More Good News: Why Go Back?

WESTPORT, Conn. — Math students in this high-performing school district used to rush through their Algebra I textbooks only to spend the first few months of Algebra II relearning everything they forgot or failed to grasp the first time.

So the district’s frustrated math teachers decided to rewrite the algebra curriculum, limiting it to about half of the 90 concepts typically covered in a high school course in hopes of developing a deeper understanding of key topics. Last year, they began replacing 1,000-plus-page math textbooks with their own custom-designed online curriculum; the lessons are typically written in Westport and then sent to a program in India, called HeyMath!, to jazz up the algorithms and problem sets with animation and sounds.

Connecticut District Tosses Algebra Textbooks and Goes Online, Winnie Hu, June 8, 2009

As I said on Friday, some good ideas are so good they seem like common sense and it’s hard to understand why they are not commonly used. Even more than that, there are entire industries that do nothing but waste our time and money. The private health care industry is a great example. Why should so many people spend so much time trying to make a profit on keeping us healthy?

As has often been said, that makes no more sense than creating an entire infrastructure dedicated to making a profit off of fire or police services. (We’ve really suffered from the desire to make a profit from war, too.) These are all very large-scale, dramatic examples that seem to generate all sorts of passions, perhaps because the changes seem so enourmous.

The end of the textbook industry, however, is a good example of a less-than-earth-shattering transformation that makes as much sense as a single payer health care system. As the Connecticut example shows, with a small investment (in their teachers) school districts can save a lot of money by simply by-passing a completely unnecessary, wasteful industry.

This is the sort of change– like SPIN farming– that is no doubt accelerated by the mess that conservatives have made of the economy. It’s also the kind of thing– like SPIN farming– that should be developed further as a part of the economic recovery. I think this could have gone even further, too. Districts could combine resources, for example, and hire local programmers.

“SPIN stands for S-mall P-lot IN-tensive”

SPIN stands for S-mall P-lot IN-tensive

SPIN-Farming is a non-technical, easy-to-learn and inexpensive-to-implement vegetable farming system that makes it possible to earn significant income from land bases under an acre in size. Whether you are new to farming, or want to farm in a new way, SPIN can work for you because:

* Its precise revenue targeting formulas and organic-based techniques make it possible to gross $50,000+ from a half- acre.
* You don’t need to own land. You can affordably rent or barter a small piece of land adequate in size for SPIN-Farming production.
* It works in either the city, country or small town.
* It fits into any lifestyle or life cycle.

SPIN is being practiced by first generation farmers because it removes the two big barriers to entry – land and capital – as well as by established farmers who want to diversify or downsize, as well as by part-time hobby farmers.

What is Spin Farming?

I watched “Earth 2100” the other night and it was so effective at communicating a sense of slow-moving doom that I had to go find something to clear my often-pessimistic political palate. The “Spin” plan is one of those simple, clear-headed ideas that seem so obvious that it’s hard to believe it’s not common practice.

It’s also interesting to think about what the site calls “first generation” farmers. I think it’s easy to see history as very linear: we lost all or most of the small farms and most of us left the countryside for the city and suburb and there’s no going back. The Spin folks seem to suggest all sorts of other ideas.

Maybe, a rust-belt city like Detroit, now being laced with small garden plots and farms, will become the model of a sustainable culture. Maybe]some of us will become farmers again. Instead of isolated, large scale plots of land, though, they will weave their farms into the ruins. It’s a great thought.

American Right Wing Terror

All of us at Planned Parenthood of Kansas & Mid-Missouri are horrified, angry and deeply saddened at the murder of Dr. George Tiller this morning. Our hearts and our prayers go out to Dr. Tiller’s wife, his children and other family members, to his brave and dedicated staff and to the thousands of women who have benefited from Dr. Tiller’s compassionate and dedicated care.

Planned Parenthood Mourns Dr. George Tiller, Statement by Peter B. Brownlie. President/CEO

The right wing has endorsed violence against Dr. Tiller and others like him for two decades or more. It’s not simply fringe elements either. Fox News has for years hyped the idea of “Tiller the Baby Killer.”

It works too: Tiller had been attacked several times before. In fact, this sort of right wing terror has made abortion increasingly unavailable. Yet his assassination is being called “a murder” as if it weren’t politically motivated.

It seems very obviously part of the crazed right wing response to the Obama administration. The right is most dangerous when it senses its own irrelevance. It starts making wilder and wilder claims, hinting at the necessity of violence.

It’s just a show for most people; entertaining, but no more real than anything else on television or radio. There are always a few, though, who buy the performance completely. That’s the danger.

An MLA Agenda: Too Little Too Late

In many places, laudable efforts to professionalize institutional policies and practices for faculty members off the tenure track have established an intermediate tier consisting of full-time contingent faculty members who hold renewable multiyear contracts. While these faculty members have more job security than part-time or short-term instructors, they are still far more vulnerable to cutbacks than colleagues on the tenure track, typically have heavier teaching loads than their tenure-track counterparts, and usually play limited roles in student advising and curriculum planning. Compared with the opportunities for professional development and institutional advancement of tenure-track faculty members, theirs are scant; their lot is to live with the frustration and resentment inherent in second-class academic citizenship.

MLA Newsletter, Summer 2009, “An Agenda for These Times,” Catherine Porter

I have to say my profession, especially my professional organizations, drive me a little batty. Everything seems laced with a bit of irritating class bias. I love the people who love technology and who incorporate it into their classrooms, but they are also too often uncritically consumerist. I enjoy the conventions (well, mostly) but they seem utterly disconnected from economic reality. Everything is priced for the tenured-expense-account-professors.

Notwithstanding the fantasies of the hard-right, academia is shockingly conservative, loath to accept even the most minor change. Porter calls tenured faculty “a discomfited elite, caught up in awkward relationships with their less-privileged colleagues.” That’s great to hear but it would have been even better to hear it a decade ago, when graduate students (yours truly among them) first began to sound the alarm.

A cynic might see the establishment of the Academic Workforce Advocacy Kit as a kind of sudden realization on the part of this elite that they may well have killed the goose that laid the golden egg of their discomfited privileges. Honestly, I am not sure how to judge it, although there must surely be some goose killing paranoia in the mix somewhere. Maybe, though, we might see this as the long-slumbering beast slowly awakening.