Tue AM

I see Tom Watkins is at it again in today's Detroit News.  He cautioned us against "bashing" the Commies in China.  Instead, he insists, we must become friendlier, even embrace the Chinese.  And all of this coziness is because of trade--economics, investment, jobs.  I suppose my seemingly isolationist opposition to this is a bit naive.  The world is different, much smaller than in the past.  Although I dislike the terms "globalism" and "global economy" doesn't mean they aren't valid, likely even more than I'd like to admit.  Still there are some concerns about sidling up with the Commies.

In the past, Watkins has noted his "Chinese friends."  I presume that these are the folks we need to do business with, to trade, etc.  Are these, though, the same people who steal our corporate secrets, hack into our national defense/safety systems, force abortions on second children in families, order tanks to run over protesters, etc.?  If so, I don't want them to be my "friends."  I want to do as little trade as possible with them.

In his op-ed, Watkins also practically canonizes Gov. Snyder for his efforts to bring Chinese trade to Michigan.  He cites Snyder for doing more "than all his predecessors" in this area.  But is that what it is, always with Snyder and his buddies--the bottom line?  Gee, how has that worked out for us with much of that emergency manager garbage, the Flint water system, and more?   It's like that with many of these politicians and corporate-types who think they know how to run education.  (Not that those running the schools now know.)  It's all about the bottom line--test results and budgets.  They just don't get it.

Speaking of schools or, rather, teaching, this has been on my mind for the past few weeks--teaching.  I have been bothered by two things.  As I read through the summer issue of my Amherst Alumni Magazine, I noted the honorary degrees given by the college at this year's commencement.  And I once again noted the lack of any honors given to teachers.  Oh, there was one college professor, but just one.  But there were no el-hi teachers.  A few years back, but only for a short while, I think the college asked graduating seniors to identify good teachers from their pre-Amherst schooling and one was selected for recognition.  I don't remember that happening for a while.  How odd that a college so intent on teaching doesn't recognize teachers, at least not to the degree it should!  I'm not at all suggesting that the college does recognize unworthy people; not at all.  The doctors and lawyers and businessmen/women and civic leaders are all deserving.  But so are educators!

This, I think, reflects the public's lack of appreciation for teachers, that is, for good ones.  Those who know me are aware that I think far too many people who are in education don't belong in education.  There are a lot more bad teachers out there than people realize.  And, it's not easy to be a teacher.  I know everyone was a student, went to school, and watched teachers for all those years.  So, everyone then thinks he/she can be a teacher.  (It's the father-in-law syndrome.  Everyone played little league and watches games on the boob tube; so everyone is smarter than a major league manager.)  Unfortunately, "everyone" is right.  Anyone can be a teacher.  But not many can be good teachers, really good ones.  I've mellowed somewhat over the years.  Although I believe there aren't a whole lot of good teachers, many more are serviceable than I had thought.  Maybe I changed because I realized how difficult good teaching is--maybe.  That said, this leads into my second concern of the past few weeks, a concern I've had for a long time.

Imagine teachers' anger at this, "Oh, anyone can teach......"  Why, then, do so many of them just assume they can teach at the college level?  (What, have a dozen? or so have expressed this idea to me over the past few months.)  "I wish I had..." decided to teach at the colleges, I've been told.  I guess it's like the father-in-law syndrome.  All these teachers went to college, so they think they can teach there.  They should know better (but maybe that's why they are teachers?).  My friend and I often talk teaching and learning.  She teaches first grade and I teach college history.  We recognize that what each of us does is different, very different.  My wife likes to say of elementary and secondary teachers, "They are different breeds."  I'm not saying one is easier or harder, just that they are very different.  So, what then leads so many teachers to think they can teach college-level courses?  If there is a lack of respect and appreciation for what teachers do, in general, isn't there a similar lack for what college teaching entails?  (Granted, esp outside of Amherst, I had some real dogs as college teachers.  And, admittedly, there were some at Amherst who weren't very good, either, but not many.  There were many incredible teachers there and I don't use the term "incredible" as cavalierly as it is tossed around today.)  Yes, the "Oh, I should have done that" irks me.  But I suppose it's a venial sin.