Book Review: What Teachers Make

What Teachers Make: In Praise of the World's Greatest Job. By Taylor Mali. Penguin-Putnam Publishing. Hardback. 2012. $12

At 197 pages What Teachers Make is short, sweet and to-the-point. Mali has a wide following, having taught in numerous places, with experiences across curriculums and disciplines. He draws from his wide experiences in this brief collection of anecdotes, many humorous, a few serious, and all poignant.

Taylor includes some poetry samples which should be read aloud. I'm a big fan of "spoken word" poetry and Mali has been part of the HBO Def Poetry Jam, a brilliant show.

Taylor Mali on HBO Def Poetry Jam

What Teachers Make is not a salary survey of compensation or benefits. What Teachers Make recounts episodes in Taylor's teaching career in which he has affected or been affected by students (smart and dying), parents (allies and enemies), and bureaucrats (who should act smarter than they do).

Mali's book should be read by anyone thinking about a career in Education. Unfortunately, most teacher wannabees have no idea what they are getting into until he or she begins student teaching. When the real scope of teaching is discovered many teachers, almost 50%, resign from teaching after the first 5 yrs. A person must want to not only be a teacher but also understand the incredible demands teaching makes on a person's life. You will sacrifice time, energy, money, emotions, and a bit of your soul to be a teacher. Teachers spend over $1 billion of their own money to support their classes. And, as Taylor points out, and is well documented, the cost of educating one student per year is 1/2 the cost of incarcerating an adult. In Arizona, for example, the wonderful bastion of tolerance {sarcasm}, studies indicate a child who has failed to read by the 3rd grade will most likely end up in prison.

One idea Taylor presents is putting first year education majors into a real life classroom. Throw them in the pool and see if they can swim, he says. Make them teach something. Take the ones who really want to learn how to educate and help them become better educators. Keep tossing them back in. Why wait until the very end, after 4+ years have been expended, and 5 years thereafter the teacher quits. Better to show them the environment and then spend valuable time on the ones willing and able to learn. I have to admit, I like the idea.

The book will validate many of you who do teach. Having experience as a middle school teacher, Taylor may speak with a familiar voice. Those of you needing some new ideas, or are feelings de-energized by educational politics may also find familiar sentiments.

What Teachers Make are future adults who question, who doubt, who can think on their own, and who can cast a critical eye upon their world.

What Teachers Make would make a nice gift for a teacher as he or she prepares for the 2012-2013 school year.

Movie Review: Prometheus

[Spoiler Alert]

Do not read this review if you have not seen the movie.

If you have seen the movie you still may not want to read my review. I found the movie trite, ridiculous at times, insulting, superficial, poorly written, and a good example of using media to promote an interesting idea albeit in a very ham-fisted and incompetently designed way.

[End of Alert]

My favorite part of Prometheus was the opening sequence. The panoramic vistas were reminiscent of many of the IMAX shows I have seen. Having never been to the Isle of Skye the terrain might be of the island. I also thought of the many images of northern Pakistan, the Karakoram Mountains, and the Hindu Kush of Afghanistan. The upland meadows of the Lake Baykal region in eastern Russia. Very nice opening cinematography, maybe award-winning.

And then the movie turns in a stinking "pile of crap" as one posted on GetGlue.

Prometheus has so many problems I don't know where to begin. I guess I'll start near the beginning. After the opening sequence, the action moves us to the year 2089. A small group of archaeologists are examining a site on the Isle of Skye. Archaeologist Elizabeth Shaw (Noomi Rapace) discovers cave art dating to 30,000 years ago. The art seems to suggest a race of giant people from a distant star system influenced the local cultures. Later, we learn the cave art was merely one clue in a series of ancient art which all describe the same star system. The star system is so distant as to be unviewable with the human eye, thus the knowledge of the star system must have been communicated by some other means. Enter the idea of Prometheus, a giant from Greek mythology who tried to elevate humans to be equal to the gods.

With very little exposition, or research, or analysis, the idea humans were "engineered" by space aliens is thrust upon us. I didn't appreciate the rapidity of the notion of humans being "engineered" being established so soon without any real conversation, facts, or evidence being established. Later, the audience is treated to a brief soliloquy by the scientific team on paintings and carvings found around the world, and somehow we are supposed to glean from the art humans were not only engineered but also these artifacts are in essence an invitation to come for a visit.

Because a character tells me some detail is important does not make it so. In what should initially be a scientific detective story, the uncovering of facts and substantive evidence based on research and study and analysis and interpretation, we are forced down the path of "this is important because I feel this is important" illustrated in tiresome fashion throughout the movie by Dr. Shaw. She often fondles her pendant cross as she pleads for her boyfriend, another archaeologist, Dr. Charlie Holloway (Logan Marshall-Green) to understand her "faith."

Having known several archaeologists and anthropologists over the last 15 years or so, I have to say neither Holloway and Shaw are representative of archaeologists. Archaeologists are far more studious, skeptical, and discerning than either Holloway or Shaw conveyed. The media may sensationalize archaeological finds and embellish comments by scientists. In my experience archaeologists don't assert their personal faith as a hypothesis in the explanation of archaeological finds. Utterly ridiculous and shameful for the writers to even connote such a travesty.

Prometheus offers no gradual reveal of information, no suspenseful build-up to the disclosure of a human-Engineer connection. In contrast, Blade Runner was a fascinating exploration of what makes a human, human. As Deckard questions Rachael we are left to wonder if an artificial lifeform indistinguishable from a human is then human. One of the greatest scenes in all of science fiction cinema is the conversation between Roy Batty and Deckard as Roy sees his life waning.

None of those moments even exist in Prometheus. Not one whit. Prometheus lacks intelligence. The burden of the movie's lack of wit falls upon the writers. Hollywood writers must believe the U.S. population collectively dropped out of school about the 7th grade, 8th tops.

Don't expect any interesting discussions such as those found in Blade Runner or Contact, nor any of the philosophical thoughtfulness of 2001: A Space Odyssey. The later is lambasted by people born in the decades beyond the 1980's. No laser beams, explosions in space, no aliens - sort of. One man versus an IBM mainframe in space, ending in some fantastic dreamlike sequence which results in the rebirth of Man.

Blade Runner, Contact, and 2001: A Space Odyssey all have a single commonality. Each movie was based on phenomenal literature. Philip K Dick, Carl Sagan, and Arthur C Clarke were inspirational writers of science fiction, and in the case of Sagan, a well-respected scientist in his own right. The writers of Prometheus were  lazy, uninspired, and guilty of following their own hubris. The anemic story alone proves my point but I have some other points which support my criticisms.

The spacecraft, Prometheus, decelerates on approach to a moon suspected of being home to the Engineers. We are treated to some information, unfortunately. The moon, LV-223, is 2.67 x 10^14 km away from Earth. No reason to tell the audience the distance because first, the knowledge does not advance the story, and second, people like me will take the information and do something with it, like figure out how far away the moon is.

2.67 x 10^14 km is a little over 28 light-years away.

In the movie, we are told the stars are too far away to be seen with the human eye. My vision sucks but even I can see the stars on Orion's Belt, in the constellation of Orion. The closest of these three stars is a little over 730 light years away. 28 light-years is so close as to be next door, in cosmological terms.

[caption id="attachment_1095" align="alignleft" width="300"] The Constellation Orion.[/caption]

Whoever wrote the screenplay must think the audience is stupid. I can almost hear the inner voice, "No one knows how to read scientific notation. I'll just throw some numbers together and no one will really be paying attention."

In today's age, such laziness is inexcusable. Writers must have access to even a local community college in order to ask questions. Even James Cameron, who helped produce this fiasco, could have been a source of information. The writers made no attempt to bring any kind of cosmological spatial sense to the story.

How long did the Prometheus journey to LV-223? Two years, according the story. Two years to travel 28 light-years? In other words,

the Prometheus traveled at 14x's the speed-of-light.

The spaceship arrives at LV-223 in the year 2093. 2093 is only 71 years in the future. I'm expected to believe the human race has achieved either faster-than-light (FTL) travel methods or some other type of conveyance inside the next 7 decades?

Deceleration in space is also tricky business. If one builds up considerable velocity over distance, when one reaches the destination, the velocity has to be shed. The Prometheus slowed so fast I'm pretty sure even the android would have been converted to mush.

[caption id="attachment_1094" align="alignleft" width="300"] The ship is cool but is more suitable for an orbital craft, not an lander. I found the double-duty implausible, even in the Alien milieu.[/caption]

The spaceship is too small. I liked the spaceship design. I liked the Prometheus as a science fiction ship. But, the ship is far too small for interstellar travel. I saw no evidence of any source of fuel or propulsion energy. Ion Engines were mentioned. Ion engines are very efficient. Ion engines take a really long time to achieve any type of decent velocity.

In the first movie, Alien, the Nostromo was the parent ship. The crew picked up a distress signal and opted to journey down to the planet's surface to investigate. Their dispatch ship was not the most aerodynamic of craft but I could buy its flight and descent. The Prometheus cannot be both an interstellar spacecraft and an atmospheric craft, not in 2093. To have enough fuel mass to reach LV-223, Prometheus would have be prohibitively heavy to dive into and navigate an atmosphere. Prometheus should have stayed in orbit, the crew descending in a more suitable landing craft.

Also, by 2093, that pesky force known commonly as "gravity" must be completely understood. None of the characters seemed to be bothered by weightlessness.

After the android, David (Michael Fassbender) activates a sort of holographic projection system, the exploratory team finds decapitated body of an Engineer. Exploring further, a door is opened and the head is found. Upon initial observation, the alien form appears to be exoskeleton. Almost immediately, Shaw states, "oh, this is a helmet." Again, I would have preferred a more close-up scrutiny of her analysis, rather than a group shot with her crouching and proclaiming "oh, its a helmet! Let's take it off." Lame.

Her cavalier approach to "science" is then aped by the other scientists on her team.

If the science team of archaeologists, biologist, and geologist are as incompetent in the real future as Prometheus makes them out to be in the movie, the human race is literally doomed.

The team's biologist and geologist become separated from the main group during exploration of the underground alien installation. The geologist is literally freaking out - unlike any geologist I have ever known, and I have known many. In the meantime, the biologist notes some things swimming in the icky oily fluid leaking from some containers. He becomes entranced by these little worm-like things squirming in the fluid when a very large worm-like thing rises mere feet from a runnel of goo in front of him. I have known and do know many biologists and while I am putting words in their collective mouths, I feel confident when I say,

Any self-respecting biologist would have tripped their own grandmother to escape something which looks like the love-child of a cobra and a lamprey eel.

[caption id="attachment_1096" align="alignleft" width="277"] See? Have we not learned anything since Elf? You don't mess with the wildlife![/caption]

Instead, the Prometheus biologist gets closer, "oh, aren't you pretty?" I felt like I was watching Elf, when Buddy the Elf tried to hug the raccoon in Central Park. How dumb do Hollywood writers think the American movie audience is? Animals that seem sweet generally aren't. We learned that lesson in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

Seriously, outside of the fact no ship like the Prometheus could ever exist in 2093, no ship like the Prometheus could have ever been built within the context of the movie's setting because apparently scientists are all dumb as a bag of hammers. In fact, the android wouldn't exist, either. According to the writers, in the future no Education Reform ever takes place. Either that or scientists are a dime per dozen in the future and even nitwits can find a role on a science expedition. I don't buy that, either. The economist in me abhors such a notion. In terms of writing, the writers must have decided to insult as many science disciplines as possible in the making of Prometheus.

And, physicists, astrophysicists, astronomers, chemists, and cosmologists take note: you were not deemed important enough to denigrate. Or, I might also believe the writers simply were not smart enough to figure out a means to insult you, so they simply opted to leave you out.

Why does the captain of a gazillion dollar spacecraft always dress like a homeless person, act like a truck driver, and speak as if they were yanked out of rural Missouri two days ago? The answer to that one is beyond me.

I also wonder why the only weapon in the future is a flame-thrower. I don't get that. Again, just because Ripley used a flame-thrower doesn't mean the prequel has to set the stage for all flame-throwers. Why are flame-throwers even on a scientific expedition? And its the first handy weapon? Why not an arc welder, or a laser welder? I can see much more utility in a laser welder as a weapon, or a plasma welder, especially on a spaceship. Of course, the movie would be watching the crew turn the Container Room into a bunch of briquettes - The End, no sequel to the pre-sequel because we just turned the Queen Alien and her hatchlings into alien jerky and pot roast.

I was not amazed at the scene where Dr. Shaw "proves" human lineage to the Engineers via common DNA samples. I need more than "see their DNA predates our DNA" and then a little screen shows the overlap. Scott and the screenwriters never used any nuance, merely "here, aliens visited Earth; here, they live in this 5-planet system; here, they are related to us."

Prometheus is no science fiction detective story trying to feel out humans relationship with the stars, or our own humanity, or how we came to be who we are. No events unfold in which the characters discover as the audience does how these pieces come together. The movie is almost like a set of video flash cards, arranged in order, which push the plot at the audience. Yuck.

And somehow, Dr. Shaw figures out the Engineer site on the moon isn't really their homeworld, but a military installation. And, somehow she is able to figure out something went wrong at the installation. How she came to understand these details is unclear to me. No facts are laid out, no observations made, no analysis, no interpretation.

"Oh, this is not their homeworld"

"Oh, this is a military installation."

"Oh, something bad happened here and something got out."

"Oh, they had their own weapons of mass destruction, too."

Yes, I saw the piles of Engineer bodies. Yet, nothing suggested to me the Engineers installation was military. No military weapons, no military equipment or hardware, the holographic Engineers did not appear to defer to anyone. Nothing David was able to interpret could have led anyone to that conclusion. In fact, of all the characters, David's was hardly useful. The wall were covered in glyphs which he could understand to some degree. He was able to operate the Planetarium Room (which was cool, I admit). Of all the characters, David's character could have contributed significantly to the understanding of the installation and the Engineers, yet the writers must not have thought his use towards exposition appropriate.

The character of Meredith Vickers (Charlize Theron) was pointless. Her character rightly died at the end, as any character who runs with the danger should. I'll never understand why directors, writers, whoever, has characters run in the same path as the danger. Dumb. I'm tired of seeing characters behave this way. If a giant rock rolls down a mountain and heads toward you, you deserve to be crushed and killed by said rock if you run downhill along the same vector as the rock. A smart person would dodge to the left of right allowing the rock to pass harmlessly. Hell, a reasonable intelligent person would dodge. In fact, any person beyond 4th grade would dodge, as we have been taught in games of Tag and Dodge Ball and Football and Basketball and in any other activity where getting away from an opponent is necessary. Except in the movies, where

everyone either runs to the danger or momentarily runs in front of the danger until the danger catches them and crushes them like a bug."

Finally, the movie insults James Cameron, Richard Branson, Elon Musk and any other wealthy entrepreneur who might want to finance a space expedition. Scott has the penchant for using really old men as maleficent benefactors. Consider Tyrell from Blade Runner. Old. In Prometheus, Weyland looks like he is 150 years old. Again, I argue, we will never be able to live as long in the context of the Prometheus universe simply because the scientists as created by the screenwriters are morons. Though, who built Prometheus? Probably the Japanese or Chinese or Indians or Germans, as the Prometheus expedition was obviously crewed by Americans. No international folks on-board. Well, except for the crazy Scottish geologist. But, he was probably educated in the U.S. so my argument still stands.

In the future, China, Germany, Japan, and India build spacecraft for the U.S. to crew. According to R. Scott and his staff of writers, American scientists will be too stupid to build one for ourselves. The aforementioned countries will be all too happy to build the US as many spaceships as we need so we can ship ourselves into deep space, where we will end up as part of an alien version of Iron Chef as the secret ingredient.

Why do the scientific benefactors have to be crazy old guys? Why not a Richard Branson-type, or a Mark Zuckerberg-type, or a Elon Musk-type? Young, adventuresome, wealthy and with other wealthy friends. The crazy old coot played by John Hurt in Contact is another fine example of a wealthy benefactor who has lost all his grapes. How come the mission to LV-223 wasn't sponsored by Apple? Now, that would have been a sexy spaceship and undeniably simply to navigate as long as you didn't need to tweak anything.

I'm at the end of my rant. I think I am perhaps one of 5-6 people who found Prometheus insulting and insipid and boring. I also admit that after all of the science reading I have enjoyed over the last couple of years any science-based movie is going to have to work extremely hard to overcome my personal distaste for playing fast-and-loose with science. Also, as I also read philosophies of science and stellar creation I find any superficial smattering of ideas appalling.

I fully wanted and expected Prometheus to be thought-provoking, curious, challenging, and of the depth I'm accustomed to from Ridley Scott. He has done some great work; Gladiator, Black Hawk Down, American Gangster to name a few, besides Blade Runner. As director and co-producer, Scott has to be blamed despite the fact he did not write the screenplay. But, the writing, dialogue, action was wretched.

Geographic Variability of Childhood Food Allergy in the United States

As a past, current, and future allergy sufferer, I found this review interesting. Allergies can be regional, based on local weather, regional climate, and distribution of vegetation. I had not thought to map the incidencen of childhood allergies, thinking those were coincident with population size. I might be wrong in thinking that, perhaps, based on maps and geographic analysis.

Elevation and Cholera: An Epidemiological Spatial Analysis of the Cholera Epidemic in Harare, Zimbabwe, 2008-2009

Health care is an important beneficiary of geographic information and geographic analysis.

Ethics of Deadlines in Education

I recently attended a day-long workshop at the Jefferson County Community and Technical College-Southwest in Louisville, KY. GeoEd 2012 targeted two-year college staff and faculty looking to incorporate geographic information sciences (GIS) in their coursework. My primary employer is a 4-yr institution but the presentations were not especially directed to universities, which is good; otherwise the trip would have been a waste.

I'm a nosy person when it comes to education. I want to know how the classrooms are outfitted with technology, make/models of computers, brands of data projectors, podium-based devices or multimedia podiums, and how the seats are arranged. I want my program to be attractive and I'm constantly looking for new ideas.

On one hallway a poster was taped instructing anyone who saw a student cheating to "turn in the cheaters." I was amused, yet appreciative of at least a superficial attempt by the administration to support academic honesty. Peeking into a classroom I noticed taped to the whiteboard and offset from the projection screen so as not to be hidden was a sheet of paper printed with the words "Do Your Own Work. Don't Cheat." I checked another classroom and in the same location was an identical announcement. Cool, I thought; every student needs a reminder.

I can understand why someone would want to cheat. Laziness. The student sets some other activity above doing the requisite work for the course, like fishing, hunting, golf, XBox, etc. Then, the student tries to find a short-cut to a better grade and in doing so undermines the instructor, other students, and his/her own education. Usually, cheating is also accompanied by a bad attitude about having to take the course. "I don't see why I have to take this course?" The lack of understanding creates a sense of justification for cheating.

Personally, if you don't understand the Importance of Education, then, please, stop consuming financial aid and educational resources, leave school, find yourself and discover why an Education is important. When you can appreciate the knowledge you are gaining then, and only then, should you re-apply.

Education is not merely training. Education is immersive, holistic, and never-ending. Education is about understanding the milieu, the ecosystem of a problem, using critical and creative thinking, logic, reason, and tapping into other disciplines.

Training will provide some education, but training is task-oriented. Training provides a specific set of skills, installing, setup, and administration of a computer server, for example. Or, learning how to program in Python or C++ or F#. Plumbing, roofing, electrical work are skills and while people trained in such occupations become educated about the details of those endeavors, reading Plato and Democritus and learning about Golden Hordes is not a prerequisite for installing a circuit breaker.

I do not understand why some students help other students cheat. The Accomplice does the work and assumes as much risk as the Cheater. The Cheater does little to no work while the Accomplice carries the weight with no real return. Maybe money changes hands, or a form of quid pro quo relationship develops, then each student undermines their own character and ethics. How else will the behavior manifest? In what other ways will the Cheater and Accomplice rationalize their behavior, i.e. "this is too expensive, so I'll just take this;" or "my boss doesn't pay enough, so I'll take a few office supplies home." Cheating is simply the rationalization of the theft of a grade and perpetrating fraud upon other class members and the college and university.

Get to the point, you say; your post is about Deadlines!

Cheating is out in the open. An entire section of most higher education syllabi is devoted to Academic Honesty, Academic Ethics, and Plagiarism. There is another ethical issue in education, a behavior which is silent and insidious. And, admittedly, I have been guilty of the behavior but no more.

At the conference, a presenter discussed the attitude of current (and probably future graduates) of being dismissive of Deadlines. Employees show up late, leave early - those are deadlines. Contracts and legislative dollars usually come with timelines and deadlines, or at least benchmarks. Some contracts are written to force payback of money if work is not completed by certain deadlines.

"At West Point, if a student does not submit homework on-time, that is disobeying a direct order."

Stew on that for a while.

Faculty set deadlines. "The paper is due on April 27th" or "make sure your Powerpoint is ready-to-go by March 17th." Deadlines are typically provided well in advance of a due date. Usually, deadlines and due dates are included  on the syllabus. All students are responsible for reading a syllabus regardless of whether a syllabus is covered during class time or not. Therefore, there are no surprises, only choices.

Students are obligated to read and know the syllabus. Faculty are obligated to stand beside their deadlines. Being faculty, sometimes deadlines need to be modified. Inclement weather can interfere with class time. The complexity of the material can impact uptake of information and students may need an additional class period. However, when a deadline is extended, the deadline is extended for all students.

Ethical issues arise when a single or a few students are allowed more time to submit homework for reasons falling outside of the traditional "Act of God." For example, a student who decides to spend the weekend in St. Louis watching a Cardinals home stand does not get more time. A student who opts to practice for the GED does not get more time. A student who decides to cruise the Caribbean does not get more time. For me, only the death of an immediate family member constitutes an occasion of changing a deadline. Or, a serious illness which requires extended hospitalization. Even then, if something so life-altering occurs, the student must make a decision regarding near-term education and not place the burden on the faculty or university. Student are people, and people are responsible for their own lives. Not me. Everyone gets to decide how they react when poked. Reaction is choice.

Faculty need to pay attention to their deadlines. Faculty need to stiffen their backbones and prevent manipulative people from undermining the work of other students. A student who receives even an extra day extension receives an unfair advantage over those students who practiced due diligence in getting assignments completed before or on the deadlines. In essence, faculty who allow themselves to be manipulated are also an Accomplice to aiding and abetting cheating. I also know occasions when faculty have adhered to deadlines and have been overruled by ineffectual chairs and deans. Then, the institution undermines their own Academic Standards and the institution itself becomes an Accomplice. See what I mean by "insidious?"

Yes, I was a bit of a pushover, years ago. Then, I realized being "flexible" was not fair to the other students. Why should a student who "forgot" to do an assignment get an extra week to finish an assignment other students did on time? Now, when I go over a syllabus, I have two categories, the "Act of God"-type problem, which needs to be handled on a case-by-case basis, and the "I-forgot"-type problem. I tell students:

"If you forget about a deadline, test, quiz, or assignment, don't ask me about turning it in late. Just do not turn it in. Life is about deadlines. The IRS has deadlines, your job has deadlines, etc., and this class has deadlines. Miss a deadline and you might as well keep whatever you have. Learn from your bad choice. Buy a calendar or an appointment book."

The effects of my rigid policy have been fascinating, actually. Students simply choose what grade they will settle for in the course. To illustrate, a student will choose between showing up for an exam and going to a concert.

"When will I get a chance to see Def Leppard again? I don't care about the exam; I'll take a zero. I figure I'll end up with a C. It's all I need to keep my financial aid, anyway."

The only part of the above I am making up is Def Leppard. I had a student take a cruise in the middle of the semester one year. I do make exceptions for events I deem important, such as high-profile people who occasionally grace our cultural wasteland, like Maya Angelou, P.K. Botha, and the late Prime Minister of Pakistan, Bennazir Bhutto. I do not make exceptions for cruises, deer-hunting, the season premiere of The Mentalist, or Mylie Cyrus concerts.

If you cannot attain a grade on your own then suck it up and figure out how to improve your study and research skills. Stop using the events in other people's lives as an excuse for not being in control of your life.

Most faculty will take some time to help an honest student figure out how to improve study skills. Most new faculty have no idea, not the ones I have run across. Over the course of 3-5 years, then their ability to foster student learning improves immensely. New faculty receive little to no education on how to teach, by the way. They learn the nuances of teaching on-the-job. By working with you, and you them, each will learn from the other about what is needed to communicate knowledge.

If you are faculty, or know someone who teaches, ask yourself if you (or him/her) have ever bent on a deadline. Now, ask yourself,

"If you were a student in a class and you discovered another student received another week to take a test or to submit a paper, how would you feel?"

Would you feel cheated? I hope so.

Students might lie to a professor or a teacher but students are proud of pulling the wool over on the System and will boast of getting more time, or boast of cheating to fellow students. When you see students in the hallway, congregating and swapping stories, one or two of them are bragging about how (s)he used a phone to cheat, or how she manipulated the instructor  into getting extra time to turn in the assignment.

Faculty, chairs, deans, and provosts are all responsible for maintaining the educational integrity of all courses. Cheating can be flagrant and typical, as when students collaborate and scheme to exploit others or technology to steal a grade. Cheating can be abetted by faculty who cave on deadlines, the mistake belief of being "a nice guy" or thinking she will earn the accolades of students for being "nice." The only thing you'll be known for is being a sucker.

PAX

Gamification of Higher Education

I can't stand cheating, academic dishonesty, and plagiarism. People who spend more time trying to figure out how to subvert an exam, cheat, plagiarize, or pay someone else to do their homework. Fail. Simply fail on your own merit. Contemplate what led to your failing grade and change your behavior. Not everyone can, should, or does deserve an "A." Get over yourself. Merely because you have a busy Life with two jobs, three kids, a mortgage, a lawn to mow, and you still want time for fishing, hunting, golf, or shoe shopping does not give you the right to snake your way through a class. If you cheat because you have a busy life, your life is the problem, not the course.

Academic dishonesty is not a victimless crime. First, you have essentially stolen a grade by committing fraud. You did not pay for any grade. Your tuition dollars were tendered in return for contracting with the college or university for them to provide the academic resources, the classroom, projector, and faculty for you to learn something, not for a grade. Thus, you have defrauded the college or university and also any student loan or grant organization who awarded you money. When your child cheats you can tell them not to; of course, you will be a hypocrit.

Honest students also have the potential of being victimized. Any course grade "adjustment," i.e. "curve," offered by an instructor has the potential of being affected by your dishonesty. Higher grades artificially inflate grades and taint any statistics generated which might benefit the class as a whole. And, as cheaters often work as a team, the effect can be much worse on honest student the more people cheat.

Academic dishonesty taints the department's reputation, the university, and you own degree. Degrees are often reputation-based.

"Oh, you went to Ivory Tower State University? They have a really good program."

On the other hand,

"We do not hire anyone from the University of Mordor. Programs there lack credibility and rigor and their students must cheat, receiving high grades yet have no useful skills or are marginally trainable. We've been burnt by students we have hired from there as they never seem to know what the hell they are doing."

In a recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, a person referred to only as Shadow Scholar admitted to earning $60,000 in one year writing term papers. No wonder students today cannot write nor correctly process and analyze what they read. Someone else is doing the heavy lifting. Cut-and-paste operations in writing requires no thought. Summarizing requires a little more thought, but not much more. People simply do not understand eduation.

Another student, Bob Smith, anonymity protected by a psuedonym, is noted in the same article as being proud of his cheating. He never read a damn thing throughout his online course and spent less than an hour a week prepping for exams. By "prepping" I mean "figuring out how to cheat." Mr. Smith argues the lack of consideration given to cheating in the course means the university does not care if a student cheats or not. I suppose if Mr. Smith had to use a thumbprint scanner, and a webcam for facial recognition, and only be able to take the exam in a proctored environment, only then I guess would Mr. Smith believe the university was serious and academic integrity.

What bothers me is the idea which he has adopted: "If there are no measures to prevent me from cheating, lying, or stealing then it must be OK."

For U.S. students brought up with video games, attaining an education is little more than "Angry Birds" or "Farmville." Some students want to experience the gamut of education and immerse themselves within, like players of Skyrim. But, what about those players who cheat, who do not "pay their dues" so to speak and buy their World of Warcraft characters on Ebay yet cannot play worth a damn? Or, the players who take advantages of glitches to assassinate others players, or use cheats to attain "god-mode?" Most gamers have integrity and despise those who cut corners or cheat.

We live in an era where open attacks on Education, especially Higher Education, are frequent and common. Around the world, people both respect and admire U.S. education, at least Higher Education. Those sentiments are changing, however, as the U.S. Congress continues to defund academic research, higher education, and is increasingly dismissive of science and engineering. Compounding the diminishing respect of U.S. Higher Education are the increasing numbers of foreign students educated here who return to their home country and use their education to teach and train others. Countries whose populations are becoming more educated, Vietnam, India, China, Ghana, and Brazil are then able to achieve greater incomes allowing them to invest in education. A positive feedback loop is then established to continue educational progress.

Meanwhile, U.S. students, rather than work hard and honestly on their education, find themselves distracted by the opening of deer season, fishing seasons, shoe buying season, taking a cruise in the middle of the semester, video games, binge drinking, whatever-makes-me-feel-good-now-because-my-parents-have-been-too-indulgent-of-my-poor-behaviors.

Academic honesty policies are in place and well-posted. That should be enough. Society doesn't place police at every stop sign to ensure you stop, nor at every speed limit sign to prevent you from speeding, nor place police at every shopping market to prevent you from shoplifting. The absence of police does not give you the right to steal.

I tell my students a few details about cheating. First, you will never get a Letter of Recommendation from me if you cheat in my classes. Furthermore, faculty talk. If I find you have cheated in ANY OTHER COURSE, mine or not, I will not give you any recommendation. Additionally, most faculty will not give a dishonest student any recommendation, either. In small to medium-sized departments, a student branded as dishonest might as well change majors or go to another school. When the most any student has to prove competency in an area of study for a job is a Letter of Recommendation from faculty, the effects can greatly diminish the chances of getting a good job, or getting into graduate school.

I have frequently been interviewed by military security personnel, the FBI, and Special Investigators regarding students attempting to earn a security clearance. I am perfectly honest with investigators and will inform them of all relevant details pertaining to a student's integrity. Fortunately, all of my students who have chosen a line of working requiring a security clearance are ethical people.

Academic dishonesty may seem like nothing. Academic dishonesty is anything but. Cheaters set a terrible example for family, friends, children. Cheaters undermine institutional integrity. Cheaters undermine national academics and economic potency.

The same attitude of despising cheaters should carryover to education. We do not trust cheating spouses, cheating politicians, cheating police, or cheating athletes. Why should be trust students who gamify education by cheating?

PAX

Google is a Mapping Company

Google is a mapping company. For years I've used Google Earth in lieu of a physical globe in my world geography courses. If you have not experienced Google Earth download and install Google Earth (GE) after reading my post. Don't download and install now because once you realize the shear genius of GE I will have lost your attention.

GE is a wonderful teaching tool for children 7 and older. GE is easy to use and is loaded with simple features, like a measuring tool and bookmarks, which can help parents teach basic geography to kids. GE is linked to Wikipedia; thousands of sites are referenced via Wikipedia. YouTube places are also linked indicating where people have posted videos of some event occuring at the location. Be advised: some videos are not educational and only informative in the sense of illustrating Darwinian processes at work among people. But, some videos are nice and informative. GE contains a wealth of links to outside sources such as the World Wildlife Foundation, National Geographic, and the United States Geological Survey.

Grabbing screenshots from Google Earth is a cinch and embedding JPEGS from Google Earth can improve posters and presentations. Using a keyboard or a mouse, 3D terrain can be simulated providing a sense of scale and landscape relief. I recommend visiting the Karakoram Mtns in northern Pakistan, my favorite mountain range. The world's highest highway is found here.

GE also has a flight simulator embedded within. Using simple controls and basic physics, a user can pilot around any place in the world.

Now, Google recently revealed plans to map in 3D a number of cities using aerial photography. Nothing especially new about such efforts. Most large cities engage in aerial mapping missions every few years. As cities grow aerial photography helps city planners identify buildings, land use, help them plan for utility growth, estimate population density, estimate potential stormwater drainage issues, and in public safety efforts - all sorts of pursuits. Most states will fly aerial photography mapping missions every 5 to 10 years to help monitor landscape change. The federal government acting through the Department of Agriculture collects aerial photography across states dominated by agriculture. The USDA uses aerial photography information to assess crop type, acreage, productivity, and keeping farmers honest with regards to subsidies and set aside programs.

Kentucky has plans for collecting not only aerial photography statewide but also LiDAR statewide. LiDAR is an acronym for "Light Detection and Ranging." Essentially, a plane equipped with a laser shoots the ground a million zillion times and the laser reflected back to the plane is sensed, allowing distance to be calculated. The result after post-processing are highly detailed terrain maps or maps of city structures, or landforms. The amount of data points is immense; LiDAR collected for a small watershed in Arkansas was in excess of 300GB.

Right now, Google Earth users can fly around the world with some interesting terrain but the cities are mostly flat unless someone has used SketchUp to add 3D buildings. Examine Washington, D.C. for a good example of 3D urban builds.

With Google's new efforts to collect aerial photography of major cities people from around the world will be able to go on virtual field trips, or plan real trips. I'm sure Google will expand their Google Earth API to include such data for wild and crazy new apps.

Check out earth.google.com

PAX

Amateur Traveler Podcast Entertains & Educates

A perfect job would include reading and writing and traveling. And, eating the local cuisine. And, drinking some local beers. Sounds like the perfect job to me. Traveling the globe, writing, reading, eating and drinking… yeah, Anthony Bourdain has pretty much the world's best job.

I don't travel much. Teaching geography, one would think I travel a lot. I did as a child. My parents, especially my father, drove us all over the American Southwest. Arizona, New Mexico, and southwest Colorado have a special place in my heart. As an adult, I've made a couple of really bad choices with my revenue stream which I get to pay for into the next decade. I also had stomach surgery years ago which left me unable to vomit. To be a really adventurous traveler, one needs to have the ability to puke. Bacteria conform to a certain geography. Not all places have the same bacterial flora as Kentucky or Missouri or Arizona. People living in Eastern Europe, Russia, Sub-Saharan Africa, Argentina do not have identical intestinal flora.

When we travel to exotic places our bodies need time to adjust. The "adjustment" period goes by several names, like "traveler's tummy" or "montezuma's revenge." I do not like the fact I only have one egress for problem foods and substances so I pay attention to where I travel and what I eat.

From spectrum of human conditions arises an interesting question:

"What can a person who might be home-bound or otherwise unable to travel do to develop some sense, experience or knowledge of other places ?

With such cable stations like The Travel Channel and Public Broadcasting shows like "Rick Steves' Europe" anyone with access to cable television or the Internet can travel vicariously through others to far-off lands and never leave their kitchen table, desk, or bed. I recommend one should try to travel someplace, Canada, Mexico, the Caribbean, England or the United Kingdom of Great Britain or Ireland, or even Japan. All U.S. citizens should try to travel outside our country once in a person's life. I do recognize traveling may fall outside a person's ability or means, though.

One of my favorite podcasts to which I frequently listen is Chris Christensen's "Amateur Traveler." The Amateur Traveler podcast is a 30-60 minute interview-style podcast. The host, Chris Christensen, interviews a person who has recently returned from a trip somewhere. You can literally replace "somewhere" with a place name and Chris has probably interviewed someone who has traveled there. I believe the archive of his podcasts date to 2007 and perhaps earlier. I am guessing he has over 500 shows available through iTunes.

Over the last week or so, I've listened to travelers tales of Cyprus, Bulgaria, two places in China, Stonehenge, and Oklahoma. Yes, even places in the United States are fair game. Today, I downloaded a podcast for Brooklyn, NY. I also downloaded a podcast for Northern Iraq, too, and Bangladesh.

Chris is a great host. He has traveled extensively himself and often has knowledge of the precise place the interviewee has visited. His geographic knowledge is pretty vast allowing him to ask good questions, and good follow-up questions. He allows his guests to talk freely, as well. He does not talk over them or interrupt. He asks good leading questions which help the guest interpret their travel, as well. You can almost hear the guest's voice change as he or she realizes some new impression or detail about their trip.

Throughout their conversation, which is really what the podcast feels like, that you are simply eavesdropping on two or more friends talking about their travel experience. The conversation is light-hearted yet educational. Chris makes sure to hit the mark, covering climate, weather, the best time to travel, the worst time to travel. He also helps listeners plan their own expedition, in essence.

"If you had to give someone advice about traveling to Albania what would you want people to know?'

Some of his guests are not professional travelers. They sound as if they have not given much thought to helping someone travel. When posed with question like the one above novice travelers will stumble. Other guests are very seasoned travelers and watchful of traveling pitfalls and very willing to share their experience. Some of his guests have worked for language programs, or health programs, have experiences related to mission trips or aid organizations. Some of his guests simply travel for fun, using vacation time. Regardless of the guests background Chris is deftly able to entice an interesting conversation even from such mundane a place as Oklahoma.

"You know you are in Bulgaria when ___[blank___.

Every place has a "feel," and "atmosphere" which you notice almost after deplaning or going ashore. How do you know you are in a specific place versus being someplace else? What gives your new location away as being unique? The question above Chris poses to his guest. Without video or pictures, how do you communicate the essence of a place in audio only when your audience has no experience of such place?  Chris asks the same set of questions near the end of his podcast. The guest, who I think may be brief on these question ahead of time - yet many never seem to give the questions much thought, surprisingly - often let their minds wander for several seconds as he/she tries to recall definitive memories of their time.

After listening to a few episodes traveling seems easy and within reach of everyone and anyone. Whether you merely want to investigate St. Louis, Missouri, Portland, Oregon, or Prague, Czech Republic, the Amateur Traveler podcast will lure you into fulfilling your own travel dream.

Here is what I do. I like music and listened to music as I exercised but at some point I felt as if I really should be learning something during the 1-2 hours of exercise time, jogging or rowing or biking. I decided to load up my iPhone with Amateur Traveler podcasts and listen to stories of people who have used their time wisely, traveling to interesting places or traveling to mundane places and uncovering fascinating stuff, such as the best Vietnamese dining west of the Mississippi in Tulsa ( I think; could have been Oklahoma City). When I jog, I'm learning new geography, which is what I'm supposed to being doing - expanding my horizons and educating myself.

I also listen at work. I have the luxury of not sharing an office with anyone. When I get bored with NPR I'll tune in the Amateur Traveler and learn something.

Do your brain some good and plug in some Amateur Traveler while you drive your daily commute or exercise.

The Amateur Traveler. Chris Christensen, host. Podcasts available via iTunes Store. Free.

Geographical Perspective on the Transit of Venus

June 5th, 2012 was the most recent Transit of Venus. The last Transit of Venus occurred June 8th, 2004. The next Transit of Venus occurs December 11th, 2117. The frequency of transits is no doubt interesting but the more proximate interest I have is how Venus was used to determine the size and scale of our Solar System.

An important geographical question is "how far is it?" Well, the answer to the question depends, depends on what "it" is. How far is it to your house? How far is it to the donut shop? How far is it to the beach? How far is it to the Sun? How far is it to Venus? The last two questions are necessary for determining the size and therefore scale of our Solar System. If we can determine distance to Venus we can then determine the distance to the Sun and thus we will have established our position among the inner most planets and we will have a new unit of measurement, the Astronomical Unit (AU).

[caption id="attachment_1040" align="alignleft" width="300"] The geometry can become far more complicated for an accurate answer but the method illustrated gets within 2%[/caption]

The process of using two locations to measure the distance to a single point is called parallax. We use parallax every day to determine distance. Our eyes are a positioned a few centimeters apart. The distance between our eyes coupled with the images our retinas capture provide our brains enough information for most of us to infer properties about the objects around us, the speed of a car, the distance to a stop sign, or the height of a building. The illustration (left) is from the notes of Daniel Fischer, University of Germany - Bonn (link). I found his explanation of the Transit of Venus precisely in tune with the level of understanding I wanted to communicate.

His geometric description of parallax requires little more than a high school appreciation of geometry or freshman level trigonometry course. By following his directions, one can determine the Astronomical Unit (AU), the distance of the earth from the sun and thus have a basic understanding of planetary distance relationships.

One of fantastic side-effects of understanding the process outlined in Dr. Fischer notes deals with exoplanets. Exoplanets are those planets which orbit distant suns (stars). By determining the distance of an exoplanet from its sun we can figure out if the planet exists in the "Goldilocks Zone," the zone not too hot and not too cold for life.

Another benefit of the method described in Fischer notes is our ability to use the idea of parallax to chart the distance to nearby stars. If we consider 1/2 the planetary orbit of the earth around the Sun as our baseline - the base of our triangle - and we collect two sitings 6 months apart, we can sort of calculate a distance. I say "sort of" since our measurement will not be entirely accurate. The Sun is moving through space and the target star is moving through space over the course of those six months, thus the geometry is changing.

I read recently in a cosmology textbook ("Your Cosmic Context") the error inherent in the calculations is minimal due to the shear distance involved. With NPR running two stories (here) and (here) regarding the use of parallax to determine the distance of the earth to the Sun I've been reading more about the use of parallax to measure all sorts of cosmic distances. Some astronomers and cosmologists point out very small changes in angles, merely being off a few arc seconds can create substantial errors in calculations.

I'm neither cosmologist nor astronomer but I do tell my geography students to pay attention to the latitude and longitude calculations as rounding digits can shift the points measured with a GPS significantly. If you have ever looked through a pair of powerful binoculars and noticed how fast your field of view can swiftly change with small movements of your head then you get the idea.

Back in the "day" explorers used parallax to determine distance to far away objects, lighthouses, islands, points, coves, all sorts of places. Navigators had to be really good at angles, distances, direction, and speed - otherwise known as "course." Tools like the astrolabe and secants were used to gauge position and if a series of positions were known then velocity could be calculated. Once velocity and positions were known then distances to places could be calculated. Navigators were very valuable people; they had to be smart. Early maps were developed by cartographers who were given information derived from parallax measurements. As our tools became better, magnetic compasses and precision chronometers introduced, better and more detailed maps were authored.

[caption id="attachment_1049" align="alignleft" width="240"] In 2013 the GAIA satellite will become active and ready to determine distances using parallax methods.[/caption]

The fact cosmic distances are so large should give us some pause. First, parallax only works well for close objects. Right now, the best tool for measuring these distances is the satellite Hipparcos, launched in 1989. Hipparcos can measures distances using parallax to only 1,600 light-years. In 2013, the European Space Agency's Gaia Mission (link) will be able to measure distances in the range of 10,000+ light-years using the parallax method. Astronomers and Astrophysicists and Cosmologist are constantly working out methods to accurately map out our solar system, our stellar neighbor, and our position within the cosmos. They can use radiation from different portions of the electromagnetic spectrum. They can use known properties of electromagnetic radiation to discern distances.

In fact, most cosmic objects cannot be measured using the parallax method simply because the objects are so very distant the parallax method won't work. We can see many extremely distance objects simply standing outside on a clear night. On a clear night, if one knows where to look, 100+ galaxies are visible to the naked eye. Galaxies, not stars in our own Milky Way galaxy but other galaxies outside our own galaxy. Boggling!!!

Now, imagine looking at any one of those galaxies. The light emanating from the galaxy had to cross intergalactic space to reach your eye. That galaxy is not hundreds of light-years away, nor thousands, nor hundreds of thousands of light-years - er…actually, depending on which one you picked it could be a couple of hundred thousand light-years away - but, if you elected to pick out the stunning Andromeda Galaxy, the light from Andromeda took over 2-1/2 million years to reach your eye.

Fascinating stuff!

On a more earthly note, knowing these distances is very humbling. Not only humbling, but also challenging to those with very strong conservation religious beliefs. Many Southerners with whom I am familiar hold dearly to the Biblical notion the earth is only slightly older than the personalities of people detailed in Genesis. According to Creationists, the earth is a little over 6,000 years old. If the age of the earth was merely 6,000 years we would only be able to see those objects in the cosmos 6,000 light-years away or closer. Judging by the shear number of objects and type of objects we see, 6,000 years is simply absurd and insulting to any intelligent person.

Make no mistake, I am not bashing faith or spiritual beliefs, I am bashing religion-based presuppositional nonsense, especially those viewpoints which purport the Bible to be a first-hand eyewitness account of Creation.

I suppose God could have "staged" everything, like a surprise party, decorating and getting all the galaxies and black holes and nebulas in place and stringing all the light rays into place and 6,000 years ago God turned on the lights and yelled, "Surprise!! Look what I did!"

I don't think so.

That's fiction of the Tolkien world-building fantasy milieu.

And, oh yeah, there were living people walking the earth more than 6,poo years ago, too. They did not have dinosaurs as pets, though. The Dinotopia world Creationists dream about didn't exist, either. I have to admit the idea is fun to think about in a purely speculative fiction sort of way.

Pax

Book Review: False Economy

False Economy, by Alan Beattie. Published by Penguin and Riverhead Books. Copyright 2009. Paperback. $16.

My interest in economics certainly cannot be traced to my college experience with Micro- or Macroeconomics. Both classes were taught be the same gentleman, Mr. Johnson. Mr. Johnson tended to be tardy and always arrived with a ceramic coffee cup of the vintage found in cafeterias. The class had to be somewhat forgiving of Mr. Johnson.

Mr. Johnson was old. He was so old I had no trouble imagining him following Adam Smith around the English countryside taking copious notes. I'm pretty sure he pre-dated the invention of the Supple-Demand curve; hell, he probably pre-dated supply and demand.

My only memories of those classes were of Mr. Johnson, all nine decades of him, standing in front of us, gentling cradling his coffee cup in both hands so as to offset the tremor in one and prevent spillage, whispering the notions behind money supply, and lightly scrawling a Supply-Demand curve on the chalkboard.

[caption id="attachment_1029" align="alignright" width="168"] In case you forgot what a supply and demand curve looked like, here is one in all its glory[/caption]

Geography drew me to economics. Geography also drew me to history but that story is for another post. Geography is about the spatial distribution of nouns, people, places, things, and ideas and the relationship among those nouns. When those nouns have a monetary value we can talk about economics.

Economics is also about philosophy, psychology, and sociology. Most people do not realize economics was born from Schools of Philosophy, from notions of Human Choice especially regarding economic choices, where to live, where to work, and now to spend money.

In False Economy, Mr. Beattie weaves several meandering tales which borrow from geography, history, politics, and economics. Mr. Beattie conducts a sort of economic post-mortem on a variety of countries, Argentina, Sierra Leone, Botswana to name only a few to create a narrative in which the reader can understand in context why some countries and their associated economy behave in certain ways.

Often, I hear the uninformed proclaim, "Well, Africa simply needs to put its colonial past behind itself and move on. The past is the past." Alan addresses Africa and colonial histories of Great Britain, France, Germany, and Belgium on the continent. Colonial powers left a near-indelible legacy behind, helping create racial divisions, or augmenting pre-existing tensions to colonial benefit. Coupled with tremendous natural wealth the legacy of poor political institutions and lack of infrastructure has led to considerable and unwarranted suffering.

Mr. Beattie draws from many sources, the unlikely future of the panda, the necessity of airbourne delivery of cash crops to market, and the benefits of having a only a single political party to bribe. These essays bring to the fore-front the difficulty many countries have in choosing appropriate economic paths. Russia, for example, has a history of renegging on trade agreements much to the dismay of other parties. India might experience greater growth if not for the volume of political factions and special interest groups all wanting to divide the financial pie into smaller and smaller pieces. Diamonds. ight be a girl's best friends but diamonds are certainly not a country's best friend.

Be prepared to journey through several centuries within a single chapter. When I got the book I had no expectation of receiving an education on the Hansestic League. Guilds were the predecessors to unions, thus to understand how monarchs and oligarchs lost power one has to investigate the Hanseatic League, at least a bit, to understand how the power of guilds siphoned influence from aristocracy. Make sure your Time Machine has a set of fresh batteries. Don't let the history lessons dissuade; they are a necessary component of understanding today's obstacles.

Having recently finished a quantum physics book in which each chapter was divided into sections I gound myself thinking sections would have been nice in Alan's book. Due to limited times to read, reading from section to section is a nice luxury.

I differ with Alan with respect to China and the presumed need for the Chinese government to adopt some form of democracy. To quote Mao, "It doesn't matter if the cat is white or if the cat is black as long as it kills mice." As long as the Chinese government continues to liberalize the economy, the type of government is almost irrelevant. In fact, a more democratic government could stall growth. Using India as an example, India's economic growth is stymied by caste-based and income-based special interest groups. One could argue the same about the U.S.; political factions in the U.S. undermine growth. China, having nearly 175 million people belonging to 55 different ethic groups, would no doubt find economic and political stagnation in becoming more "democratized."

I did not find the book in the words of James Patterson "unputdownable" but I did find myself intrigued with the tangential topics and hyperbole of discussion. At times, I felt Mr. Beattie may have played a little too fast and loose with history but he is a historian so I will grant him considerable leeway.

The book does fill niche for tying history with economics and geography to help provide insight as to why some countries succeed, others fail, and yet others cannot seem to get out of their own way. While Mr. Beattie argue my use of hyperbole to describe his musings, the reader must be patient in order for Alan to paint his scenarios. Once accomplished, the reader will have a more nuanced understanding of the obstacles many states face.

Yes, I do recommend the book :)

PAX