Wack is Back, Part II

\ Leave a Comment \ by

BARBARA FORREST knew the odds were stacked against her. “They had 50 or 60 people in the room,” she says. Her opponents included lobbyists, church leaders and a crowd of home-schooled children. “They were wearing stickers, clapping, cheering and standing in the aisles.” Those on Forrest’s side numbered less than a dozen, including two professors from Louisiana State University, representatives from the Louisiana Association of Educators and campaigners for the continued separation of church and state.

That was on 21 May, when Forrest testified in the Louisiana state legislature on the dangers hidden in the state’s proposed Science Education Act. …

The act is designed to slip ID in “through the back door”, says Forrest, who is a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University and an expert in the history of creationism. She adds that the bill’s language, which names evolution along with global warming, the origins of life and human cloning as worthy of “open and objective discussion”, is an attempt to misrepresent evolution as scientifically controversial.

Forrest’s testimony notwithstanding, the bill was passed by the state’s legislature – by a majority of 94 to 3 in the House and by unanimous vote in the Senate. On 28 June, Louisiana’s Republican governor, Piyush “Bobby” Jindal, signed the bill into law. The development has national implications, not least because Jindal is rumored to be on Senator John McCain’s shortlist as a potential running mate in his bid for the presidency.

“New legal threat to school science in the US,” 09 July 2008, New Scientist, Amanda Gefter

I’ve written about this sort of thing several times before but these creationists, uh, intelligent design-ists, are the Energizer Bunny of radical Christian idiocy. It’s almost perfectly Orwellian: teachers are free to teach students non-science in the name of scientific objectivity.

I keep wondering at what point this sort of thing will create a common sense uprising. Why does any Christian want to compete with the schools, for one thing, or with science, for another? It seems to me that religions have much more effective methods of persuasion than the classroom.

Posted in: Language, Writing

The Myth of Multitasking

\ Leave a Comment \ by

In one of the many letters he wrote to his son in the 1740s, Lord Chesterfield offered the following advice: “There is time enough for everything in the course of the day, if you do but one thing at once, but there is not time enough in the year, if you will do two things at a time.” To Chesterfield, singular focus was not merely a practical way to structure one’s time; it was a mark of intelligence. “This steady and undissipated attention to one object, is a sure mark of a superior genius; as hurry, bustle, and agitation, are the never-failing symptoms of a weak and frivolous mind.”

Christine Rosen, “The Myth of Multitasking,” The New Atlantis, Spring 2008

I have to say that, despite being a dyed-in-the-wool computers and writing guy, I find this sort of discussion refreshing. In my own work, I find that a limited amount of multitasking is very helpful. Right now, for example, I am listening to WILL’s program Sidestep. (It’s pretty good, but amateurish in some ways).

I discovered as a teenager that this kind of white noise is helpful. On the other hand, after working online full time for a few years I have discovered that it’s best to turn off email while I am writing or commenting on papers. I sometimes put on a video instead of a podcast, but I usually listen more than watch.

There’s also been a few stories recently about “no email Fridays” and the like which seems to confirm that multitasking can be counter-productive. I am not sure that I would go as far as Chesterfield, but it may be true that what we thought was helpful is going to turn out to be much less so.

I sense an economic blind spot. I have been thinking about Twitter in these terms, too. A colleague, for example, shared this post (via listserv) on “25 Twitter Tips for College Students.” What I find so interesting is that each item on the list is either unnecessary or better done in other ways.

Why have so many online “presences” at all? I think Twitter– and the Iphone– illustrate the absurdities that arise when consumerism meets technological fetishism. I’m hoping for a backlash that focuses on using these tools well.

Posted in: Autobiographical, Composition, Language, Online Places, Professional, Writing

HNN Poll: 61% of Historians Rate the Bush Presidency Worst

\ Leave a Comment \ by

“It would be difficult to identify a President who, facing major international and domestic crises, has failed in both as clearly as President Bush,” concluded one respondent. “His domestic policies,” another noted, “have had the cumulative effect of shoring up a semi-permanent aristocracy of capital that dwarfs the aristocracy of land against which the founding fathers rebelled; of encouraging a mindless retreat from science and rationalism; and of crippling the nation’s economic base.”

HNN Poll: 61% of Historians Rate the Bush Presidency Worst, Robert S. McElvaine, April 1, 2008

This is old news by internet standards, but I am fascinated as much by the argument– which is specific and detailed and, finally, persuasive– as by the comments. The article is worth reading because it suggests the outlines of how reason might be returned to the public debate over politics.

I included the above comment from one of the surveyed historians because it neatly summarizes the criteria that underlies the assessment. An effective president should mute if not nullify capital, encourage rationality and scientific inquiry, and build the economic base.

I did not check all of the comments, but I doubt there is anyone willing to argue that the Bush administration fought for labor, nurtured the growth of knowledge, and created a thriving economy. At best, the argument is that he “did what he had to do” to fight terrorism.

The comments are interesting because the arguments against the survey’s conclusions reflect exactly the distorted political culture cultivated by the Bush administration. The goal of the anti-survey comments, in other words, is to shift the argument away from the criteria and towards the historians.

Ironically, these arguments reflect exactly the worst sort of bad-faith partisan arguments that the right wing so often attributes to academia. I think this “duck the issue” rhetoric is the best indication that the historians are on the right track. I doubt Bush will look any better in 50 years.

Posted in: Economics, Language, Online Places, Professional, War, Writing

Class and Broadband

\ Leave a Comment \ by

While most schools in the United States (in fact, 98 percent) have basic Internet access, for many that access is cripplingly slow–too slow to accommodate technology-driven educational initiatives–according to a new report from the State Educational Technology Directors Association (SETDA). The group is recommending certain baseline figures for adequate bandwidth for schools and proposing policy changes to effect upgrades over the next five to seven years.

SETDA, an education technology advocacy group based in Maryland, released its report, High-Speed Broadband Access for All Kids: Breaking Through the Barriers, to call attention to the “critical” issue of broadband access in schools and to get stakeholders prepared to achieve growth in the quality of broadband that schools need in order to take technology-based learning to the next level.

Dave Nagel, Tech Association Calls for Greater Broadband Access for Schools, the Journal, June 2008

This is a report that I wanted to note even though I don’t have much to add. It seems like more of the same. I think, though, that we can’t be reminded often enough that whenever we hear about a problem, say, the lack of funding for public schools, the impact is always shaped by class.

I am reminded of this each time I read a piece celebrating Web 2.0. There was a nice reflection on talking with students about these sorts of issues earlier this month at the Education and Class blog. I liked the excerpt from Borderland, as well as the comment from Urban Scientist.

Posted in: Composition, Economics, Language, Writing