The Curmudgeon Speaks

The curmudgeon should take a different approach to end of year recognition. How about an award for the loser of the year? My award goes to [drum roll] – the patent troll.

I understand a patent troll to be an individual or company (mostly made up of lawyers) who buy up patents and then use them to sue for financial gain. Patent trolls tend not to be the original developers of products and may secondarily collect patents for the purpose of resale.

While I am on the topic – I also object to “trivial” patents. My favorite example is the Apple “swipe to unlock“.  I do see that my new phone uses a padlock image, but shows no pathway along which you must move the padlock. Trivial patent, trivial fix.

This year ends as it began – I am still working on a book. This is not even a completely new book, but a new edition. What complicates the process is our effort to move away from the traditional textbook format to a hybrid that is an attempt to combine what is best about books with what is best provided online. The process moves slowly for me. I fit writing around my primary responsibilities and I must learn as I go. I don’t exactly write what I know, I write what I learn and what I observe. The holiday break gives me the opportunity to make some progress.

Writing books is not always that well received. This may surprise the general public who tend to believe this is what academics do. Some place original research at a much higher level. I guess I do to a point, but there is often a diminishing return with many studies contributing little of value. I value the researchers who identify problems and work to solve them. For practitioners, there can also be an anti-book bias. In this case, the book is seen as a commercial venture. The open source movement types align themselves with this perspective. It is evidently fine to earn a living by interacting, but not by providing the resources on which these interactions are often based. I assume what I do takes a degree of talent and commitment much in the way helping individuals learn through interaction takes talent and commitment. I am willing to compete to do what I do. Most who earn their living interacting are not willing to accept the same challenge.

I grapple with why books or at least comprehensive products in some format are still needed. Why not just follow a few bloggers who offer content appropriate to the domain you are expected to understand – what some describe as a personal learning network. I think authors provided two valuable contributions far more efficiently than a series of online interactions. First, I think good authors provide a structure that ties things together in a way that makes sense. The books from Tom Friedman offer good examples of what I mean by structure. What does the focus of U.S. education have to do with world wide access to the Internet, politics, the energy resources we rely on, and the dangers in a sense of entitlement? Offering a perspective that provides an answer to the complexities of our world Is not something you pick up from casual conversation. Writing about tech represents a similar challenge. It is relatively easy to explain how to use this online service or that software. It is far more difficult to explain to people who teach different things and who work with learners of different ages and capabilities how to make decisions about what learning experiences make sense.

Understanding is about constructing mental structures not fact collecting. Cognitive psychologists explain long term memory as a combination of nodes and links. We tend to be long on the contribution of fodder for nodes and short on the modeling of links. A structure I can identify, even if I disagree, gets me closer to crafting a structure of my own than lots of isolated tweets, blog posts, or web pages. We need models of the big picture.

The second major contribution is the commitment to providing a complete view. We live in an era of specialization. As a researcher I know a lot about the metacognitive limitations of struggling learners in self regulating learning environments. In other words, why do some learners study in such an inefficient fashion. This is good for one class period in my undergraduate ed psych class. My depth of knowledge on the other topics I cover varies. I think this is typical. I tend to know what I write about in far greater depth. This is what takes so much time.

So, this is what I think you pay an author to provide – first, a clear and creative structure appropriate to the field of study, and second, a perspective that makes certain that all the of essentials are covered in depth and with authentic examples. There are not a large number of people willing to meet these standards – the first requires some talent and the second a great deal of work. So, I am a fan of the long form and believe that it will always be important. I do understand that many are frustrated with expectation that someone must pay for the products used in education. I have difficulty relating to this position, but I try to understand it as a function of their limited experience. My wife once asked my son who has won an Emmy for his video editing skills whether he was threatened by the inexpensive tools so many now use to edit video content. “Not really,” was his reply. “I think most people will find out it is a lot harder than you might expect. I think it is a good thing when people give it a try.”

I saw this sign near my office today and it made me think. I have been on a quest for equity lately – who looks out for the little guy?

Finals are tough enough. Now it appears that some students will have to compete with other students who have the advantage of a blessed pencil.

I sign my name a lot. I am not famous. My signature is of no value to a collector. I sign my name because I am an administrator.

Sometimes I read what I sign. Really, I do. This sounds logical, but actually reading what I sign often gives me reason to pause and wonder how it is that I or anyone else could really know what I am signing to certify.

Some examples:

1) When someone drives somewhere and asks for compensation for the miles they have accumulated, I must indicate that they were not in the car with someone else also collecting mileage. I understand the logic of the policy. It just assumes a lot to think that I would know whether or not the policy has been followed.

2) Then there is my current favorite – I must indicate that a trip that someone takes is beneficial to my institution. This is what those of us in the social sciences would describe as “poorly operationalized”. Again, I get the unspoken problem – the potential concern is that someone goes to San Francisco to eat in fine restaurants and see the sites rather than attend the conference. The problem is the lack of effort to just say what one can and cannot do. Beneficial is a pretty difficult word to translate unless one is heading off to pick up a donation – most would likely agree that this was beneficial to the institution. I tend to see things a little more broadly. Heck, I think sending someone to Florida after several months of North Dakota winter might be great for their morale and hence a benefit to their productivity.

I have been thinking what might actually be necessary to assure compliance and the recent revelations of cell phone tracking have given me some ideas. I think faculty members should wear those tracking ankle bracelets when leaving town. If the satellites show two blips in the same car, we know that we have a clear violation. If we see a blip outside of the convention centers between 9-12 and 1-5, we also know that rules have been broken.

I must be getting too old for this job. We used to trust people and give them half the cost of the trips they took. The money commitment has not changed, just the trust.

It appears that the joint super committee to end all committees evidently was unable to accomplish anything.

I blame it on the simplicity of the American people and their lack of understanding that complex problems require more in the way of a solution than a mindless commitment to no new taxes. (see The Pledge)

Evidently the committee members really did not believe they had the power to compromise. It is always – you change because I am right. I just agreed to participate to make this clear.

Cut expenditures AND raise taxes. BTW – this is what Reagan, supposed Republican hero, actually did. HE DID RAISE TAXES. It is those politicians who take on expenditures such as wars with taking responsibility for covering the expenses that do not understand balancing the budget.

I have created a mantra – see if this helps:

Repeat after me – Reagan raised taxes. Reagan raised taxes. It is OK to be responsible. It is OK to be responsible. I can think for myself. I can think for myself. Rich people have a little extra money. Rich people have a little extra money. I don’t need all of those campaign contributions. I don’t need all of those campaign contributions.

Repeat as many times as necessary.

Andy Rooney has died. It seems like just a week or so ago I listened to his final piece on 60 minutes. Andy’s short comments on 60 minutes were an inspiration to the entire curmudgeon community. He had a way of making a point by identifying the strange things we all deal with and making us laugh with his dead pan humor. He used to start his monologue with trademark expressions such as “did you ever notice that ….”. I enjoyed what he had to say and how he would say it.

Did you ever notice that there are rules we seem to think we have to follow even though the rules are pointless. I always ask what problem is this rule supposed to solve, but no one ever answers. Like flags on goal posts in indoor stadiums. Do you think the kicker needs to account for the home team fans inhaling when the kick is for the win at the end of the game. I watched today – carefully – and I did not see the flag move. The kick was good as time ran out. Go Sioux.

Goodbye Andy.

The curmudgeon is home handing out halloween goodies.

I have decided there is one group of individuals that annoys me. They are not into the spirit of trick or treating. These individuals are likely middle school kids and come to my door without a costume and with a pillow case expecting a handful of snickers bars or tootsie rolls.

I have decided that certain rules show good faith. If you show up at my door, you must:

• be wearing a costume, or
• come with a parent.

I do have a solution – two bowls of goodies. For the kids with costumes or parents – one bowl has candy. For the other group – this bowl has boxes of raisins.

Have a safe halloween. (the curmudgeon)

I understand the concept behind rental companies. Twice in my adult life a tree has blown down in my backyard. I don’t own a chain saw. Experience has taught me that I will use a chain saw only rarely, but there will be a time or two when this might be necessary. Hence, I can see the value of renting something I need only rarely.

Does this fit the situation of textbooks? Here is where my opinion as an instructor and the opinions of my studies may vary. I would think it would be of value to have a required textbook available on multiple occasions. Students might suggest they use a text 3-4 times – the nights before the exams.

Students don’t really purchase textbooks. This is a fabrication they use to explain their college expenses to their parents (see the beer money ploy). The actual question is do they rent books for 4 months or is it less. I am attempting to imagine a situation in which renting a book by the month would be better than buying a book and then selling it back to the bookstore. What sense does a monthly rental fee make? I can see a monthly rental if an instructor required multiple books and a book used in the first half of a course would be unnecessary in the last half. I can guarantee you that none of the books in the B&N ad (see above) fall into this category.

Wouldn’t it really be – rent a book for the semester (or quarter)? I assume the value of advertising a rental would be equivalent to a guaranteed buy – back. All this means is that the book company guarantees something your campus book store may not – we will buy your book back. They just call it a rental rather than a guaranteed buy back.

Now a rent by the week plan may actually be something students would go for. Why pay for a book for the 12 weeks of the semester it will not be used? It is just going to gather dust on your desk.

You do understand that the old curmudgeon is not advocating such an approach. He is just suggesting that a weekly rental would likely make some company some money.

I attended a conference this past weekend and the keynote speaker got me thinking. BTW – this is what they are supposed to do.

Dr. Greenfield spoke on the connections between culture and values – how are changes in one area associated with changes in the other. A particular focus of Dr. Greenfield and the Children’s Digital Media Center with which she is affiliated sees media both as a manifestation of culture and a shaper of personal values. Hence, media represents a more manageable way to study culture and values.

Here is the problem (not all aspects of cultural change are problematic, but this aspect is), there has been a gradual shift over generations to an increase in narcissism and a greater desire for material goods. Over the same period of time, there has been a decline in empathy and respect for tradition. This sounds exactly like the kind of thing a curmudgeon would claim so I offer a citation (at end of post) in case you assume this is just the type of thinking someone who walked to school up hill (both ways) in the snow would say.

One of the studies traced over a period of 50 years the themes present in the most popular programs for tweens (study is linked below). Evidently, there are ways to locate a considerable amount of information on the focus of specific programs going way back (tv.com) – I watch little television, but I can admire the commitment to a web site that provides information in this depth. So, in 1967 the top tween shows were Andy Griffith and Lucy and in 2007 the top shows were American Idol and Hannah Montana. The characteristic showing the greatest change was “fame” – nearly last to first.

I admit I watched Andy (if that is Andy of Mayberry). Barney was my hero. I also watched Happy Days in 1977. After that, I can’t say I have much experience. What happened to MASH – guess that was not a tween show.

Is there anything wrong with seeking “fame”? The authors are concerned with two issues – the desire for fame may be associated with unrealistic goals eventually resulting in dissatisfaction; fame and material wealth are not associated with life satisfaction.

I wonder about one thing. The implication in this work is that our values are manipulated by media. We all know about correlation and causation, but it is so easy to speculate. What if our values are shaped in other ways and we seek entertainment consistent with our values? I wonder – what about all of the “real housewives” and “bachelor/bachelorette” shows my students watch. Are they the victims of the cheap to create pseudo-reality television or do these shows reflect their values?

It is back to CNN for me.

Uhls and Greenfield

My heroes have always been tech guys (with apologies to Willie)

I feel like I should comment on the life and death of Steve Jobs. I guess I am not sure why. I think it is because it is a safe way to frame some comments about mortality. I would not write about the death of my parents because that would have been too personal. Steve, in contrast, represents someone just familiar enough to all of us to offer a more comfortable opportunity to comment on the meaning of a life and have others understand.

My career has been strongly influenced by the products created by Apple (then Apple Computer). I started with Apple about as early as it was possible to start. I wrote a grant back in the day when Apple had grant programs for educators and received several Apple IIs. To put this time in perspective, this was before computers came with displays capable of producing lower case letters and before images on the screen were practical. I learned to program so I could write games to develop reading skills. I really believed the idea that technologies offered a way to change the world – or at least that part of the world called school. I became fascinated with a product called Hypercard because it seemed a way to offer authoring/programming to everyone.  The idea of personal empowerment through technology has always meant a lot to me.

Personal empowerment and possibilities even for children – the potential caught the attention of my wife who more or less redirected her career as a consequence. Together, we began to explore ways in which children could use technology to create in ways that helped them learn. A powerful idea – Children as the authors and the teachers, children with something meaningful to say. The fascination with Apple products has been good to Cindy, too. She has traveled the world and continues to do so because she has a way of relating to educators and explaining what students are capable of given the opportunity.

I have only seen Steve in person one time and I have certainly moved on to use the technology tools produced by other companies. Visionary people fascinate me and I have read most of the books written about Apple. I have learned that Steve was certainly not the nicest person, but he was a true believer and he was a finisher. You encounter lots of people in a life time who are lucky enough to possess some true gifts. Only a few have the determination to make a difference.

I think the death of someone we connect with impacts us mostly because it reminds us of our own mortality. That sounds kind of uncaring and egocentric, but I think it is true. We can certainly feel sorry for the loss of the family and feel that the person has been cheated out of living on, but still we soon begin to think about ourselves. The media have been playing the part of a recent commencement address in which Steve commented on this same thing. I have always thought my wife, a two-time cancer survivor, has a similar sense of things. Once the reality of death becomes clear, you start asking yourself how you really want to spend today.

So, as the ad goes (sort of), “here is to the crazy ones – the ones who really have changed the world.”