Work With Hope

Among my favorite classical Christmas pieces that I listen to every year, one of the best is Ralph Vaughn William's Fantasia on Christmas Carols. This piece for soloist and choir combines three traditional English Carols into a retelling of the story of the fall of humankind and the joyous celebration of the Savior's birth. I was lucky enough to sing this piece when I was in choir, and I have a warm feeling remembering both the rehearsals and the performance. Some people find it a bit slow and heavy, particularly at the beginning as the Baritone, accompanied by cello, formally declares the purpose of the piece and resells the story. The language is extremely formal, and probably stuffy for some.

The first thing which I will relate
Is that God did man create
The next thing which to you I'll tell

Woman was made with man to dwell

But soon the choirs join in, and the piece starts moving.

My favorite part of the entire piece is in the final movement. Amid sweeping orchestral accompaniment and soaring voices, the men get to sing the final verse.

God bless the ruler of this house and long on may he reign
Many happy Christmases he live to see again
God bless our generation who live both far and near
And we wish them a happy, a happy New Year

 

In so many ways, this encompasses the warmth of the Christmas celebration. Apart from the dated references to a ruler of a house, I love the line “God bless our generation who live both far and near.” The blessings of Christmas are extended for all.

So on this third Sunday of Advent when we celebrate Gaudete! I wish for us all the same thing:

• To live to see many more Christmas times
• To feel God's blessing along with all humankind
• And to have a Happy New Year!

As always, I welcome your comments.

Image: 'A Christmas Carol'

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68187565@N00/4211897997 Found on flickrcc.net

 

I was reading articles from the CNET site this afternoon and I came across a picture and article that caught my attention. The full article is here, but as much as the article, it was the picture that caused a series of reactions in me.

My first thought was, “this must be a joke.” As soon as I saw that it was real, I thought, “Well, that's terrible.” and I'm sure, by reading the article that most people feel the same.

But then I thought, “Why is it terrible?” When our daughter was a baby she had a similar chair with hanging toys for her to see and touch and manipulate. This chair has those same toys plus a screen to see and touch and manipulate. There are pictures and video of our daughter in her chair in front of the television (this is probably showing that I'm an awful parent, but we do have an amazing daughter despite). This child can watch the screen of the iPad and might be more actively involved. How is this worse than my daughter's chair?

But then I thought, “you are blinded by your tech orientation.” This chair is based on assumptions that haven't been proved and could have effects long after the chair itself is gone. Do I know if this is a healthy viewing distance? What is the effect of manipulating digital objects instead of physical ones? Does this feed a lifetime of technology addiction?

So I don't know what I think. Like most things in tech, there isn't a simple answer. You can't always trust your gut reaction…or your reaction to that reaction.

As always, I welcome your comments.

Image: Taken from article

 

I love Christmas carols, love to hear them, love to sing them. Today I attended a madrigal feast at one of my high schools and was able to enjoy the many choral groups and individuals sing a wide range of sacred and secular Christmas songs. The kids did a wonderful job, and I liked almost everything…

…except the singing of “Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas.” Now, the young lady who sang it did a fine job, but she did one thing (I'm certain without knowing it) that bugs me about this song.

As most know, the origin of the song was in the musical Meet Me in St. Louis written by Hugh Martin and Robert Blane. Judy Garland sang the song to her sister at a sad point of the story as the family faced separation and loss. The concept of a “merry little Christmas” is that they should take the little joy and solace that they can from this Christmas, and hope for better days ahead.

Here are the original lyrics

Have yourself a merry little christmas
Let your heart be light
Next year all our troubles will be out of sight
Have yourself a merry little christmas
Make the yule-tide gay
Next year all our troubles will be miles away
Once again as in olden days
Happy golden days of yore
Faithful friends who are dear to us
Will be near to us once more
Someday soon, we all will be together
If the fates allow
Until then, well have to muddle through somehow
So have yourself a merry little Christmas now.

Over time these lyrics have been adapted by pop singers to remove most of the sad references. The line “Next year all our troubles will be out of sight” is revised to the more saccharine “From now on our troubles will be out of sight.” Several similar changes are made throughout the song, culminating with the replacement of “Until then we'll have to muddle through somehow,” to the sweet sounding (but unrelated to anything else) “Hang a shining star upon the highest bough.”

Of course most modern renditions are completely separated from the original context, and I understand why a singer would want more upbeat sentiments. However, without the painful nostalgia of the original lyrics, there is no logic to the idea of a merry “little” Christmas. Why, when everything is so great, would we want to wish a merry little Christmas to someone? It feels a little like the Christmas machine is uncomfortable with the suggestion that anything about Christmas could be less than ecstatic. I appreciate the fact that this song talked about other types of Christmases, ones that are the reality for many.

The original is sweet, sad, and nostalgic. The updated version makes no sense to me, and it grates on me any time I hear it, even when sung beautifully by a great high school student.

As always, I welcome you comments.

Image: 'Christmas Spirit'

http://www.flickr.com/photos/13907834@N00/5270349562 Found on flickrcc.net

 

Wanted to write about something else today, so I'll continue my list of diocesan technology directions at a later date.

During the last half hour of television, I have seen four car commercials. All four have indicated that their product would make a lovely Christmas gift. Three emphasized this with enormous bows on the roof of the beautiful luxury vehicle. This has become such a recognizable holiday tradition that they are barely noticed; cars with bows are as common as Santa, snowmen, and Starbuck's holiday cups.

Tonight, however, I was troubled by these commercials, or more by a question they provoked:

“Who is buying and giving cars as Christmas presents?”

Now, I'm not saying it doesn't happen. Even as a child, I remember stories of lavish gifts among the super rich. The car for the 16th birthday has become a staple on television. I'm certain there are always people of means who spend extraordinary amounts, but these are luxury cars far beyond that gift for the new driver. Somewhere every year, the Christmas morning automotive reveal from the commercials is being played out. But how many of these luxury gifts are really being given?

Since I began writing this, the have been three more giftcar commercials, all for luxury models. I'm certain that they must be effective; companies don't spend money year after year on ads that don't produce. But who are these people? Surprisingly, I have never given nor received an automobile as a Christmas present, and I don't know anyone who has. There has never been a Lexus beneath my tree or a Audi in my stocking.

In saying this, I'm not suggesting that I need or would want a car. Frankly, I can't think of a more audacious and uncomfortable gift.

But somebody….

As always, I welcome your comments

Image: 'Mary's Christmas Museum 2012 – Auto bokeh'

http://www.flickr.com/photos/12836528@N00/8275105683 Found on flickrcc.net

 

As we get closer to year's end, like most, I spend some time meditating on what the year meant and how I've changed or developed professionally or personally. I may share some other reflections in the coming days, but one thing I know for sure, this is the year that the direction I want to lead my schools in terms of technology finally crystallized. Before this year I had vague notions of directions, but if you held me down, I couldn't articulate a clear program. But now I can list five goals that make up my to do list of ed-tech accomplishments I want to complete before I leave this job.

I'm going to break this topic into two days to avoid an overly long post (and to fill more days).

The first step is to provide bandwidth to all schools that is adequate to support the huge demands of a technology rich environment. The movement from local to cloud based audio, video, and services, has exponentially increased the amount of bandwidth consumed by each device. Since even the high demands of today may be dwarfed by tomorrow, it is vital that this bandwidth be scalable. To support this, we are negotiating diocesan contracts with ISPs, running all bandwidth through a centralized location, where we provide filtering and firewall protections to all networks. All school sites have fiber connections which allow for easy scalability with no hardware upgrades. Negotiating a single contract saves money compared to schools negotiating alone, and schools can realize savings by eliminating local filters and firewalls.

We are close to finishing this first phase, and it has been harder than anticipated. Dealing with ISPs has been a true challenge, and I have learned to accept that they are always lying to me about timelines or costs. Unfortunately in our current systems, these companies hold a stranglehold on broadband access; they know it and operate accordingly. So often I have given schools assurances that things would be completed by a date, only to be made a liar by our ISP partners. Another area of challenge was educating schools about the costs of a fiber line. Even with discounts, the new lines cost significantly more than previous DSL or cable which are limited and not scalable. Schools who had $50/month service designed for consumers were suddenly faced with monthly bills of $300. This was a slow process which I did not do well at first. Finally, trying to adjust any filter system to meet the diverse needs of 35 sites is a slow process guaranteed to frustrate all involved.

The second direction is the implementation of a single student information system (SIS) called Sycamore for all elementary schools. An SIS does much more than store student information; it operates as a parent communication system, grade book, report card system, web portal, and other services. Most schools already had an SIS, but they were paying a single school rate, every system worked differently, and there was no way to gather census and other data from the diocesan office. By purchasing a single SIS for all schools, we can save money, centralize training, and gather census data without having schools fill out forms. Implementing a single system also can guarantee that all schools have an effective system to serve teachers, parents, and students.

Hell have no fury like a school that is asked to use a new student information system. Like any new piece of software, there is a learning and a comfort curve. Over time, users learn shortcuts and stop having to think while doing repetitive tasks. A new system starts this process over again, and makes it feel like the new system is inferior. Too many times I had to repeat the mantra, “You'll hate it until you love it.” I know years from now the system will be changed again everyone will complain about moving off the “intuitive” Sycamore system. The SIS project will be completed will full implementation next year.

I'll save the other three goals for later.

As always, I welcome your comments

Image: 'Our Direction'

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68634595@N00/116220689. Found on flickrcc.net

 

Short one today, for reasons that will become apparent.

This evening we are celebrating Advent and the one year anniversary of our Bishop's installation. This will be a large event with around 600 people gathered on the Cathedral campus. I'm certain it will be a lovely evening with decorations, and food, and music….

Ugh.

I am in charge of coordinating the six school choirs that will be performing. Here is a brief outline of the plan.

1. The groups will all meet in the school gym where they will be given pizza. I will take the directors over to the performance space so that they can see it for the first time.
2. At 6:00 the bell choir goes over and performs as people arrive.
3. At 6:40 all the groups walk across the campus, climb the back stairs of the performance building to the third floor and wait.
4. Each group will come 1 flight down the stairs in order, wait in a holding area, and then go out on a balcony where they will sing. I will be monitoring the holding area, and I will be calling up for each group to my assistant.
5. As each group finishes, I have another assistant who will lead them around the entire balcony and down the stairs
6. The students will meet in a second area to be picked up.

This is the life of an educator every day, coordinating the needs of a mass of individuals, trying to keep them on track, and hoping that the whole thing looks good.

I will let you know tomorrow how it all turns out.

Image credit: http://www.aoltv.com/2010/12/07/a-charlie-brown-christmas-special/

 

This one may get me in trouble. I have to be very clear, but if anything bothers you, you can simply pretend that this blogpost is a counter factual fantasy sequence ala It's a Wonderful Life.

Civil discussion and even argument is the hallmark of a democratic society and the basis for a number of my great friendships. Argument can lead to better understanding and even better relationship. I learn more from those who disagree with me than from a chorus of nods, and I have changed my views based on persuasive argument. A well-run argument energizes me and brings out my best.

However, too often in my world I am experiencing and participating in an number of conflicts that serve to cloud rather than clarify an issue. Most of these are disfunctional because the issue at hand is a stand-in for a deeper philosophical difference, so it is impossible to reach resolution because the real issue never comes to the fore. Therefore it goes on, causing greater division and frustration, or as Eliot so aptly described a “tedious argument of insidious intent.”

I sent a response to a concerned Catholic last week explaining my support for the adaptation of the Common Core State Standards in our diocesan Catholic schools. Unfortunately my response anymore is simply a boilerplate letter stating my views and reasons, sent with little to no hope that it will convince the writer.

Background for anyone out of this particular hellish firestorm. The Common Core State Standards were developed by a group of educators who attempted to build national standards to be adapted by every state. Previously states had independently developed standards of varying rigor and breadth. Beyond simple standardization, the CCSS sought to increase emphasis on real world skills, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration, while deemphasizing some traditional skills of memorization and rote learning. Most Catholic schools have always adapted state standards in all subjects except theology. These standards were taught in accordance with Catholic teaching and integrated with the faith formation that is essential to our schools.

The new standards are simply that, a sequential listing of skills a students is to master at certain grade levels. They do not mandate a curriculum, textbook, or political or moral philosophy. The CCSS have been in development since the Bush administration, but they were released during the current administration, and hence the firestorm. Conservative pundits jumped on the standards, not over any particular educational concern, but simply because they were released by the Obama administration. There are coded references to government control and constant direct correlation between the CCSS and Obamacare.

The banner has been taken up by leading conservative Catholic organizations and writers. The CCSS are portrayed as anti-Catholic, a government infringement on our schools, and a dumbing down of traditional education. None of these writers discuss the standards themselves, only their origin and perceived agenda. Most of the letters I receive are from people reading these outlets. None of them are from people who have read the standards. Arguments against their criticism are felt as an attack on their core beliefs, not the issue at hand.

So the argument continues, with no hope of resolution because we are arguing apples and kumquats. I will keep sending my letters, but I no longer fall into the definition of insanity by doing the same thing and expecting any different results

As always, I welcome your comments.

Image: 'I'M A WATERMELON SHARK YOUR ARGUMENT IS+INVALID'

http://www.flickr.com/photos/70285332@N00/8076047220 Found on flickrcc.net

 

The first aria of Handel's Messiah is “Comfort Ye, My People.” It could also be the theme for the second Sunday of Advent, as readings focus on the prophecy of the Messianic Era, where peace will reign and natural enemies will be reconciled. The prophet's message talks of coming joy despite current suffering. “Comfort, comfort my people, says your God” (Isaiah 40:1).

While I certainly don't want to suggest that the message of the technology revolution is a Messianic prophecy, sometimes I feel like I and others in edtech are telling people about great times to come. I believe that digital tools, used correctly, can bring new opportunities for students and transform teaching. Hopefully I'm not echoing the vapid message of Jim in A Glass Menagerie who brags that he has “an idea of what the future will be in America, even more wonderful than the present time is!” but I believe that much of what I talk about is good news.

But do I bring comfort?

Honestly, too often the answer is no. I know that many people agree with me, some are excited by new possibilities, and others are gratified to find a kindred spirit. However, many people are concerned, worried, or even frightened by new developments and my words sometimes exacerbate these fears. After a talk or presentation, I see the people who come forward, but I don't see the ones who slip out of the back shaking their heads, worried that they don't know how they will learn this or how their school will pay for it.

I suppose this is to be expected, even Isaiah was not so touchy-feelie all the time. I'm certain that the people of his time found many of the prophecies to be very uncomfortable. Change is frightening to many, and I can't in honesty say to them that this will all go away if they just wait long enough. A time is quickly coming when a teacher who is not proficient with technology will not have a place in education and a schools that is not a technology rich environment will be irrelevant.

But I don't think this gets me out of the obligation to speak comfort to people, not the comfort of denial, but the comfort of understanding. Maybe I need to sacrifice some confidence for acknowledging problems, less telling and more listening. Maybe even a little less smug humor and more humanity.

How can we bring comfort while sharing this good news?

As always, I welcome your comments.

Image: 'what now?'

http://www.flickr.com/photos/61411590@N03/5859097301 Found on flickrcc.net

 

He is a traveler; his face and name is not important. His destination is of no consequence. The only fact that means anything is that he is traveling, and it is cold. The darkening sky promises no respite. Our friend…but can he be a friend when our sole knowledge of him is his state? Perhaps his journey is of malevolent intent; perhaps he is a saint, perhaps he is a bore who insists on trapping his companions into tedious tales of questionable provinance. But our malefactor/saint/bore walks on, knowing he needs to find shelter or risk hypothermia. He has been walking for hours, and he has no hope of reaching his destination before morning. The reasons and merits behind his journey have no bearing on the effect of cold on his limbs; a saint freezes at the same temperature as a fiend. Now he needs warmth, light, and perhaps a little food and drink. More than that, he needs to reconnect to a transactual world, where moneys, ideas, emotions, or physical contact are exchanged in equal or unbalanced deals. What he will do in this marketplace of values, we don't know, and neither does he. But it is cold.

On the horizon line, he sees a faint, but growing light. As he nears, the hope in his mind turns into possibility, into likelihood, into certainty. Beside the light is the unmistakable sign of an inn. He feels the warmth while still at a distance, the muscle memory of many previous inns. As he opens the door and faces comforting smells and voices, he sighs with relief and comfort. As he settles in a chair, half eavesdropping local conversations, half sinking deeply into self, our malefactor/saint/bore feels safe.

When I arrive early to an unfamiliar location, like I did this morning, I drive through the streets looking for a safe haven to fill the time. I scan the streets looking for the familiar logo or text, searching for green amid the confusion of colors and signs. I know if I drive enough city blocks, I'll find it. There it is, Starbucks. I know I will find a familiar way station filled with fellow travelers. I know it is fashionable to look down on cookie-cutter Starbucks, but I know I can count on coffee, warmth, free wifi, a table or soft chair, people to watch, and (as a good friend of mine says) always a clean restroom. It is the modern commons, shared space for individual pursuits, shelter from the storm.

As always, I welcome your comments…be they malevolent, or saintly, or boring.

Image: 'Coffee Break [Explored]'

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22749993@N08/10440330523 Found on flickrcc.net

 

I am fascinated by times when digital realities collide with analog rules and traditions. So much of our culture was built around the realities of the previous century, and as digital tools (or new tools of any kind) give us new abilities, they often bump against laws and tradition built around not having these abilities. Many times these battles are painful, but they are the birth pains of a new world.

I read a story this morning that illustrates this tension perfectly. A man in Georgia parked his Nissan Leaf near an exposed public outlet at a school. While he watched his son play tennis, he plugged his car in to the outlet to “top off the tank” for about 20 minutes. When he returned to his car, he was charged by the local police with theft of public property, in this case electricity. Though the valuation of the electricity used in those 20 minutes is roughly 5¢, the position of the police is “theft is theft,” and the case is currently being contested in court.

The story can be found here: Kaveh Kamooneh Arrested For Charging Electric Car At Chamblee, Georgia Middle Schoola

Hearing this story immediately brought to mind the number of times that I have “stolen” electricity for my iPad and iPhone in airports, restaurants, public halls, and anywhere that I can find an outlet. I’m certainly not alone in this, as I often join the new nomads who camp beside outlets crouched beside their phones and pads like a primitive tribe enjoying the benefits of modern digital technology.

The specifics of this case are odd, making me wonder whether I have all of the story. I don’t know why the man wasn’t simply told not to do this, why he wasn’t charged the offending nickel, why this case is being pursued through a trial that will cost thousands of time the amount of the offense. However, it illustrates clearly the tension between laws that worked in a former reality and new tools. There was never a need to clarify rules about using outlets, since there was no significant need for them.

As I wrote that last sentence, a man sat down next to me in Starbucks and plugged his phone and laptop into the wall outlet. I realize it is not absolutely the same, as there is probably an understanding that those using the restaurant are entitled to use these resources, but I’ll bet this has never been explicitly stated.

In education technology we bump into these situations all the time. The rules, procedures, and expectations we created for students who could do x a retested and strained by students who can do x+y. Like the case of the electric thief, we will have to navigate many choppy seas of spirit vs letter, rules for a purpose vs rules for rules, and new wine fitting into old wineskins. Someday it will be worked out, but probably not during our (at least my 7775 days) lifetime. The best we can do is recognize that these are cases of changing realities and recognize that they are not simple…maybe theft isn’t theft.

As always, I welcome your comments

Image: ‘Ops…’

http://www.flickr.com/photos/31018257@N00/5828415133 Found on flickrcc.net