Taking a Flyer OR No Fear of Flying

I just finished a 6-week sub gig at Lindbergh High School, filling in for a teacher on maternity leave. That it has taken me a week to put this blog-entry to bed is just one indication of how tired I was at the end of the job. Thanks to Ronni Zagora for trusting me with her kids. It was a pleasure and an honor.

I am embarrassed at just how quickly I had forgotten just how much work teaching is. This was not that tough a gig (3 AP USHistory & 1 General Psychology), with an already prepared calendar and assessments (for the history) and an enviable schedule. (Hint: subbing for the department chair is probably a good strategy if you can manage it.) I used to be critical of teachers-turned-administrators who began making demands on their staff. “Don’t they remember how tough this job is?” I would snarl to myself, or anyone else within earshot. Sorry about that, and for not always recognizing that their job is also hard.

I hope you’re not expecting some critical expose of public schools in general or Lindbergh in particular. I have not one bad, or even critical, thing to say about my experience there. One thing about subbing (or guest speaking): If the students respect the teacher in whose classroom you're working, you'll almost certainly have a good day (or in my case, 6 weeks). 

The kids were fantastic; I didn’t have even a sniff of anything that could be called a discipline problem. The students were respectful and at least responsive, if not always super motivated. They were, after all, high school juniors and seniors (and seniors, especially this time of year, are pretty much done). It took a couple days for me to get my “sea-legs” back (perhaps not the most apt metaphor for a school with an airborne mascot), but I was teaching in my wheelhouse and quickly found my rhythm.

Nor did the kids didn’t seem to mind the passive learning to which they were subjected. I did thank them for their patience on the last day of the “Berndt Talking Tour.” I mean, anyone who knows me knows that if I can do one thing, it’s talk. Press the “On” button and away I go. I remember showing an early baby picture of Nicci, and having one student say, “She looks just like you, her mouth is open.” I’d have been more insulted had it not been so true.

The social studies faculty (with whom I had the most contact) were incredibly warm and welcoming. Even though I’m (still) an introvert, I quickly felt a comfortable kinship. And once I was able to find my way to the office without a Sherpa or leaving breadcrumbs, I also had pleasant, helpful encounters with the support staff. Everyone struck me as competent, although if I really met an administrator, I don’t remember him/her. I’m excited for my former student, and my current friend, Dr. Eric Cochran, as he takes over the (challenging) principal job next year. I’m confident he’ll be great.

One thing I learned, or at least reinforced, is that I absolutely made the right call a couple years ago when I submitted my final letter of retirement and decided my time had come. I had only a few misgivings at the time, and none now. I’m glad I did not dishonor the profession of which I am so proud to have been a part by coasting to the end of my career for another year or two. I’m proud of that career and what I accomplished in it. However, I’m also proud that I recognized when it was time to go, not because I was lazy or had lost my dedication or skills, but because I knew that I no longer had the energy to do the job the way I believe it needs to be done, and, more importantly, the way kids deserve to have it done.

When talking about my decision to really retire, I previously used the party-host analogy. I’m updating that analogy to fast-food. As a sub, even a long-term sub, I was the teaching equivalent of fast food. The kids didn’t starve, but what our patrons (students) need are nutritious, home-cooked meals. I’ll do in a pinch, but even with a selection of “healthy choices” on the menu, it’s not in anyone’s best interests to subsist on fast food.

I may have more to say down the road, as I make generalizations about teaching and education from this added perspective, but I had a great time at an excellent school and I’m grateful to Keith Cochran for thinking (and taking care) of me and recruiting me to spend time with him and the Flyers. Based on my experience, I have no doubt that these young men and women will truly soar.

New Memories Under Construction

Forgive the over-long hiatus. It’s embarrassing to admit just how quickly I forgot how much work is the art of teaching. I’m currently filling in on a maternity leave at Lindbergh High School (where Hancock connections show up almost daily). I will then resume more regular posts, assuming I have think I have something relevant to say.

Thanks for your patience.

Thanks for your service

This is an edited update of a blog piece from last week. It’s edited to include a link to an article provided by a friend of mine, Chris Counts, in response to my original. (http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/please-don’t-thank-me-for-my-service/ar-BBhPFEn) If you don’t want to read the whole piece (it’s not that long and worthwhile, IMO), it essentially confirms my original misgivings, at least for some vets. In addition, this updated version will be (re)posted on Facebook as a stand-alone article, and not, like the last time, as part of the “Comments” section to my original Facebook question/post. This typeface and style will denote the additions to the regular piece.

In part due to smarmy radio and television talking heads and politicians making a show of their patriotism by constantly thanking all past and present military for their service, I came to question whether “Thanks for your service” was always appropriate and well received. It seemed, to me, to have become sort of a pro forma statement, so I posted the following question on Facebook:

I have a question for my formers who are, or were, in the military. I had occasion to briefly interact with the son of a friend (also a former) who is currently serving. Because of my friendship with his mom, I've known him for a while and we've met before (didn't need to be introduced). After a brief conversation, we were saying our good-byes and I thanked him for his service. While sincere, that expression has seemed to become such a catch-phrase used so often that it sounds almost meaninglessly automatic, and, therefore, discounted. What is your reaction to being thanked in this way? Or am I overthinking again?

It would appear that, as is my wont, I was, indeed, overthinking – again.

What became clear was not only that is that statement well-received, the gratitude expressed is at least matched by the pride in their service, whether or not they view it as a sacrifice. Even when not seen as any kind personal sacrifice on their part, they recognized that for many of their brothers and sisters (both literal and in-arms), the service was indeed a sacrifice that deserves recognition.

There will always be exceptions, of course, but I hope, and do believe, that we have progressed as a country to the point where we can appreciate our servicemen and women while still, when necessary, separating their efforts on our behalf from whatever political decisions made by our government put them in harm’s way. The fact that they may have benefitted personally or professionally from their service does not discount its value to the rest of us.

So I will, when the opportunity presents itself, continue to express my thanks to our military men and women for their service to our country. That small token is the least that I can do. I will continue to support charities like The Wounded Warrior Project or St. Louis Honor Flight. Beyond that, I would hope that our politicians start doing more than wearing flag lapel pins and making speeches around election time; instead I hope they start keeping the promises, both implicit and implied, that have made not only to our soldiers but their families, as well (http://bobberndt.blogspot.com/2014/05/ought-to-be-no-brainer.html). That will take money and can’t be funded simply by cutting budgets or eliminating wasteful spending. We need to start recognizing the true and ongoing cost of maintaining – and supporting – our military and make decisions based on those numbers, not imaginary ones.

As one of the original commenters, a young man who has actually served, noted, it’s your sincerity that makes the difference. Any gratitude for anything, sincerely expressed, might be misunderstood or misinterpreted, but should never be a cause for regret or second-guessing. It is your responsibility to make sure that’s the case, however.

In the meantime, to all my friends and formers, as well as their families and extended families, my sincere thanks and appreciation for your service.

The Fallacious Fear of The Nanny State

Fear of an ever-encroaching “Nanny State” has been a common theme among conservatives for a number of years, as they bemoan the decline of personal and the growth of government responsibility, the loss of liberty to do what you want when you want, the right to the consequences of your own actions. I get it in theory, but there seems to me to be a fallacy in that thinking, one that has been brought to the fore as over the weekend GOP contenders Rand Paul and Chris Christie pandered with their answers about vaccinations. I was most disappointed with Christie who at least claims to be a “Damn the consequences, here’s what I believe” kind of politician.

There used to be another libertarian axiom, “Your freedom stops at the tip of my nose.” Those who claim to be most fearful of the growing nanny state seem to have forgotten, or just deliberately ignore (as so many seem to do with that sciencey stuff) such a concept. Too many of those trying to reclaim the primacy of personal responsibility ignore the far-reaching consequences of the irresponsible. It’s not government overreach if the majority are being protected from actions of the few that put us at risk.

I’d be happy to support your right to drive 110 mph (without a seat belt) if you guarantee that you will travel alone on this highway to hell and pay for the cleanup costs and damage to the infrastructure.

You don’t want to wear a helmet riding your motorcycle? Fine, I concede your right, but promise to die instead of living for months in a brain-dead coma, driving up health care costs for everyone (to say nothing of creating mental anguish for those who care about you).

Don’t want health insurance? Okay, but then don’t expect the hospital ER to treat you when you’re sick or injured. There is no such thing as “free care.” Someone is paying for it, and for a long time it’s been those who had health insurance. It’s why conservatives from the Heritage Foundation proposed mandatory coverage to solve what they called the “free rider” problem.

The ironic coalition of ultra liberals and anti-government conservatives joining forces in the anti-vax movement is mind boggling, but as long as the wackos are willing to solely associate (and infect) each other and not put at risk children with compromised immune systems, as long as they isolate their epidemic to their own group, I’ll grudgingly accede to their misguided notions. However, we protect children from bad parenting on so many other levels (and, having seen too much of the negative results of irresponsible parents firsthand, I might argue not often enough), I have my doubts about even this. And who will be paying for the children permanently damaged by their parents’ failure to vaccinate them? All of us.

I am a live and let live kind of person, but our society has become too interconnected, too complex, to allow the few to take actions that jeopardize the well-being of the many. It is never just your mess, never just your problem. The fallout from individual irresponsibility spreads throughout society. It may not have been what John Donne was really talking about when wrote “No man is an island,” but we do have obligations to our fellow human beings, even if those obligations interfere with what we want to claim as rights. It is the price we pay to live in the world today. Your claim to a freedom that jeopardizes my, or a loved one’s, health, safety, security, or future creates a problem that is beyond just you, a conflict that must be resolved in favor of the majority.

Any concept, pushed to its logical extreme, can be ridiculed, of course. That is precisely the tactic used by both fringes, to advocate for the positions of those who want either no government involvement or those who want the government to solve every problem. But the re-emergence of measles offers us the opportunity to discuss rationally the role and limits of government rules and regulations, as long as we don’t allow the slogan masters to slam the “nanny state” or “my freedom, my choice” doors in our faces.

On the Eve of the State of the Union...

… which I won’t watch, again. As little point as I see in using my time listening to political punching and counter-punching, from a lame duck president this reality-TV drama seems an even bigger waste of my time. Then tonight and tomorrow we’ll be treated to being forced choose which narrow slice of right or left wing real estate we’re going to inhabit.

I never liked forced choice questions, A or B, True or False, Good or Evil. I don’t live in a black and white world; mine is a (fuzzy) shades-of-grey world-view. Thus, I find there are no easy answers and am increasingly suspect of those who claim to have a monopoly on the truth, be they Islamic radicals or Fundamentalist Christians, right-wing Republicans or left-wing Democrats, Clint Eastwood or Michael Moore …..

Life is no longer simple (if it ever was), probably (at least in part) because people are complicated. Seldom, if ever, do we really have an either/or situation, at least when it comes to how we feel about something. While our personal choices may often appear to be a forced choice, if we’re honest with ourselves we’ve had a variety of paths to take before arriving at H-Hour.

Why do I have to go “all in” on an issue? Are you really telling me I can’t support both the 2^nd Amendment and background checks? That I must pick between the 1^st Amendment freedom of (pick one of the 5) and reasonable limits that protect society? Can I not support the police and those who are concerned about whether “black lives matter”? Can I not appreciate the service and sacrifice of our military men and women and have concerns about where and why they are deployed?

On these big issues we seem to be at the mercy of the absolutists and extremists who take no prisoners, admit no middle ground; they manipulate issues and events trying to force the majority of us into their particular small corners. We are also at the mercy of those political consultants who energize voters and contributions by polarizing every issue. And we wonder why Congress can’t find any middle ground?

I almost envy those who live in their narrow black and white worlds. It cuts down on listening, thinking, analyzing, concluding. I’ll finish by sharing a meme that has been posted by both conservatives AND liberals and the cartoon (above) that seems to sum it all up.* Have we finally found something we can all agree on? Nah….

* You might also try to check the cartoon on the mast-head.

The Legacy of Dr. King

When did conservatives start falling in love with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.? I used to joke that I was so old that I could teach history from memory, but this I truly do remember. When Dr. King was alive, he certainly was never recognized as a courageous hero by the right. Instead, conservatives vilified him regularly. To mention just a few, they labeled Dr. King a radical, a communist, a subversive, a criminal, a trouble-maker, etc., etc.

Today conservative memes are showing up all over the place jumping on the Hero Bandwagon. Their real purpose, however, is to not to praise King but to denigrate and label as dangerous radicals President Obama, AG Holder, the reverends Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson, and others. I’m not nominating any of these men for sainthood (history will judge them as it has Dr. King); the leadership of the latter two, especially, frequently strikes me as more self-serving and reactive than productive, but my guess is these converts wouldn’t like what the “radical” Dr. King would be saying today, were we blessed to still have him with us.

At some point, in order to make skeptics listen more closely, conservatives are going to have to recognize that their track record on civil rights for ALL groups (minorities, women, gays, etc.) has always been oppositional, and trying to bring their stale chips and dip to the party 35 years later is less than impressive.