feeling that I had not done my "due diligence," I went back and read the entire catalog entry for the course this morning. In retrospect, I guess the entry should have warned me otherwise. Certainly, Becky went out of her way to provide alternate assignments for the pre-secondary classmates. That was definitely appreciated and valuable.

Perhaps it's always been a question of definition and certainly "workforce development" has been a social and political football since the phrase was first used. Indeed, Wisconsin government used the phrase as its "cloak" for welfare reform in the middle 90's. I did a cursory search on the Internet and it seems the phrase is nearly exclusively used in terms of adult employees and skills/attitudes required in the workplace. Conversely, I did not get a single "hit" that linked "workforce development" with elementary grades.

I am also not conscious of a particular "process" in my use of time, my use of Stout resources, or interaction with Becky and the rest of the class. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying this journey has been without value. This course has been a fine review of skills and techniques that I had previously had exposure to. The interaction with a fascinating and diverse group of people has been especially valuable.

In particular, I have kept and will apply the "outcomes" from Module 3 - Rigorous and Relevant Questions and Module Four: Team-based Problem Solving & Inquiry. These two modules had the most pointed and directly applicable skills/techniques that I can apply to teaching adults. As I indicated for Module 3, questions are my professional life and any means of increasing my ability (and hence my students' ability) to ask incisive questions and get incisive answers is a benefit.

Not Sure of Creativity Applied Here

I’m pretty sure I didn’t follow a particular creative process as I was hard-pressed to simply get this done. It felt much more like cookbook, fill-in-the-blank more than I can certainly agree this is a worthwhile teaching/learning exercise but I am just as certain there isn’t a direct application to workforce development.
Frankly, this seems like a lot of “moving parts” for projects that I work on everyday. And that is probably the value from a classroom perspective. By breaking a large, complex task into its constituent parts, students can analyze, research, compile, and comprehend.

One-handed (As Opposed To Off-hand) Observation

First off, forgive the terseness and perhaps greater ill temper in my responses this week. I had my right thumb re-built last Thursday (damned osteoarthritis) and typing one-handed gets tedious in a hurry.

What struck me most about these collaborative / communication tools (or, really, rather processes) is that the technology simultaneously makes the collaboration possible while not becoming the end result, the deliverable.

That’s why I call a fishbowl a process and not a tool. It’s an elegant metaphor – participants and participation are so wonderfully transparent. In looking at the several examples, there were different software programs involved.

You wouldn’t expect to go to Best Buy and buy fishbowl software in a box. And, after all, nothing previously actually prevented a “fishbowl” from occurring in ‘real life’, was there?

The technology also seems to aid in grading. To extend the metaphor of transparency, it’s much easier to see the quality of participation.

In one of the supporting documents for the Arapahoe “Fishbowl 101,” one of the expectations reads, “Also, there will be one chair for the presenters to select 5 random people (drawn names) who at some time must jump into the discussion and participate. If a drawn name individual does not participate, he or she will not be able to regain 2 of their 10 daily points. Any sign of a lack of preparation by a circle member will result in the loss of points for that particular day.”

This seems to be a quantum leap over “old-style,” “live” classroom discussions because of the logging / tracking capacity of most of the software programs available.

Relating Bloom's Taxonomy and the Big6

I was nearly tempted, early on, to skip over this question because it seemed well ... just not really a question. They appear, again at first blush, to be related not at all. But the obvious doesn't always follow through.

After all, Bloom's Taxonomy is an organization of creative and thinking skills, of meta-skills, described in one of the Module 3 readings as " ... provid[ing] a way to organise (sic) thinking skills into six levels, from the most basic to the higher order levels of thinking." On the other hand, the Big6 is a prescription for getting a project or specified amount of work done and is, indeed, called a "model/tool" in the summary chart in Activity 3 of this module.

Both are solidly cognitive domain constructs, despite the revisions in Bloom's Taxonomy to incorporate the two other realms (affective and psychomotor).

Bloom's Taxonomy and the Big6 are strictly hierarchical and the temptation would be to map the levels of Bloom's to the steps of the Big 6. While perhaps an engaging intellectual exercise, it would seem ultimately futile:
The Creating level of Bloom's Taxonomy happens before the Big6 Evaluation step because its focus is on what happened. Similar arguments can be made against simple one-to-one matching of the other five levels and steps.

It seems that the best way to relate the two constructs is to consider each level of Bloom's Taxonomy as the method to explore or as a "checklist" for each step of the Big6. In other words, in order to complete Task Definition, you need to have answers relating to all of Bloom's Taxonomy from the literal, "What do I remember about this task, this subject, this project?" (remembering)) going through each level of Bloom's to arrive at the final definition of the task (creation).

Creativity - At Right Angles

Describing the creative process is almost a contradiction in terms for me. Creativity has always seemed to work at right angles to intent; that is, for me to sit down and say, “Now I will be creative and insightful and brilliant” and things just flow. Doesn’t happen that often.
When I transcend being a craftsman and become an artist, the Muse sneaks in somewhere and whispers much more than sweet nothings in my ear.
I’ve found that the harder I try to be creative, the more elusive the creativity becomes.
However, that’s not a particularly useful response and puts creativity on a somewhat loftier pedestal than may be warranted.
In looking at my creative process, I’ve realized in the course of answering this question that it’s exactly the opposite of what I do at work. Instead of de-constructing a single (usually coherent, defensible, and attainable) concept, creativity is a matter of using a lot of little things to build up to a new (perhaps unique, perhaps very compelling) construct. In this particular case, I looked at as many examples of PBL as available in the time allotted and read the assignments. I was looking for similarities and for gaps. By gaps, I mean what hadn’t been done before (within the breadth of my search) and what would be appealing to my (virtual students).
All of these pieces, these bits of ideas, eventually coalesced into the draft of a new construct. However, it’s just a draft. I find that simply putting the idea in the form of the final assignment that new possibilities and gaps present themselves.
And the process starts again. The conclusion? The good news is that creativity produces something – the next possibility.
Fortunately, this struggle can be verbalized and shared with students. By “opening up” this process with students, they can also be drawn in, especially if I “admit” to being stuck on a particular point or coming to a fast but not particularly successful “creation.” Seems like it takes a very few words to describe what is ultimately a highly complicated give-and-take.
From this openness, students can feel more secure in their own explorations and lack of infallibility. After all, if the teacher isn’t perfect, it’ gives them permission to be less than perfect, too. And I’ve never been comfortable with being the kind of authority figure that McCain describes in his early chapters.
With that level of comfort, students (even adults!) can be more open, more experimental, and more – dare I say it? – creative.

Implementing Ted McCain's Ideas

I must confess that my first response was to feel the same level of impatience with Ted McCain that I do with so many other “I've-seen-the-light-and-this-is-the-NEW-way-to-teach” tomes.

That accounted for the first two “significant changes” as in “Yeah, yeah, what else ya got?”

I wasn't sure if I was angry for paying so much for such a slim volume or grateful that it was, indeed, short. I started reading McCain a week late as the book was delayed due to a mix-up on payment. So I decided to read it all, all at once. (See above paragraph.)

It wasn't until he explained what he meant under:
3. We must stop giving students the final product of our thinking.
4. We must make a fundamental shift - problems first, teaching second that I changed my mind.

Finally. Here were practical, pragmatic methods of teaching that addressed the needs of 21st Century Skills. The teacher became the initiator, the source or the guide, instead of the judge and arbiter. The students were empowered to act – or not.

This completely dovetails with my experience in training adults. Adults don't want to get lectured at; they're accustomed to taking responsibility for their own learning (or not). They're used to having parameters set out and have learned (or can be coached into asking the kinds of questions that move them toward achieving the goal (finishing the job, doing the assignment).

But it was his descriptions that really turned my perceptions around – in very specific terms, he showed how a class could essentially run itself.

This was not to excuse the teacher. It seems to me that McCain's approach actually demands MORE of a teacher – certainly in finding and defining the kinds of problems/ real world situations that encompass a class's objectives and still be contained within a class.

To be a guide, to consistently resist the temptation to “tell” and to give the canned explanation, to prepare and have the resources to answer questions that may go far afield (legitimately) but beyond one's preparation also sounds far more difficult than “teaching to the test.”

As I am not currently teaching, no, I haven't implemented any of these approaches but I certainly intend to do so.

Thinking about the Framework for 21st Century Skills

Now that you have explored the Framework for 21st Century Skills- what are your thoughts?

I have heard it, read it, watched it and I still don't see where these skills are any more 21st Century than they are 20th Century (or 2nd Century for that matter).

I realize I may be committing grade suicide here but I can't help but echo Jay Matthews, the Washington Post education columnist who noted, “The organizations involved in the 21st-century effort are staffed by good people. I am going to assume that we agree that we need to look closely at the details of teaching these skills, and in that spirit I want to make two suggestions.

"First, please try to avoid the lethal disease that infects so many of these studies. I call it All-at-once-itis. That refers to the irresistible urge to insist that the changes have to be accomplished ALL AT ONCE, or we will fall short of our important objectives.

"In this democracy we never make good changes all at once. The presidential campaign and economic crisis are proof of that. So please don't tell us we have to.


"Second -- and this will wreak havoc with report deadlines -- why not wait to release your recommendations until you have tried them out on at least two or three schools with a few hundred students?

"I won't insist on proof of success. I just want to get a sense of how young human beings, and their teachers, react to all these new hoops they must jump through. (This will also help stifle my suspicion that you don't actually know how to do any of the things you are suggesting.)

"No one is going to pay attention to what I want, of course. The report writers know I will keep reading their stuff, full of hope that I will eventually find some classroom reality among all the pie charts.

"I am not saying the people who issue these pronouncements are wrong. Many of their ideas are excellent. But if we are going to make them happen, they have to show us what it is going to take, besides just more concerned citizens spending more money to produce more reports like this one."

Yes, they're phrased and packaged in a contemporary way. The presentations are all very “professional” (which I've found to be the word used when something looks like it wasn't done by an amateur and devoid of any appreciation of content). The urgency of addressing problems has grown exponentially from the 2nd to the 21st Century, certainly. The stakes of making mistakes or not aggressively addressing challenges has certainly grown.

Lest anyone get the opinion that I'm sort of latter-day Luddite, I'll readily grant that Information and Communications Literacy (ICT) is an utterly new construct worthy of separate attention and inclusion in the curriculum.

As the slide says, Use the ICT Literacy Maps for Math, Science, English, Geography, and Social Studies.

As I've commented elsewhere, this should be incorporated at the earliest levels where there is some support for it being effective. It seems this alone would be something quantifiable, easily (or should be easily) communicated to even the most parochial or ignorant school board member, and straightforward in implementation. Pursuing this alone would be a huge leap forward for the American education effort and one that would certainly have payoffs in the workplace.

The Life Skills List continues to bother me.

Why is Personal Responsibility any more important now than it ever has been, for example? Has there ever been a time when personal productivity wasn't important? Seems like a lot of effort went into coming up with this list and it doesn't just resonate with me.

Global awareness is critical, yes, but can't it be incorporated right now? Watching currency exchange rates would be a great way to teach division (dollars to Euros, Euros to dollars, for example) at the lower grades, graphing the changes in exchange rates for higher grades, and analysis of those trends for upper levels of high school. What is it going to cost? Is some principal really going to say “No, don't do that?”

Response to Blog Entries from Module 1

Okay, first the disclaimers. My “day job” is a business analyst for WEA Trust, the Wisconsin teacher’s union benefits company meaning I am not a classroom teacher. My claim to being involved in education is a sometimes-trainer and a nearly full-time curriculum writer and developer. So I couldn’t really answer the assessment questions any more honestly than could Paul

I can offer some perspective from that business-industry point of view and as a “consumer” (if only working with recent graduates on teams and some informal mentoring) of the American public school system.

In reading the blogs of my classmates, I am encouraged to see that all of them are in the “transitional” stage in terms of their MILE assessments. (I will take it at face value that the survey was accurate, the respondents were able to express themselves accurately, etc.)

I detected a bit of discouragement from a few that they were “only” in the transitional stage. However, the great thing is that they and their districts have started to acknowledge the need for change but, even better, have taken steps to achieve those changes. On the other hand, I am worried that all of them are in the “transitional” in this literally globe-spanning if scientifically invalid slice of teaching. From a business-industry perspective, I know the U.S. can’t wait for another five to 10 years for schools to collectively “get it together” and contribute graduates from the K-12 system and post-secondary system who can contribute effectively from very early in their tenure.

I am encouraged that all of the practicing teachers see a personal responsibility to not just teach well within their own subject but also show a district-wide responsibility to move education forward. I am equally pleased that they recognize teachers can be their own worst enemies. From personal experience, I can safely agree that teachers are often the worst students and the most resistant to change (even when it can be shown to be in their own best interest).

I am, however, discouraged that so many of the themes – getting everyone on board, having open and innovative leadership, better tools, more time – are the same things that I’ve heard, well, at least since I covered education as a newspaper reporter in four different states and at least 24 different districts.

Time, the time to learn new technology and 21^st Century skills teaching tools, time to apply them in the classroom, tempt me into this digression. 21^st Century skills are “messy,” just as democracy is “messy,” and any process that puts humans in the center of things is “messy.”

This connects to time because, as one of my colleagues mentioned, she gives small groups time in her science class to discern and understand the steps involved in an experiment. How many schools can grant that kind of time, that kind of “messiness” with the dictates of No Child Left Behind hounding their every move?

I was also a bit surprised that only one of my colleagues even brought up the question of creatively teaching to a diverse student group. In my own workplace, this is a near constant challenge as we have rotating groups of off-shore IT personnel.

I was pleased that one of our colleagues commented, “The tendency of education to be separate from the world and exist only in learning institutions has to change.” Nothing occurs in a vacuum and let me extend that time-weary bromide by adding, that schools reflect that reality just as they reflect the society in which they operate.

Let me suggest because I didn’t really read it from my colleague’s blogs or read it in the articles. It must be a two-way flow of meaningful programming so that businesses get the employees they need while the schools get the support and recognition they need.

Yes, it’s one thing to solicit the input from local businesses on what kinds of skills they need. But it’s getting down to the practical. How many districts have partnerships/internships/apprenticeships that go beyond the Explorer Scout “gee-whiz, ain’t that interestin’” level? How many districts get students involved in the real world beyond granting time off to flip burgers or fold sweaters at Wal-Mart? I’m talking about meaningful exposure and not the silly posturing of Junior Achievement.

As a liberal arts graduate and unrepentant generalist, I want to hasten to caution against total and absolute kowtowing to the needs of business-industry in a school. The antithesis of what I’m perceiving as “21^st Century skills” is the technologically adept drone who meets the letter but not the spirit of a job opening.