There has been much breathless discussion lately surrounding the national debt ceiling as total government debt approaches the legal limit. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said there was "no alternative" and threatened Congress with unspecified "catastrophic" consequences if the limit was not increased. Of course, he is merely following in the tradition of terroristic threats by corrupt Treasury officials.
But just as the implied threats of martial law were used by Henry Paulson as cover for one of the biggest thefts in history, we must now ask what lurks behind the current spate of threats out of Treasury? Paulson lied about what the TARP was to be used for - which is why he demanded immunity in advance. Geithner is lying about the need for an immediate increase in the debt limit. What is being hidden is many activities that aid speculators and bureaucrats that will have to end if the limit stays in place.
In the real world there is a problem that a lot of money is being spent that has nothing to do with the operations of the federal government. This can be seen clearly in the recent announcement that the Treasury will be selling off some of its $142 billion of MBS (mortgage backed securities). There really is no legitimate function of government that relates to manipulating the price of bonds. It's good that they are looking to get rid of them but there is no reason to have them in the first place other than to overpay to help sellers and also to make continuing holders look more solvent by deliberately distorting the "market" price.
Then there are the loans which Treasury has extended to the states to cover their own spending. The state unemployment funds are in hock to Washington for $46.3 billion as of March 23. This is problematic in that it undermines the constitutional requirements that many states must balance their budget every year. It also undermines the ability of the states to function as sovereign entities when they are financially so beholden to the central government. Thus it is a direct attack on the our Federal system of government.
Secretary Tim Geithner is not running a Treasury Department. He is in fact running a bank under the aegis of the federal government and Congress needs to keep that in mind as he goes begging them for more money. Treasury should not be in the business of lending money to the states or of buying private market debt. Those are functions for commercial banks and bond markets. Worse still, those banking functions have been performed using the credit of the American People. If Geithner was not playing these games, the Treasury would have another $190 billion in borrowing authority remaining.
Any increase in the debt limit should be conditional on the Treasury ceasing all interference in state finances and public financial markets.
Friday, 25 March 2011
Saturday, 19 March 2011
Panic Room
We will be breaking from our normal practice of commenting on economic issues to address something that is bigger and more important today. That is growing panic over radiation from Japan. Trace levels of radioisotopes have been detected in water and food near the Fukushima plant site. In one case, it exeeded the legal limits so if you are in Japan, you should take some precautions - and especially so in Northern Japan. The governments involved have no one to blame but themselves since they have destroyed their own credibility and many people won't believe them even when they tell the truth. As of today, the truth is this:
There is no threat of radiation in North America and with a couple tiny of exceptions, there is no measurable increase above background levels.
One of the sources I see quoted often by the panic-mongers is Radnet - a data gathering program of the EPA. But most people have no idea what the data means and there are many problems with the data itself. The most serious problems with the Radnet data are as follows:
1) Collection is by volunteers and by agencies that often specialize in other things. For instance, most of the California data is gathered by regiona agencies like the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. BAAQMD certainly knows what it is doing with regard to routine air pollution issues but they are hardly specialists in radiation exposure.
2) Inconsistency of the data due to the varied and non-specialist nature of the data gatherers. The data should be comparable over time at any given location but may not be comparable between different locations gathered with varying practices.
3) Timeliness is weak. The typical collection method is to use air filters to gather particulate matter and then apply a radiation detector after a 5-hour field deployment period.
4) The data is difficult to interpret. Because of we do not know with certainty the exact equipment used to measure beta and gamma exposure at a given location, we cannot be certain what conversion factor should be used for CPM to millirems or milliseiverts.
Also, the gamma exposure is divided into energy ranges. Due to the normal slope, we can feel confident that the lower ranges are lower-energy (longer wavelength) gamma rays. This is a typical pattern for background radiation. In fact, many of the less energetic "gamma rays" detected by a typical geiger counter are not technically gamma rays at all. Quite often the detection threshold for a geiger is 20 kEv or less - at a wavelength more associated with X-rays so the lower bands of gamma reported by Radnet are actually mostly X-rays. Even so, I cannot locate a chart showing the frequency or wavelength with which each gamma energy range is associated.
Nevertheless, Radnet can be a valuable tool to measure changes over time in a single location. If better data were not available, I would be forced to use it for other purposes as well. Fortunately, we have something run by people who are focused on radiation and the only real weakness is that the network is only regional.
The Department of Energy and the Desert Research Institute maintain a network of radiation monitoring stations across Nevada and western Utah known as the Community Environmental Monitoring program. The explicit purpose of CEMP is to monitor sites downwind of the underground nuclear test site in Nevada. Thus, CEMP is "focused like a laser" on radiation. Most stations update every 10 minutes and the rest do so hourly.
The data is comparable between stations and presented in an easily analyzed format. Exposure dosages are measured in microrems per hour (uR/hr) and measured constantly. The only downside is that only gamma radiation is measured, not beta but this is not a severe drawback in my opinion. There is even a tab on the display for each monitoring station that allows you to display the data from the past week in graphical format.
I checked a sampling of the monitoring stations and all of them showed gamma radiation steady as a rock for the past week. There is NO EVIDENCE of any increase in ambient radiation in Nevada or Utah at least.
The website can be found here:
CEMP
I want everyone to be safe and informed. Don't panic out of ignornace. If the data call for you to take precautions you should absolutely do so but rationally and based on facts. Good luck.
--- dataSlave
There is no threat of radiation in North America and with a couple tiny of exceptions, there is no measurable increase above background levels.
One of the sources I see quoted often by the panic-mongers is Radnet - a data gathering program of the EPA. But most people have no idea what the data means and there are many problems with the data itself. The most serious problems with the Radnet data are as follows:
1) Collection is by volunteers and by agencies that often specialize in other things. For instance, most of the California data is gathered by regiona agencies like the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. BAAQMD certainly knows what it is doing with regard to routine air pollution issues but they are hardly specialists in radiation exposure.
2) Inconsistency of the data due to the varied and non-specialist nature of the data gatherers. The data should be comparable over time at any given location but may not be comparable between different locations gathered with varying practices.
3) Timeliness is weak. The typical collection method is to use air filters to gather particulate matter and then apply a radiation detector after a 5-hour field deployment period.
4) The data is difficult to interpret. Because of we do not know with certainty the exact equipment used to measure beta and gamma exposure at a given location, we cannot be certain what conversion factor should be used for CPM to millirems or milliseiverts.
Also, the gamma exposure is divided into energy ranges. Due to the normal slope, we can feel confident that the lower ranges are lower-energy (longer wavelength) gamma rays. This is a typical pattern for background radiation. In fact, many of the less energetic "gamma rays" detected by a typical geiger counter are not technically gamma rays at all. Quite often the detection threshold for a geiger is 20 kEv or less - at a wavelength more associated with X-rays so the lower bands of gamma reported by Radnet are actually mostly X-rays. Even so, I cannot locate a chart showing the frequency or wavelength with which each gamma energy range is associated.
Nevertheless, Radnet can be a valuable tool to measure changes over time in a single location. If better data were not available, I would be forced to use it for other purposes as well. Fortunately, we have something run by people who are focused on radiation and the only real weakness is that the network is only regional.
The Department of Energy and the Desert Research Institute maintain a network of radiation monitoring stations across Nevada and western Utah known as the Community Environmental Monitoring program. The explicit purpose of CEMP is to monitor sites downwind of the underground nuclear test site in Nevada. Thus, CEMP is "focused like a laser" on radiation. Most stations update every 10 minutes and the rest do so hourly.
The data is comparable between stations and presented in an easily analyzed format. Exposure dosages are measured in microrems per hour (uR/hr) and measured constantly. The only downside is that only gamma radiation is measured, not beta but this is not a severe drawback in my opinion. There is even a tab on the display for each monitoring station that allows you to display the data from the past week in graphical format.
I checked a sampling of the monitoring stations and all of them showed gamma radiation steady as a rock for the past week. There is NO EVIDENCE of any increase in ambient radiation in Nevada or Utah at least.
The website can be found here:
CEMP
I want everyone to be safe and informed. Don't panic out of ignornace. If the data call for you to take precautions you should absolutely do so but rationally and based on facts. Good luck.
--- dataSlave
Sunday, 13 March 2011
Car Scams
Since I'm reasonably sure that our car will be totaled (not totally, but I'd put 10/1 odds on it being the case, after looking at the car), it looks like I'll be buying a new one. So, I started looking around on the various sites. On CraigsList, they warned about "Ebay scams".
There was a 2009 Nissan Altima with 29,000 miles listed for $2900. Too good to be true, so I figured it was phony. Just in case, I figured I'd send an email. Here's my response (highlighting is mine, to point out the "fishy" parts.
UPDATED 3/18 - so far, I've come across this scam three times in the last week. I haven't bought a car yet, but I have had some fun with the turkeys at the other end. Once said he was in Great Falls, and he ran for the hills when I told him I had a cousing stationed at Malmstrom AFB.
Good times, good times.
There was a 2009 Nissan Altima with 29,000 miles listed for $2900. Too good to be true, so I figured it was phony. Just in case, I figured I'd send an email. Here's my response (highlighting is mine, to point out the "fishy" parts.
Hello,Here's the info on the scam from eBay motors. I may play this jerk around for a while just on general principles. I know enough military folks that I could probably tie him in knots.
This 2009 Nissan Altima 2.5 S, automatic with 26,000 miles, runs and drives excellent(VIN: 1N4AL21E49N522850). This car has been extremely well maintained and it is fully paid. No accident, clear title, free of liens.
I have dropped my price to $2900 since this is an urgent sale and I need to sell it before 22 March, when I will be deployed in Afghanistan replacing the troops scheduled to come home.
(Note: appeal to sympathy - it's the military. Also, the chance to get something at a bargain))
I have decided to use ebay for this sale (the car isn't listed on ebay, only the payment process will be done through them). The car is already at our Military Logistic Department form Fort Bliss, TX, packed for shipping to a new owner. The Logistic Department will deliver the car to your home address in 3 days and the shipping is free for you. Since the car is in a military base, with no access you can't go there and take it, only the Logistic Department can deliver it. I will offer a 10 days period to inspect the car from the moment you receive it, before I will have your money.
(in other words, you can't see the car - just trust me).
If you agree with my price $2900, I need your FULL NAME AND COMPLETE ADDRESS, so I can inform ebay motors that I have a buyer! I will forward your details to them and then you will receive an invoice(with no further obligations or fees). Like this you'll be able to talk with them directly and ask all you want to know.
(eventually, he'll ask me to send it through Western Union, and poof goes my cash).
Hope to hear from you soon,
Sgt. XXX
UPDATED 3/18 - so far, I've come across this scam three times in the last week. I haven't bought a car yet, but I have had some fun with the turkeys at the other end. Once said he was in Great Falls, and he ran for the hills when I told him I had a cousing stationed at Malmstrom AFB.
Good times, good times.
Friday, 11 March 2011
More Fun In The Unknown Household
We had a speaker (excellent one, at that)today at the Unknown University. Just as I got out, my cell rang - the Unknown Daughter on the phone tearfully says "Mom got into an accident and she's in the hospital". No other information.
So, I rush home (I live about 2 miles from the university) and try to get some info. UW was heading to the neighboring state (about 2 hours away) for a "retreat" at our old church (actually, a sleepover with a bunch of her old girlfriends). Less than a mile from our house, she stops, since the car in front of her was turning. She promptly gets rear-ended by some moron in a Ford Explorer (she was driving our Camry, so it's likely totalled).
She was able to get out of the car, but just in case (she got whipped around pretty hard), she went to the Emergency Room on a board, and called our house (we had arranged a babysitter so someone could watch the Unknown Baby Boy until I got home from the speaker).
She managed to call us from the ER (at this point it's 4 p.m.
Six hours later, after x-rays and an MRI,she gets checked out. No major problems, but she'll be sore tomorrow once the muscles start spasming (been there, done that, bought the shirt).
However, the MRI showed a possible bulging disk in her neck, but it could it's not clear whether it's from the accident, or just "Chronic". So (since I'm seeing a back specialist in a could of weeks), maybe they're running a "have one back checkup at the regular price, get the second for $99 (after all, it works for suits, so why not?).
Granted, it's a friday night, there are whackos out there, and it's a college town (and it's a friday night).
But. Six. Hours.
Damn.
Time to start looking for another car.
So, I rush home (I live about 2 miles from the university) and try to get some info. UW was heading to the neighboring state (about 2 hours away) for a "retreat" at our old church (actually, a sleepover with a bunch of her old girlfriends). Less than a mile from our house, she stops, since the car in front of her was turning. She promptly gets rear-ended by some moron in a Ford Explorer (she was driving our Camry, so it's likely totalled).
She was able to get out of the car, but just in case (she got whipped around pretty hard), she went to the Emergency Room on a board, and called our house (we had arranged a babysitter so someone could watch the Unknown Baby Boy until I got home from the speaker).
She managed to call us from the ER (at this point it's 4 p.m.
Six hours later, after x-rays and an MRI,she gets checked out. No major problems, but she'll be sore tomorrow once the muscles start spasming (been there, done that, bought the shirt).
However, the MRI showed a possible bulging disk in her neck, but it could it's not clear whether it's from the accident, or just "Chronic". So (since I'm seeing a back specialist in a could of weeks), maybe they're running a "have one back checkup at the regular price, get the second for $99 (after all, it works for suits, so why not?).
Granted, it's a friday night, there are whackos out there, and it's a college town (and it's a friday night).
But. Six. Hours.
Damn.
Time to start looking for another car.
Wednesday, 9 March 2011
Some Reasources For Teachers
I'm not (by any account) always the best teacher. I do all right - ry (and sometimes even succeed), but I have a few personal characteristics that sometimes work against me. First, I have a certain, shall we say, lack of interpersonal skills and an occasional inability to pick up on cues (insert joke about faculty member with mild Asberger's here). In addition, I have a tendency to become a bit sarcastic under stress, and that never plays well in the classroom.
But, much like the palace eunuch, even if I can't replicate it while it's happening all around me, I know it when I see it.
I saw it today when I came across Joe Ben Hoyle's website. He's an accounting professor at the University of Richmond, and I've mentioned him previously here, where he was profiled in UR's alumni magazine.
It turns out he has a website with some good teaching material. One of the links is to a set of short (1-2 pages each) essays on teaching and another is to his blog. Both are well worth reading. Go over the blog when you have time, but do yourself a favor, and download the essays (they're in one document) now. I almost guarantee you'll get something out of it.
But, much like the palace eunuch, even if I can't replicate it while it's happening all around me, I know it when I see it.
I saw it today when I came across Joe Ben Hoyle's website. He's an accounting professor at the University of Richmond, and I've mentioned him previously here, where he was profiled in UR's alumni magazine.
It turns out he has a website with some good teaching material. One of the links is to a set of short (1-2 pages each) essays on teaching and another is to his blog. Both are well worth reading. Go over the blog when you have time, but do yourself a favor, and download the essays (they're in one document) now. I almost guarantee you'll get something out of it.
What Really Is To Blame?
By now, everyone who reads this blog has probably heard of the book “Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses” by Arum and Roksa that basically makes the claim that the emperor has no clothing by giving evidence that students do not learn much in their four years in college. If you have missed the release of the book, you can learn more at the following URL where the authors are quoted as stating "How much are students actually learning in contemporary higher education? The answer for many undergraduates, we have concluded, is not much.”
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/01/18/study_finds_large_numbers_of_college_students_don_t_learn_much
What I find most interesting is that the blame game has started. Something is obviously wrong so what is to blame? Here are some culprits that I’ve heard mentioned: grade inflation, lack of education classes for college professors, the stress put on faculty to do research so they can’t focus on their teaching, lack of student preparation in K-12, student evaluations, lack of uniform requirements (students prefer to sign up for easier teachers – what a shock that one is), the desire of universities to retain students, increased use of adjuncts, the failure to reward good teachers appropriately, and on and on.
And, my response is—after 40 years in the classroom—certainly, all of these are a factor. We have built an education system with so many internal flaws that I’m surprised it works as well as it does. It is not one problem; there are many problems. Anyone with their eyes open should have seen this coming. You’d have to be totally in denial not to have expected these results. The only thing that surprised me about this study was that anyone was surprised.
I have always said that good teaching is not a mystery. If a teacher (a) seriously challenges a student, (b) helps the student understand the benefit from the knowledge to be obtained, (c) offers an appropriate amount of assistance, and (d) treats the student fairly, most students will be willing to climb a tall mountain for you. However, if you leave off even one of those four, students will gladly go drink beer and work on their suntans.
Is there a solution to the educational problem? Well, here is one. Following is part of an opinion piece that appeared in the University of Richmond school paper this past Thursday written by a student named Liz Monahan. (Although she has never been one of my students, I have written about Ms. Monahan and her opinion pieces previously.) And, although she is talking about this one university, my bet is that students at virtually every school in the country could say about the same thing (at least if you believe Arum and Roksa).
In her paper, I especially like her very last line. What would we teachers all do if this were to happen? Now, wouldn’t that change the world as we know it?
From Liz Monahan:
Four years of my life have been spent at a phenomenal liberal arts institution with enough learning resources (whether they be human or text) to wrap around the earth twice, and yet I find myself wondering one thing. What did I learn while I was here?
In the book, “Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses,” authors Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa discuss the data accumulated during a study they conducted on whether college students improve their critical thinking and writing skills during the four years they attend college.
The study, which involved using a standardized test called the Collegiate Learning Assessment, indicated that more than a third of students showed no critical thinking or writing improvement after four years in college.
The results of the study also indicated that 35 percent of students said they studied five hours per week or less, with a 50 percent overall decline in the number of hours spent studying compared to years past.
Sadly, I don’t doubt the data whatsoever. Excluding a small minority, we study less. I’d go as far to admit that I study less now than I did in high school. I remember spending hours on my Gateway computer typing up study guides for exams and writing extensive papers for various AP classes.
According to the study, 50 percent of the students said they didn’t have a single course that required them to write 20 pages total. I’m not shocked by that statistic either.
Granted, I am a journalism major and am writing constantly, however I do have many friends who say that when it comes to writing papers, they simply aren’t assigned them.
I can recall writing a 30-page research paper on inclusion in elementary education during my sophomore year of high school.
Thirty pages for one assignment makes all of the assignments from my general education classes at Richmond look like a two weeks paid vacation.
When I question why it is that we study less I think it all comes down to one thing: accountability. In high school I was held accountable by my parents, my teachers, my peers and more importantly, by myself.
If I didn’t put in the effort, I didn’t receive a good grade. And why should I have? I didn’t deserve one. Which was why I made sure I worked hard — always.
Accountability is not a word we hear very often in college, at least at this one. We’re all told that college is supposed to be hard.
That’s when the justifying starts. The fact that I got a C on an anthropology paper no longer has to do with the fact I wrote it the night before it was due, rather that I’m not an anthropologist. Justifications like these make lack of accountability a comfort.
Many professors are just as guilty as their students. Instead of demanding hard work, effort and, inevitably, respect from his or her students, he or she attempts to gain respect (possibly in the form of a good evaluation wink, wink) by catering to the “needs” of students.
Another possible explanation for the decrease in studying, authors of “Academically Adrift” say, may be that the pressure put on students to be socially engaged is too great. What do colleges care about? Student retention.
So a happy student means a student who is doing fun things on and around campus. Fun things on and around campus mean that student is coming back next year.
So when the admissions spiel sounds a little like, “We care about your happiness,” future generations of college students should smile because now they’re in on the joke.
Data from the CLA survey indicated that students who majored in more traditional liberal arts studies such as English or philosophy showed higher levels of critical thinking and writing skills. It makes sense. I can’t imagine it’d be easy to B.S. your way through an analysis of the Theory of Forms.
For those of you, like myself, who are questioning your personal improvement throughout your year(s) spent at University of Richmond, a word of advice: It’s not too late.
First step: Hold yourself accountable. No one will do it for you.
Second step: Challenge your teachers to challenge you.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/01/18/study_finds_large_numbers_of_college_students_don_t_learn_much
What I find most interesting is that the blame game has started. Something is obviously wrong so what is to blame? Here are some culprits that I’ve heard mentioned: grade inflation, lack of education classes for college professors, the stress put on faculty to do research so they can’t focus on their teaching, lack of student preparation in K-12, student evaluations, lack of uniform requirements (students prefer to sign up for easier teachers – what a shock that one is), the desire of universities to retain students, increased use of adjuncts, the failure to reward good teachers appropriately, and on and on.
And, my response is—after 40 years in the classroom—certainly, all of these are a factor. We have built an education system with so many internal flaws that I’m surprised it works as well as it does. It is not one problem; there are many problems. Anyone with their eyes open should have seen this coming. You’d have to be totally in denial not to have expected these results. The only thing that surprised me about this study was that anyone was surprised.
I have always said that good teaching is not a mystery. If a teacher (a) seriously challenges a student, (b) helps the student understand the benefit from the knowledge to be obtained, (c) offers an appropriate amount of assistance, and (d) treats the student fairly, most students will be willing to climb a tall mountain for you. However, if you leave off even one of those four, students will gladly go drink beer and work on their suntans.
Is there a solution to the educational problem? Well, here is one. Following is part of an opinion piece that appeared in the University of Richmond school paper this past Thursday written by a student named Liz Monahan. (Although she has never been one of my students, I have written about Ms. Monahan and her opinion pieces previously.) And, although she is talking about this one university, my bet is that students at virtually every school in the country could say about the same thing (at least if you believe Arum and Roksa).
In her paper, I especially like her very last line. What would we teachers all do if this were to happen? Now, wouldn’t that change the world as we know it?
From Liz Monahan:
Four years of my life have been spent at a phenomenal liberal arts institution with enough learning resources (whether they be human or text) to wrap around the earth twice, and yet I find myself wondering one thing. What did I learn while I was here?
In the book, “Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses,” authors Richard Arum and Josipa Roksa discuss the data accumulated during a study they conducted on whether college students improve their critical thinking and writing skills during the four years they attend college.
The study, which involved using a standardized test called the Collegiate Learning Assessment, indicated that more than a third of students showed no critical thinking or writing improvement after four years in college.
The results of the study also indicated that 35 percent of students said they studied five hours per week or less, with a 50 percent overall decline in the number of hours spent studying compared to years past.
Sadly, I don’t doubt the data whatsoever. Excluding a small minority, we study less. I’d go as far to admit that I study less now than I did in high school. I remember spending hours on my Gateway computer typing up study guides for exams and writing extensive papers for various AP classes.
According to the study, 50 percent of the students said they didn’t have a single course that required them to write 20 pages total. I’m not shocked by that statistic either.
Granted, I am a journalism major and am writing constantly, however I do have many friends who say that when it comes to writing papers, they simply aren’t assigned them.
I can recall writing a 30-page research paper on inclusion in elementary education during my sophomore year of high school.
Thirty pages for one assignment makes all of the assignments from my general education classes at Richmond look like a two weeks paid vacation.
When I question why it is that we study less I think it all comes down to one thing: accountability. In high school I was held accountable by my parents, my teachers, my peers and more importantly, by myself.
If I didn’t put in the effort, I didn’t receive a good grade. And why should I have? I didn’t deserve one. Which was why I made sure I worked hard — always.
Accountability is not a word we hear very often in college, at least at this one. We’re all told that college is supposed to be hard.
That’s when the justifying starts. The fact that I got a C on an anthropology paper no longer has to do with the fact I wrote it the night before it was due, rather that I’m not an anthropologist. Justifications like these make lack of accountability a comfort.
Many professors are just as guilty as their students. Instead of demanding hard work, effort and, inevitably, respect from his or her students, he or she attempts to gain respect (possibly in the form of a good evaluation wink, wink) by catering to the “needs” of students.
Another possible explanation for the decrease in studying, authors of “Academically Adrift” say, may be that the pressure put on students to be socially engaged is too great. What do colleges care about? Student retention.
So a happy student means a student who is doing fun things on and around campus. Fun things on and around campus mean that student is coming back next year.
So when the admissions spiel sounds a little like, “We care about your happiness,” future generations of college students should smile because now they’re in on the joke.
Data from the CLA survey indicated that students who majored in more traditional liberal arts studies such as English or philosophy showed higher levels of critical thinking and writing skills. It makes sense. I can’t imagine it’d be easy to B.S. your way through an analysis of the Theory of Forms.
For those of you, like myself, who are questioning your personal improvement throughout your year(s) spent at University of Richmond, a word of advice: It’s not too late.
First step: Hold yourself accountable. No one will do it for you.
Second step: Challenge your teachers to challenge you.
Tuesday, 1 March 2011
What It Takes To Be Great – Part II
I did a little experiment over the last two weeks and, to tell you the truth, I was a bit surprised by what I discovered. I asked my students in Intermediate Accounting II (virtually all are second semester juniors) to identify the very best teacher they have had since they entered college. For most students, their teachers provide them with the best examples of leadership. I really wanted my students to consider the attributes that it takes for a person to be a successful leader. Most of them will graduate from college and, within a year or two, they will be in a position where other workers must report to them. Often, the upward trajectory of their careers is not based on their knowledge of accounting but rather on their ability to guide and lead the people who form the members of their team. A teacher is not exactly a team leader but the characteristics for success would seem to be somewhat similar.
My students were asked to identify their very best (“best” not “favorite”) college teacher and then write a short paragraph justifying this selection. In a follow up assignment, I asked each student to boil down the characteristics of this person into just three words. I wanted to see what I could discover (and what they could discover) about being the best by looking at these descriptions.
What I fully expected to receive was what I call the 2 C’s and 3 E’s of teaching: Caring, Challenging, Engaging, Energetic, and Enthusiastic. I have always said that a teacher can go far by simply focusing on these 2 C’s and 3 E’s.
What I got was a much wider variety of responses than I had expected (some of which I didn’t even understand). So, I had to figure out how to create an organizational pattern for the information that I had gathered. I finally decided that I could take each word that I was given and assign it to one of three classifications:
Teacher’s connection to students
Teacher’s personal attributes
Teacher’s method of instruction
Okay, some of the descriptive terms could fit into more than one category but I chose to use my best judgment and force them all into one category or another. Below you will find what I learned from my students. If you want to become a better teacher (on the road to becoming a great teacher), pick out a few of these terms and work to get a bit better. As a good friend of mine recently told me, it is really hard to know how to become a better teacher – it is such a nebulous goal. However, perhaps becoming a bit more enthusiastic will help or maybe a bit more helpful. Don’t attack the goal, attack the attributes.
Or, possibly a more efficient approach would be to take this list and grade yourself: “For each of these characteristics, what grade would my students give me?”
After that, ask yourself which grades bother you the most? There are undoubtedly some areas where you won’t be pleased with your own grade. Then, as you might with one of your students, ask yourself: “What could I do to get that grade up?” Merely, by identifying the attributes where you don’t like your grade, you are taking the first steps to becoming a better teacher.
The number in parenthesis indicates a term that was mentioned by more than one student to describe their best teachers. Remember, I created the categories myself after looking at the overall list of characteristics as a method of organization.
Teacher’s connection to students
--Caring (6)
--Engaging (5)
--Helpful (5)
--Approachable (2)
--Fair (2)
--Inspirational (2)
--Motivational (2)
--Accessible
--Accommodating
--Considerate
--Empathetic
--Fear
--Friend
--Influential
--Inspiring
--Respect
--Sympathetic
--Trust
Teacher’s personal attributes
--Personable (4)
--Intelligent/smart (4)
--Knowledgeable (3)
--Down-to-earth (2)
--Energetic (2)
--Enthusiastic (2)
--Attentive
--Charismatic
--Cool
--Dedicated
--Experienced
--Genuine
--Laid-back
--Professional
--Trustworthy
Teacher’s method of instruction
--Interesting (3)
--Entertaining (2)
--Humorous (2)
--Passionate (2)
--Compelling
--Creative
--Fun
--Involved
--Organized
--Prepared
--Realistic
--Resourceful
--Storyteller
--Unpredictable
My students were asked to identify their very best (“best” not “favorite”) college teacher and then write a short paragraph justifying this selection. In a follow up assignment, I asked each student to boil down the characteristics of this person into just three words. I wanted to see what I could discover (and what they could discover) about being the best by looking at these descriptions.
What I fully expected to receive was what I call the 2 C’s and 3 E’s of teaching: Caring, Challenging, Engaging, Energetic, and Enthusiastic. I have always said that a teacher can go far by simply focusing on these 2 C’s and 3 E’s.
What I got was a much wider variety of responses than I had expected (some of which I didn’t even understand). So, I had to figure out how to create an organizational pattern for the information that I had gathered. I finally decided that I could take each word that I was given and assign it to one of three classifications:
Teacher’s connection to students
Teacher’s personal attributes
Teacher’s method of instruction
Okay, some of the descriptive terms could fit into more than one category but I chose to use my best judgment and force them all into one category or another. Below you will find what I learned from my students. If you want to become a better teacher (on the road to becoming a great teacher), pick out a few of these terms and work to get a bit better. As a good friend of mine recently told me, it is really hard to know how to become a better teacher – it is such a nebulous goal. However, perhaps becoming a bit more enthusiastic will help or maybe a bit more helpful. Don’t attack the goal, attack the attributes.
Or, possibly a more efficient approach would be to take this list and grade yourself: “For each of these characteristics, what grade would my students give me?”
After that, ask yourself which grades bother you the most? There are undoubtedly some areas where you won’t be pleased with your own grade. Then, as you might with one of your students, ask yourself: “What could I do to get that grade up?” Merely, by identifying the attributes where you don’t like your grade, you are taking the first steps to becoming a better teacher.
The number in parenthesis indicates a term that was mentioned by more than one student to describe their best teachers. Remember, I created the categories myself after looking at the overall list of characteristics as a method of organization.
Teacher’s connection to students
--Caring (6)
--Engaging (5)
--Helpful (5)
--Approachable (2)
--Fair (2)
--Inspirational (2)
--Motivational (2)
--Accessible
--Accommodating
--Considerate
--Empathetic
--Fear
--Friend
--Influential
--Inspiring
--Respect
--Sympathetic
--Trust
Teacher’s personal attributes
--Personable (4)
--Intelligent/smart (4)
--Knowledgeable (3)
--Down-to-earth (2)
--Energetic (2)
--Enthusiastic (2)
--Attentive
--Charismatic
--Cool
--Dedicated
--Experienced
--Genuine
--Laid-back
--Professional
--Trustworthy
Teacher’s method of instruction
--Interesting (3)
--Entertaining (2)
--Humorous (2)
--Passionate (2)
--Compelling
--Creative
--Fun
--Involved
--Organized
--Prepared
--Realistic
--Resourceful
--Storyteller
--Unpredictable
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)