Improving schools

To make any system improve, positive and negative feedback are required. Measure what's happening, reward the good, punish the bad. "That which is measured, improves." But that's as much a warning as a rule! Measure test scores, test scores go up. Measure graduation rates, graduation rates go up. That's exactly what we're seeing. But are those the things that matter? No! We care about long-term outcome, post-graduation, which may get worse even as graduation rates and test scores improve!

Schools should be judged by how students do after leaving (which might not mean when they graduate!). Employment rate, income, and incarceration rates are obvious measures, but there are others. Further, schools should only be judged against schools with similar demographics. A 10% incarceration rate a year after leaving might be high in one area, but low in another. And graduation shouldn't be be the only goal; if students can leave without graduating and still have a successful life, more power to them!

It's gotten to the point that graduation is all that matters, so it's been made so that everyone can do it. And if everyone can do it, it's meaningless. It's now impossible to get a grade under fifty in metro schools! School should be hard. Some people should fail. The students that fail should have a different system in place for them. We're trying to make every student fit one system, instead of making different layers of system that fit different types of student. And all we get out of it is very old, uneducated, useless children. It's a giant mandatory waste of time.

And the information taught in school needs to be completely changed. Instead of teaching to the test, schools should teach skills that will be needed in life: writing resumes, interviewing for jobs, doing taxes, signing rental contracts, avoiding debt. Primary among these is simply thinking. Classes should focus less on rote memorization, and more on evidence-based reasoning, problem-solving, and deduction. Teach those things, then measure success in life after school, and we'll have a much better system.

Don't get me wrong. I'm a teacher. I understand the value of math and history and science. But that value is not rote memorization! School isn't about learning what to think, it's about learning how to think. You learn history, not to know what happened when, but to know why things happen. You learn science, not to know about the natural world, but to be able to observe, make theories, test them, and throw out your own ideas when they're wrong. You don't learn math so you can do math, but so you can attack and solve problems in a clear and structured fashion, one step at a time, without being overwhelmed.

We need to abandon this myopic focus on test scores and graduation rates. All that's done is lower standards to the point that a high school diploma says nothing about what you're capable of. Instead, we need to make those diplomas worth something. Schools should teach skills, including thinking, instead of just teaching information.

Nuclear weapons

Another podcast I've been enjoying is Hardcore History. It's long, detailed analyses of many different topics. Eight hours on the Mongol conquests? Yes please!

One I've just listened to has put a great spin on nuclear bombs. We all think of them as being this horrible thing that enabled the destruction of entire cities. But that's not so. The bomber does that. Many cities were destroyed just as completely from the air without atomic bombs, and World War 2 was the first time this was possible. WW2 didn't introduce the horrors of the atom bomb, it introduced the horrors of strategic bombing of civilian population centers. Atomic bombs are just one special class.

Being antinuclear is all well and good, but the horror is bombs of any kind pointed at population centers. Now, we finally have weapons that can hit what they're pointed at, unlike WW2. If there's a military target in the middle of a city, we won't kill nearly as many civilians hitting that target as we used to.

But it's still a horror. Let's not forget that.

Ukraine protests

I'm not an expert on Ukraine, international politics, riots, or really much of anything besides electrical engineering and being a first-class smartypants. But there are some things going on that I find distressing.

The Euromaidan is a series of massive protests and riots that have been going on in Ukraine for two months now. These protests are huge. Overthrow-the-government huge. You see, Ukraine was right on the edge of signing a big agreement with the European Union. At the last minute, they backed off in response to pressure from Russia. Russia wants Ukraine to join a post-Soviet customs union. The current President of Ukraine is pretty much in the back pocket of Vladimir Putin, the strongman running Russia for the last decade.

Since by most polls, the Ukrainian public supports associating with the EU much more than associating with Russia (and really, who wouldn't?), this obviously made lots of people very angry. In response to early protests, the Ukrainian government passed (I use the term loosely) new laws making protest illegal.

So now there are huge protests in Kiev, tens of thousands demanding the resignation of the government. Police are getting more and more violent, including several deaths. I'm starting to have flashbacks of the start of the Syrian civil war. And I seriously doubt that Russia would let an allied despotic government next door be overthrown.

We may be watching the start of a new Russian empire.

Now tell me: have the news sources you follow mentioned any of this? The entire thing is being streamed, live! A catapult built by the protestors had a twitter feed! And CNN's top story was that Lady Gaga was no longer banned in China.

I'm doing a better job reporting than CNN. I wish I could be proud of that. Better information here.

Roles in Lost

Lost has come and gone. It was a phenomenon, it became a staple, and now it's a memory. It was arguably one of the most influential shows of the first decade of this century. (The aughts?) The characterization was entirely believable. Every one of them was broken, but every one of them could be liked.

Note: spoilers!

One thing I enjoyed about the show was its symmetry. There were three male leads, and every one of them changed roles by the end of the show. (Amusingly, every one of them also has a first name starting with J. There are other names out there for male leads, writers...) Look at how they all start.

Jack: he started out as the guy who wants nothing more than to get off this island. He's the leader by default. He cares for those who are his, and will crush anyone who gets in the way of that. I'm not sure if he helps people because he cares in the same way other people do, because it's an emotional burden. I suspect he sees it as one more task, and he's the guy who can get it done. That doesn't mean he's a sociopath! But it does mean he's goal-focused enough that any absolute standard of morality goes completely out the window. He's a good man who's completely willing to torture or kill to accomplish his goals

(Arguably, Jack is one of a larger category of characters: the guy who will do bad things without hesitation, even though he's nominally the hero of the story. Sherlock, for a lighter example. Or possibly Dexter, or Wesley from Angel. Walt on Breaking Bad fits this mold, as well. One difference between Jack and Walt is that Walt's circle of give-a-damn is only six people wide. But that's another post.)

John Locke: John is the irrationally faithful one. He needs no evidence, he needs only to believe, and he only believes because he needs to. This makes him just as dangerous as Jack, because he's willing to risk others' lives, even kill people, if his irrational beliefs tell him it's right. He's the religious fanatic.

Sawyer: Sawyer is the trickster. His actions are dictated by the fact that he cares. He cares about his parents, he cares that someone killed them, and he cares that he killed that someone in return. He genuinely doesn't think he deserves anything good. Strange as it seems at first, Sawyer is defined by his need to be good.

Now look at how they all end.

Sawyer: He's overcome his past, and become the leader. And now, he's desperate to get off the island at all costs. Sawyer is now Jack, though not quite so sociopathic.

Locke: His faith has failed him, and he's died. But the guy who now looks like Locke? He's the trickster, the manipulator, the deceiver. Locke is now Sawyer. (Though also driven by his need to get off the island at all costs, and most definitely a sociopath!)

Jack: He's now the religious fanatic, the irrationally faithful. He no longer wants to leave. He's the one that led them back, because of his belief that it was necessary. Jack is now Locke.

And Hurley? He's still the same guy he always was.

Like a Love Song

My love for you is such that it can only be expressed in a lyrical poetic form, as many have done in the past. However, since I'm clearly unable to match, approach, or even attempt to accomplish such a feat in these lyrics, I refer you to many other fine examples. In fact, skip my work entirely, and listen to an artist who puts effort into minor things like the words to the song.

Baby.

Misspellings

My name is Stephen "S-T-E-P-H-E-N" Collings "C-O-L-L-I-N-G-S". I have to spell it out constantly over the phone or in person, because the vast majority of people would write "Steven Collins", or occasionally "Stephen Collins". (This, by the way, is a great argument for adding some sort of side-band for text alongside a phone call. An easy way to send text to the person you're talking to right now, landline or mobile, would be a huge improvement in my world.)

Of course, other misspellings are possible.

Eaton Collings is another good one. Until recently, my favorite was when I was listed in a wedding program as "Stephen Coolings". But this week, a gentleman from Quebec won the grand prize when my reservation got made under the name Heathen Collings.

Getting their attention

One night I was lecturing at University of Phoenix. As I'm writing oh-so-fascinating equations on the whiteboard, the students start looking out the window at something. A wreck on the interstate, firetrucks, who knows? I mean, it's inconceivable that anything could distract them from algebra, but apparently it did...

So I continued my lecture by writing on the window.

My students seemed to enjoy that. Though dry erase markers don't contrast nearly as well on a transparent surface as House would have you believe.

Salt

Matthew 5:13:

You are the salt of the earth, but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltiness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trampled under people's feet.

In all the sermons I've sat through, and all the Bible classes, I don't think I've ever heard anyone say what this means. What is the "salt of the earth"? Does it make the world tasty? Prevent things from growing again?

Like a lot of sheep analogies in the Bible, it's a metaphor we urbanites don't really get any more. Salt is a preservative and a disinfectant. Jesus was saying that the people of God are to purify and preserve the world. And that if the people of God themselves become corrupted, they are of no value for that purpose any more.

Consulting

I've decided I'd do well as a consultant. Here's my reasoning.

1) I'm analytical-smart. Give me a problem, and I will break it down and analyze every last crumb of it until you wish you'd never asked. I am very, very good at this. Now, this does not make me unique; I know a number of people who are the same way, some few of which are even better than me. But if I'm not the most analytical-smart person I know, I'm definitely in the top ten.

2) I enjoy learning entirely new subject domains. Maybe I don't know anything about the problem you're trying to solve. But if properly motivated, I will know it very soon. And if I'm new to your domain, I don't make all the assumptions you make, which is to your advantage. I'm so far outside the box I can't even see the box.

3) I'm not falsely modest. (This may come as a shock.) I know what I'm good at, and I'm not going to sit here and tell others "Oh, you're just as good at it as I am" unless it's true. I try not to be an arrogant jerk, but I don't do anyone any favors by pretending I'm not useful.

4) I'm surprisingly money-motivated. There's nothing wrong with this; money is a means to an end, and I really like my ends. The more money I earn, the better I can care for my family, and the more good I can do in the world at large. Waving some cheddar under my nose (either kind of cheddar, actually) has a strong correlation with getting me to accomplish a goal.

5) I'm moral. I'm not going to screw you out of a buck, and I'm going to help you find solutions that let you do the most good you can. And if there really are no good solutions, and I'll tell you that too.

So if you or your friends need someone to help you think through your problems, you know where to find me.