Or so I felt willing to claim one short paragraph ago. But I erred in at least two (more-or-less opposite) directions: It's even worse when they want you to do it online; and Lecturing on math at the board is one of the greatest things in life. And the really interesting thing right now, for me, is that the random venting actually works here at home alone with cat and computer; I'm tapping out copy for one of my (absurd number of) blogs and enjoying it as usual. Just like that. But when there's an audience around, it's murder. The more I rant, the madder I get (so "lest I go nuts" doesn't apply). And we're not looking into that just now because it's making me sort of sick at stomach and this is supposed to be fun.
So back on the droids. The deal here is that (of course) the interface sucks and people that've thought themselves in compliance up until the finish line have found their work dumped and them to blame as far as anybody cares (as usual) and it's kind of frustrating so people complain about it. And then redo it anyway which is what breaks my heart.
We're the talent, here, people! We're the ones they paid to see. None of the support staff, alleged or otherwise, even wants to think about doing our job.
(Well, not "none", literally. Dammit! I can't figure out if I'm ranting or trying to be clear! But you get the drift.)
But something strikes me weird here. Because I go around thinking I want people to complain about the brutalities we're all routinely made to submit to at the undead hand of Bad Software. Some of this bad software runs on an operating system called The College (or its Departments or what have you) and is generally known as "the way we do things here"... but I digress. Because it's Software in its usual, runs-on-hardware, sense that I'm claiming to have thought I wanted to hear more complaining about. Though now I'm not so sure, as you will have surmised. Because having now considered this, I wonder if I'm only wishing for a sympathetic ear for my complaining. So it's the (dammit) usual "just how much of a Prima Donna am I acting here", thing. And I'm not a horrible person.
I get to say this because I'm the guy everybody knows around here (and most talk to... if they talk to anyone at all around here); those are my books you see scattered about you, I studied more math than pretty much anybody, I've been at it for a long time, and, hell, I wouldn't go off like that if I didn't trust you.
And this last bit bothers me quite a bit. Because the effect is that of punishing someone for daring to love me back. But it's one thing to realize that you're being an asshole, again. And quite another to be able to reach into your soul and mess with what appears to be a pretty deep character flaw; indeed, is almost certain at least to partake of some flavor of what Program people call a dry drunk. On account of the way, just when you need to put on the brakes, you get this more speed thing going and brush your judgement aside right when you need it most. When this mood works, I call it hot blood (but then, that's not really the same thing...).
Anyway, though, I still think—to the extent that I can think and type at the same time—I want my colleagues to complain about their computer woes. And indeed, that my urge to get into every gripefest I dove into today was never unmixed with Pure Joy. Hell, I once co-founded a union drive; I can love the sound of somebody else not getting a computer to work for almost unselfish reasons.
But then, dammit, they won't even abstain and just wait and see what further pressure might be brought to bear. No, line up again and hope it's just another sheering because sooner or later they're coming for something you don't want to give up. Look. When the program predictably fails right after you ought to be done with it and you can't even get IT in the middle of the day and the emails bounce that's called being treated with contempt and whatever you put up with, there'll always be more. And it doesn't even pretend to make sense.
We don't even work for these silly assholes, anyway; they're supposed to be working for us. The fans pay the band; the barowner just passes along the money. And if just one person should say, "hey, wait a minute, Vlorbik's right!"... well, heck, with a committee of two, I could put all this computer hyperactivity to some constructive use...
I guess it's somewhat related to your theme here of professionals letting things "slide", but it brings to mind something I say now and again to my wife, who has a masters degree in education. I am continually stunned by the questionaires/forms/homework put out by educators that are illogical, incorrect, poorly written, or internally inconsistent. This includes forms sent home from school as well as homework problems and other handouts, and it's a problem with math and science teachers along with other teachers.
ReplyDeleteIt's hard to describe without examples, and I never keep one so it may seem an empty complaint, but this lack of logical thought in a teacher bothers me. I saw a questionnaire once that read "I always do [something or other]" and it had three answers to choose from: Yes, No and Sometimes. So I "sometimes always" do that??? Wouldn't that answer by be "No"? This kind of thing grates on me--it's sloppy and unprofessional. And I think it's because they really don't care to do something right. Unlike you, of course.
This naturally carries over into math and physics textbooks that have outright mistakes in them. A classic to me is the 9th (yes, 9th!) edition of Barron's SAT Subject Test in Physics that my son and I studied. I just started marking stars next to errors to write and complain about, and not only mistakes but basic conceptual errors. Who's giving a care about this stuff?? Not the several editors of that book. (In fairness, the Barron's SAT book for Math II, by a different set of editors, is quite good.)
I used to opine about classes that should be mandatory in high school, and one of them was Logic. Not predicate calculus or anything, but simply straightforward logical and critical thinking, such as recognizing when a politician will blithely declare the converse of a statement, which I see often. But I'm not confident that many teachers are very logical themselves.
Ron
writers failing to take pains bring forth painful documents.
ReplyDeletesymbolic logic is somewhere near the center
of hard-core literacy as far as i'm concerned;
one of the many tremendous strokes of luck
i had coming up was a calc teacher that took
a couplefew weeks out of the stuff he was
*supposed* to do to tell us about p's and q's
(in "deductive" style: name the steps...
modus ponens, double denial,
the "deduction rule", etcetera,
and write diagrammatic proofs.
i lean toward the "truth tables and algebra"
method myself but in some version
you just can't put enough importance
on this. i've taught this many times;
here's some pdf lecture notes.
stuff like barron's is usually far better than textbooks.
i don't know either of the documents you name, though.
anybody can get up on the net and find teachers
that can't edit their own copy pretty easily
even without particularly wanting to so there's
hardly any need to cite particular examples.
unless, of course, you've got something
to get off your chest...