[170] Naughty Teacher

Friday, January 23, 2009 at 1:53am

I think the most disagreeable part of college is the range in caliber of teachers you can either enjoy immensely or loathe indefinitely. Take my Business G300 class. This guy is just another business major who, by way of pressure from his foreign parents, decided to focus on managerial economics. He doesn't necessarily need to know anything more about teaching than what you can read from the book. He isn't worried about how fast he talks or what he takes for granted as the previous amount of knowledge the class has. He doesn't realize that while you can get the bulk of what he's saying, when you so horribly pronounce a word that you've basically just translated it into your foreign tongue, it only serves to distract and confuse, which trumps the smirk you may want to crack. I keep finding examples of people who are, by all accounts "smart" in the field they are so affluently projecting, but don't even realize there is something to be said about the method in which something is taught. This I believe is true regardless of the subject or nature of the work.

It's one thing to give some equation, which in truth you can understand isn't that hard or confusing, but easy to mess up if you haven't seen it previously. One can always go into the book or even google something that fundamental if you miss a term or something. It's quite another when you hurriedly scribble the equation on the board, pointing to this and that, filling in terms seemingly pulled from nowhere, solving it, replacing values and making arbitrary erases and re-done scribbles, then posing the token question "any questions." All the while reminding us that you got your degree in Turkey. This might come as a shock to some of you, but I don't think myself too retarded of a person. So explain to me why I'm taking a class that would almost assuredly make more sense to me if I had Mr. Bowman teaching me? I don't care that he'd cost more and would want a handy in the bathroom, I just want a B and to get the hell out of this place.

Despite the previous teacher, I also have accounting, which is basically a class I never want to end. The teacher keeps things interesting by alluding to personal stories and tying them into what's on the agenda for the day. Everything is broken down to it's fundamental component before it's used in an example or further story. He even contributes numerous stick figures who live these exciting money grubbing lives on this chalkboard turned canvas. I simply wonder why more teachers can't be like that. It makes more sense to me why home schooled kids are generally smarter. They learn something, then move on. They get to do it in the comfort of their own homes and usually with the enthusiasm of the parent who's taken on the task. Here, we're forced into their schedule, their teaching "styles," and their abhorrently expensive books which have the wondrous caveat coin toss on whether they'll get bought back or not.

What still kills me, and has absolutely been confusing to me since I first started, is the logic behind assigning twenty or thirty pages of reading, saying "you'll be responsible for that" and then quizzing us on the information weeks later. First, maybe this is a key skill I lack, but the second I read something it isn't as if I just download it and store it to be recalled when test time comes around. Second, if your going to make us read it, and then not discuss 80% of it in class, it's who's guess as to what is more important or relevant when the questions roll in. Third, most of the time the assigned reading isn't from a Harry Potter book, meaning, it's foreign material, admittedly hard to understand, or almost incapable of being appreciated without the foreknowledge of how and why your suppose to read something some way. That said, the 30 pages I had to read and take notes on in law, aside from definitional things, I'm not going to have the remotest idea how to deconstruct some case when every other word is legal jargon. And yes, I go back and read, re-read, re-re-read, slowly try to interpret, and still take notes.

The problem isn't that I won't spend hours on something if it's relevant, interesting, and required(shudders), the problem is with the system and teachers that aren't designed or trained on the best methods for getting information encoded within the students. It's some kind of sick irony when my law professor can joke about students who've taken his class, and then worked as his tempts or assistants, who've said "huh, I never remember talking about any of that." This followed by a chuckle from both him and the class. If your not going to remember it, if the person teaching you can laugh at the idea that you didn't retain what THEY "taught," what the hell does that say about all the "learning" going on?

The only other class I have that could possibly be described as "hard" is philosophy of mind. This too has it's problems. I like philosophy, I like the idea of it, most of what I've read of it, and want to know more. What I don't want to do is try and decipher old English and mash it with some conjured, heavily misunderstood notion of what I take the text to be. Why don't I want to do this? Because it's been done, over and again, in many languages, and every question we have about the text, someone has a page devoted to it either online or in another book. It's great to hear about different schools of thought, and the reason some philosopher you at first took be almost too stupid despite his brilliance, now seen in a different light. I think it's utterly frivolous to struggle through and confuse yourself when the answers are already out there. Another tragic irony, my independent study of philosophy brought me to some of the highest points in my life, while my academic pursuit of it makes me want to kill myself.

In truth, I think the teachers, students, questions, and answers should be transparent. Give me the final the first day of class. Tell me the entire paragraphs that will be wholly ignored this semester. Put me on a web cam if you have to to prove that I'm actually doing the work because at that point I would feel inclined to work knowing exactly what it is I'm working towards. They incessantly tell you they want the information to be relevant to you, they want you to be able to use it in the future, it will be helpful for jobs, etc, but at the end of the day, all anybody cares about is passing the tests. I'd say it's a foregone conclusion that you don't really need to have learned anything to merely pass a test. I think you shouldn't be allowed to have a school where one semester I'm taking a class in which the final is made up of previous identical test questions, which were made from quizzes, of which we were shown the answers next class, then onto business law where a mere quiz could be a random sampling of the panoply of information taken in from the reading and lecture.

I don't believe most people that excel in life have that downloadable information memory either. I think they simply know how to find information, implement their ideas, rinse and repeat. I think they know so many people that they are automatically best suited to make better decisions because of those contacts. Things get done, experienced and not just learned, because they are devoted to and excited about the people and subject they're dealing with. If this is all just "practice for the real world" why are pretending like we won't have the resources to get the job done? Why aren't we practicing all the social aspects of a business that can potentially make or break it? Why play like we'll be alone in some field with a book and given an hour to solve some company's salary crisis? Yes, you need a certain amount of knowledge to be in charge of anything, and yes you need specified and refined knowledge in areas to do even remotely well or handle unforeseen problems. You get these skills by practice, not memorization and tests. You learn from people who've took the time to learn how to teach to you instead of taking for granted the whole class is on the same page. Your shown the actual results and how they pertain to your life in particular. I'm going to overwhelmingly prove my theory is correct with Mystik.

 David M.L. Jaffe at 9:35am January 23

You have Schrimper, don't you? Dude's fucking sweet. And it's probably the only business class I'll ever find entertaining and informative at the same time. Sigh...

[119.154] And Then There Was This One Time

Friday, August 15, 2008 at 5:17pm

It's the last day of band camp. I get whiffs of the silly string and shaving cream that the band planned to “surprise” the staff with, which I could have fully avoided, but hung around to make proper goodbyes. I didn't want to get wet, which was my one victory, and I can remain “happy” writing this knowing my Ipod stayed safe, even if my phone dropped and cracked during the dash to my car as cream pies trailed in the distance. Given that band has been one of the biggest parts of my life, I feel it's appropriate to work out the many things I could only think while working with them this year.

On this last day, what are we celebrating? 8 hours a day, 5 times a week over the last 2 weeks. It isn't easy so yes, be happy you can now relax more often and stay out of the sun. Apart from that, I'm confused why everyone is so happy. For those of you not in the know, MHS isn't exactly top tier when it comes to marching band. In the four years I marched there, we never even got a gold rating at regionals, and once, didn't even get past district. I figured I should put that in here so any band member that reads this won't think I'm out to rag on them or there is anything special about this year's level of performance.

When I think about marching band, I put it in terms of many individuals choosing to act as a group. If someone doesn't care to be there, I offer them the door. Putting in that much time to be mediocre or “ok” just seems overtly pointless. I take on the responsibility as a teacher to build people, train individuals. Nobody is going to force you to memorize your music. Nobody will be on the field holding your shoulders parallel to the sideline. It is purely about making yourself look better, and by transference, helping the others around you look and be better as well. I only got hints of this happening in these last few days of camp.

One of the first things Byron and I talked about when we got there was the lack of leadership. When we looked around, we didn't see section leaders. There were barely any juniors and seniors that bothered to show up. So that being our first problem, we took it upon ourselves to assign people the position. Now in our experience, the section leaders were frequently the best marchers, they didn't talk at set, they held sectionals and caught the mistakes so we didn't have to. They dolled out the punishments and led the laps. How naive we found ourselves, given these section leaders didn't always act appropriately because they weren't taught appropriately. This is one of the reasons I can't find myself super angry at them or the band.

The second thing that plagued this band was the lack of discipline. All I remember from marching was getting yelled at to stay still, reset faster, and run to and from water breaks. When you screwed up, there wasn't a hesitation to send you on a lap. If that sounds kinda shitty, Byron marched corps where there's more running, yelling, and beat downs than there is playing and marching. So with these mentalities, coming into a band where breezy weather is regarded as “hot,” being called to attention means shaking around and scratching heads, and assigning push ups or laps means forgetting we had to do push ups and laps, I can't help but find myself a tad frustrated.

I was the dick staff member. I had my tick system where you got a check for moving, and stepping off wrong, and not moving your shoulders correctly. Those checks were suppose to translate into push ups and laps. Therefore, obviously I'm the bad guy. But, shall we remember that band is about individuals. When you mess up, you make yourself look bad, and by transference make the rest of the your band look bad. When you refuse to police yourself in a situation where you represent more than yourself, someone has to be the dick. No shock to me, the people who liked me where the ones that did things correctly, took constructive criticism, and hated when the band did bad as much as I did. Think they understand something the others don't? It isn't fun to watch other bands wipe the floor with you at competition. Nobody wants to look back at the hours of band and repetitive music and think, “Yay, awesome how we looked like little bitches back then. Wasn't the way the judge said 'silver' just so cool!?”

After marching under Meyers and working with Danielson I can objectively say that despite Meyers being a total dick and me not always being “happy” while marching, his method led to a more disciplined band. I can fully appreciate where Mr. Danielson is coming from with wanting people to stay and feel positive, but the happiest waste of time and effort, is still a waste of time and effort. When they didn't stand still after being called to attention that first day is when they should have taken their first lap. When they opened their mouths for the first time after going from set 1 to 2 they should have dropped for ten push ups. It is about everybody getting to the same level. There are some great marchers and great players in the band, but as a whole they will get over-shadowed by the one guy who takes two more steps during a hold, and the one girl who's looking entirely the wrong direction when marching diagonally. Is it better to feel bad about it now and work to make it fixed, or later when all you can do is cope and act like you don't care? If the perfect marcher and player doesn't feel responsible for the ones who aren't getting it by the time the staff leaves, it is too late. If the person next to you doesn't feel bad for letting their friends in the band down, there's a bigger problem than step size or wrong notes.

So no, I was not surprised or sad that the staff members who got the biggest applause, as we were introduced to the parents, were the ones who said and did the least. I'll take my handful of kids who could take things seriously and fully appreciate why I wasn't actually a dick by simply pointing out what THEY, key word, were doing wrong. The music is so simple we spent much of the time in sectionals joking and talking. When you start doing things correctly, I have no problem talking to you on the field or spending less time on music, but as a band we were unable to reach that point. For the record, it was Byron who cussed the most at the kids, but they still hated me more, so what really gets to people, your mean words, or your ability to make them cognizant of their imperfect and undisciplined selves lol.

At the end of the day, I like being around the band and hopefully contributing to someone getting better, but the strain of watching them not care or undo something that was fixed or leave a basics block that has been run 15 times, but still not correct, to move on to more “advanced” things, leaves me feeling like I've done something wrong. It makes me feel like I've cheated them by not letting them experience what it really takes to grow as a person then ipso facto seeing it play out on the field. Ultimately, I wasn't in charge and my “what if, if onlys” don't have any weight. What I can say, is there wasn't a single thing I said that Mr. Danielson ever disagreed with. Not one instruction, not one yelled order got me pulled off to the side and lectured about. I didn't get one complaint from my mellophone and saxes about “being too mean” or asking too much. Band is like anything in life. If your going to choose to do it, actively put yourself in the situation, do it well or regret it. Become the person that expects a certain level of performance and don't be happy simply going through the motions. You can't fake effort, and if there is a moral cell in your body you would feel bad about yourself well before I get the chance to yell about dressing and covering.