Nerdfighters Gazette

High-school age Nerdfighters who subscribe to the New York Times will no doubt have read with interest the article in the Sunday New York Times Magazine entitled “Building a Better Teacher” (for those that don’t subscribe, the article can be found here. ) As I sat at the breakfast table reading that article, I found myself simultaneously laughing and trying very hard not to cry at the sheer stupidity of the entire article.
Anybody who has survived any amount of time in a public school system is probably used to bureaucratic hand-wringing about, well, whatever it is that worries bureaucrats who haven’t been in school for forty years. We get used to having our achievement measured by standardized tests that ignore the fact that we’re human beings in favor of the fact that if they test us enough, eventually they can make some sort of bar graph with it to present at a meeting. And apparently the revelation that has come out of thousands of hours of School Board bigwigs’ meetings is, in the words of the New York Times, “Teachers working in the same building, teaching the same grade, produced very different outcomes.”
WOW. Hold on a second here, NYT, do you mean to say… that teachers aren’t just automatons force-feeding information to unresponsive students? That there exists such a thing as a good teacher and a bad teacher? And…wait, are you trying to say that good teachers do a better job of teaching students than bad teachers? MY GOD, I THINK MY MIND JUST GOT BLOWN! (That’s the kind of high-quality logical thinking that they just don’t teach us in school!)
The article was all about what makes a good teacher, how to get good teachers teaching and how to make a bad teacher into a good teacher. I won’t talk too much about the contents here as you can go read it yourself; suffice to say that it quoted teachers and meta-teachers (I think they’re actually called “educational consultants or something; but meta-teacher is clearly a better word for the people that teach teachers how to teach) to try to make sense of, in a nutshell, how teachers should teach.
The one group of people that wasn’t consulted– and in fact was barely mentioned in the article, was the students. In failing to consult the students about good teaching, they are overlooking the one group that has done the most extensive and, more importantly, recent research on what makes a good teacher. Students know what good teachers are because they are forced into daily contact with both good and bad teachers. And any student, having done this involuntary research, can see that most of the NYT article is made up of various flavours of bunk, blarney, baloney and bullshit. For example: the concept of “The J-factor”, which is “a list of ways to inject a classroom with joy, from giving students nicknames to handing out vocabulary words in sealed envelopes to build suspense.”
*facepalm*
I don’t know about you, but the thing that gives me the most joy in a classroom is to be in the company of an enthusiastic and intelligent teacher who cares about the subject, cares about the students and genuinely wants every member of the class to both pass the exam and to get something out of the class that can’t be tested: a love of learning and a new way of thinking about our position as human beings in the world.
That’s what makes a good teacher. Not vocabulary words in sealed envelopes. What “educators” (which is apparently some sort of umbrella term that not only includes teachers, but also people who have never set foot in a classroom in a teaching capacity and spend their days dreaming up new “initiatives” to help teachers do their jobs better) don’t recognize is that STUDENTS WANT TO LEARN. We want to learn to pass the course, and we also want to learn because the vast majority of students do have a genuine love of knowledge and respect for human ingenuity and learning.
My recommendation for an “educator” who wants to know what makes a good teacher is that they visit Rate my Teachers. There they will find honest feedback and ideas for improvement from real students who are impacted by the decision of School Board bigwigs. Only when students and teachers are recognized as real human beings with emotions, faults and desires is either group able to make a real impact on the other.

***While I’m on the subject of teaching–and because the NYT article contained some discussion of the teaching of math– I would like to recommend that anybody who has ever struggled in math and blamed themselves read A Mathematician’s Lament by Paul Lockhart. It’s a PDF file and you should download it because you’ll want to read it again and again. It is a fascinating, innovative and completely true exploration of the state of mathematical education today and if you have ever beaten yourself up over your perceived “mathematical incompetency”, you need to read it. It’s so good it might even serve as brain bleach after the extreme fail produced by the NYT article.

Please write in the comments about your views on education, teaching, your favorite and least favorite teachers and what makes them so.

I believe there comes a time when all of us suffer the strange realisation that where we are isn’t at all where we want to be. What we are doing isn’t really what we want to be doing. Unfortunately, this happens far too often for many of us. Just look at the average college student. It doesn’t just stop at college though, the average working class citizen will completely change his career several times during his lifetime.

Why is this? I’ve been me for 18 years, shouldn’t I know who I am by now? Is it even a case of ignorance of oneself? Could it be that it’s because we actually mentally and physically change, many times just beyond our vision, into something different and unexpected? A different but recognizably similar you?

I sit here in a classroom pondering, “Does the typical college student choose his major out of his own free will?” Sadly, I was one of the many who did not. While the decision is all mine to make, external factors play far to great a role for me to truly decide and it be from me. My parents pushed me one way, my teachers prodded another. “You want to make good money don’t you?” “Don’t be ridiculous, no one enjoys that.”

It wasn’t until college forced solitude and personal thought on me that I realized how much much of my own personality had been stifled by those around who wanted what was best for me in their minds, unknowingly shoving me out of the way to make those decisions. Months spent in self-thought and reflection can do wonders for the mind. It lets you actually see you. It slowly scrapes away those nagging voices of everyone else. When the only personality left is yours, the only one who’s interests are still heard, albeit nervous and uncertain, the only thing that suddenly matters is what you want.

Mark, where are you going with this? Do you HAVE a point?

Of course I do. Throughout life you have choice. One choice that shapes how you interact with the world and how it in turn reacts with you. Its a deceivingly simple decision:

What opinion matters most, mine or yours?

What makes this so deceiving is the added fight of learning what opinion is yours in the midst of all the chaos.

-Mark Todd

PS:
I am me and you are you
But who are we to say its true

There was a bit of drama here at the Gazette last weekend and it got me thinking. Here’s the abridged version of the story:

I wrote my first movie review column last weekend about Avatar. It contained some vulgar language and in the end I compared the movie to sleeping with a surgically-enhanced prostitute. Happy with my first column, I posted it to the site and went to sleep. Upon awakening, I found that one of the site’s new administrators (who I will not name as calling out a hater is not the point of this article) had not only hidden it from public view and noted how vulgar it was, but he had also changed my user status on the site to that of a subscriber, effectively taking away my ability to do anything. Which is bad because I am also the site’s webmaster.

Now, luckily I was able to hack my way back into the site and restore my user status back to that of an administrator and after doing so I sent the guilty admin an email stating my displeasure and informing him that it is not his place to play censor and that he shouldn’t have taken it upon himself to decide who can and can’t write for a website that he is not in charge of. He then responded with the following:

“…if you feel that posting obscenities to an audience of mostly young people then go nuts. There is nothing faintly nerdfighterish about what you’re doing.“

Now I am certainly not as ingrained in the Nerdfighter community as most of you, but I’ve looked around the Ning and have watched some of the Vlogbrother’s videos, and nowhere is it stated that obscenities are a bad thing. As a matter of fact, John frequently uses adult language and even describes sexual intercourse, alcoholism and drug use in his books, which are marketed to the same crowd we are writing for.

He then goes on:

“I do not wish to be a part of something where the people with power are free to post obscenities that do not belong in the community…“

Yes, I do feel free to post obscenities and my thoughts on any topics that I choose because that is my right as an American. Now, I hope this outraged former admin (who is from the United Kingdom) never makes the journey over to the USA, because I’m sure he will be appalled to learn that I can stand in the middle of the street and loudly describe, in detail, every sexual experience and bowel movement that I’ve had. And there’s nothing anyone can do about it.

His account was deleted and I have since received a couple of trollish emails, as  has the site’s owner Bekah. He has even threatened that “Hank and John (Green) will be told about how outlandish your website is.” That’s akin to hearing your 8 year old brother swear and then running to a random stranger on the street to tell on them. While we at the Gazette certainly admire and look up to Hank and John Green, they hold no real authority here.

Which brings me to my question: Why is cursing bad? The word “shit” contains 4 letters and refers to solid human waste. The word “poop” also has 4 letters and is a synonym. So who decided that “shit” was a bad word but “poop” was okay? “Fucking” is considered the King of Obscenities, while “humping” is fine and dandy to use in everyday conversation. And the only reason the word “cunt” is derogatory is because medieval clergymen were scared of vaginas (WARNING: video NSFW). These words got a bad name for no good reason.

So what do you think? Are curse words really a bad thing? And do you think vulgarity should be banned in the Nerdfighter community? Let me know in the comments below.

Space, the final frontier. These are the ramblings of non-Trek fan. My ongoing mission…alright, enough of that. Let’s get this review started, shall we?

So hot back in the day...

Now I know that I’m a little late on this one, but there is a reason for that: I just now saw the flick. Why? Because I’m not a Star Trek fan. Never really have been. I used to watch the original series when I was like 8, not because I was a fan but because they were on at 11pm and they helped put me to sleep. I never dug the Next Generation, although I do have fleeting memories of pre-pubescantly fantasizing about the short haired blonde chick who was also in Pet Sematary (thanks to Playboy).

So not being a fan, I wasn’t really interested when this movie hit theaters, even though I was a big fan of J.J. Abrams and Simon Pegg. Which ultimately is why I decided to Netflix a copy to my PS3 and watch it last night. And boy, let me tell you…

I dug it. I thought the acting was really well done and of course the visual effects were amazing. I did end up pausing it a few times so I could Google certain things that were being referenced (Kobayashi Maru, Romulan and Winona Ryder naked amongst others) but ultimately they seem to be nods to the die-hard fans and not things that I needed to understand fully to enjoy the flick.

I thought Zachary Quinto played Spock very well and I liked how they were able to bring Leonard Nimoy into the plot as more than a cheap cameo. I also dug Zoe Saldana’s Uhura (and had no clue why they were making a big deal of her first name until I Googled Uhura naked and stumbled upon the fact that her first name was never given). Chris Pine was fine as Kirk, but I didn’t quite buy him as Captain material. Then again, maybe that’s because I’m not supposed to?

Now for the negatives: Simon Pegg. As the comic relief, he should have been more prominent in this flick. He pops in halfway through the movie and he’s not given but a handful of lines. I hope he is utilized more in future sequels, or else I can’t see myself bothering with them.

Another negative was the cinematography. Now I liked how the Enterprise felt new and shiny, but it seemed like in every shot there was a lens flare or 10, and they quickly became distracting. I actually felt like I needed to put on sunglasses to watch some of the scenes.

Finally, the look of the Romulans. I know what you’re thinking: “But if you weren’t aware of them from the series, why does it matter?” It matters because mid-movie I Googled them, remember? I saw pictures and immediately got used to the pronounced facial bones and bowl cuts. But these new Romulans just looked like biker-wannabes with stupid facial tattoos. I couldn’t even find a picture of an old-style Romulan with any tats. Way to throw in random character traits, production staff.

All in all, the movie was an enjoyable watch and I can’t knock it too much as I wasn’t expecting a whole lot going in. It surpassed my expectations and I think J.J. and Co. will go on to make more great Trek films in the future…or in the past. Or in an alternate reality. I don’t know. I’ve been watching too much Star Trek and LOST recently to fully understand what is happening, what did happen and what will happen/could happen. And now I need some aspirin.

THE VERDICT
This movie felt like going on a blind date. You don’t really expect a whole lot going in, but when you get there surprisingly the girl is cute and you have a good time. Then afterwards you make out in the front seat of your Mustang and cop a feel before she says good night and leaves you with a raging hard on and nothing to do but jerk off to Playboy pictures of the short haired blonde chick from Star Trek: The Next Generation.

NEXT REVIEW
The Invention of Lying starring Ricky Gervais

Has anyone else noticed the new trend in movie making? Or, should I say, movie remaking? For starters, some movies just don’t set themselves up for another sequel, take “Pirates of the Caribbean 3″ for example: That ending seemed pretty final, yet, whoop-di-doo, “Pirates of the Caribbean 4: On Stranger Tides” is being produced. They are remaking the Freddy Krouger movie, and “Shrek 4″ is going to be coming out in 3D as well– the first two Shrek movies were pretty funny, but the third? Uh-uh, honey.

This is only because the producers want to bleed as much money from this as humanly possible, and if that means drafting a script from a seemingly closed ending, then so be it! They will find a way. It doesn’t matter if the movie sucks, if it insults our intelligence; as long as they can make a buck or two off it, who cares? Now, some movies need to be remade, because while they were good and had potential (or if they were based off a book) the movies themselves were awful. Has anyone else seen the original Narnia movie? Loved the guy in the beaver suit. The remake for that was more than descent!

I’m going to be hypocritical on this issue because, yes, I will be going to the theaters and watching my beloved “Alice in Wonderland” be acted out by Johnny Depp (anyone here see SciFi’s Alice? For some reason, I really liked it. Oh wait, that’s right– Andrew Lee Potts was in it, duh) and pray that it doesn’t stink to high heaven. I will probably go and see Shrek, and Pirates of the Caribbean, even though I am already prepared to accept that they both will [most likely] turn out to be disappointing and unimaginative: because I’m curious, and…well everyone else is going.

In fact, the only movie that I was completely unable, and unwilling to go see was “Where the Wild Things Are”. I loved that book when I was little, and I don’t want to  have the images that I have had built up in my head for the past 10 years, dashed by some computer generated man with glued on fur and plastic claws. No thank you.

Am I the only one who is terrified to go see the final movies of the Harry Potter series? Most of the movies so far have been an insult to the books, which so many of us have built childhoods out of; if the last movie[s] are awful, I think I’ll burst.