Teachers Aren't Widgets!!! (Psst! What's a Widget?)

I completely agree with Timothy Daly's argument that the widget effect is keeping good teachers from doing their best to give a good education to students--a major reason the status of the teaching profession is in its current condition. The widget effect is the idea that school districts can't distinguish between high- and low-performing teachers, treating them the same and failing to reward good teachers. Many schools rely on the seniority system, directly linking the number of years teaching to a teacher's experience and quality of his or her work. A great teacher who has been teaching at the school for five years will be on the chopping block long before a mediocre teacher who has been teaching for twenty. This kind of thinking is counterproductive to elevating the status of teachers. Why would a teacher even attempt to improve the quality of their work if the only aspect of their career anyone cares about is the number of years they worked? I know from personal experience that seniority does not make good teachers. Basing a teacher's tenure on seniority doesn't encourage them to do well; to the contrary, it gives them an excuse to kick back and not do their job, because they've had the job longer than anyone else. Such indifference to the performance of teachers will not only fail to raise the status of the profession, it will ultimately lower it over time, as people realize that a frightening percentage of the teachers suck. If we are to ever see good teachers raised to the status that they deserve, we must begin to distinguish between their successes and failures, rewarding the good and losing the bad. By doing so, teachers will ultimately gain more respect in the nation, and education itself will get a much-needed shot to the arm. Now if I could just figure out what a widget is...

Great Gatsby Response

Fitzgerald's saddened, almost hopeless reflection on mankind's push into the future shows his main point of the futility of that very act. He seems to convey the message that despite how hard we as humans try to force our way into the future and the prosperity that it will bring, we will never create as good a world as the one we destroyed in the attempt.

Fitzgerald's final lines in the passage illustrate this point of futility perfectly. He speaks of "the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us" and of our attempts to reach it. He claims that "it eluded us then, but that's no matter--tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther." He seems to create an illusion of optimism, believing that the grand future that awaits us is within our grasp. "And one fine morning--" He realizes that the future, the life we so desperately crave will never happen, that we will fight and fight for it, but all in hopeless futility. And so, dreams broken, "we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past," never to see the future of which we dreamed.

His claims that we destroyed the true paradise in the attempt to bring ourselves into our own is brings upon even more hopelessness and desperation. He claims that "the inessential houses began to melt away until I gradually became aware of the old land here that flowered once for Dutch sailors' eyes--a fresh, green breast of the new world." He speaks of "its vanished trees" that had "once pandered in whispers to the last and greatest of all human dreams." He believes, almost regrettably, that "for a transitory enchanted moment man must have held his breath in the presence of this continent" and that we were "face to face for the last time in history with something commensurate to his capacity for wonder." We destroyed the last thing on earth that could possibly have served as a veritable paradise so that we could fight in vain to create our own.

Fitzgerald has revealed a hopeless and depressing truth about the destructive nature of man, and how futile our attempts to be constructive often are. The very idea that we destroyed what we sought to create for ourselves is chilling, to say the least. Perhaps one day we will evolve beyond our senseless need to destroy, though that day seems frighteningly far away.

Ad Technique

Sony has stepped up their advertisement efforts with the Playstation 3. Their new "It Only Does Everything" ads attempt to tell what kind of awesome value one might get by purchasing a PS3 for $300. From what I've heard, the PS3 has some really cool features, such as built-in wi-fi, browser capabilities on the Playstation Network, built-in Blu-Ray players, and more. One might think to themselves, "Wow, that's an amazing value!" And one might be right.


Then Sony really tempts us (myself included) with the promise of even more great features, such as full Internet browsing capabilities, direct links to sites like Facebook, Twitter, and Netflix, printing capabilities, online chat with friends while in gameplay mode, music downloads and playlists to be installed on the system from the Internet, and of course, amazing online gaming experiences. A gamer such as myself who owns a Playstation 3 might have to lift his or her jaw off the floor at this point.


Here's the kicker: all of those aforementioned features are an absolute nightmare to install into the system. Sony neglects to inform consumers of the hassle they have to undergo to receive these features and the constant updates necessary to keep them in prime functioning order. Its bad enough updating the system every time I get a new game, let alone updating it to be compatible with Facebook and Twitter and the printer in my neighbor's house.


It seems that the Playstation 3 does do everything, or nearly everything, but at the cost of lost game time, ibuprofen, and a small portion of one's sanity, does it really need to?

My Wood Response

Forster's argument in My Wood is that owning property leads men to be greedy, selfish, and lusting for more. For some men, this is true. Some are greedy by nature. For these men there is not much one can do to convince them otherwise. However, Forster's claims are far-reaching and sweeping accusations at mankind as a whole, rather than the select group who are the face of ownership of vast properties. While several of his claims, such as the argument that wealth is often pined by those who don't have it and closely guarded by those who do, are accurate, it does not mean that wealth and property brings greed and "weight." A man with much wealth should be expected to guard it against those who would seek to take it from him, and those without it doubtless are going to pine and wish for wealth and property of their own. It doesn't mean that ownership is the gateway to greed and sin, it means that as humans we wish to preserve what we call our own and seek to improve upon our lives.

3rd Quarter Reading List

I read 2 books, the equivalent of 5 books.

The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, 450 pages, 2 books
One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest, 315 pages, 3 books

Cuckoo's Nest is the story of a group of men incarcerated in a mental institution as told by the Chief, the narrator of the story and also another inmate. The main character is a man named McMurphy, the only man committed to the hospital by a judge. He attempts to bring his idea of fun to the ward, against the wishes of the nurse in charge of the hospital, Nurse Ratchet, who rules the ward with an iron fist. McMurphy does his best to make life easier for the men in the ward and as difficult as possible for Ratchet. His antics are some of the best literary moments I have ever read. The constant theme of insanity is both chilling and humorous, making this one of my favorite classics of all time.

Consumerism Quote

The man who dies rich dies disgraced.

-Andrew Carnegie

Carnegie, in his day, was one of the world's wealthiest men, a steel tycoon with an empire worth nearly half a billion dollars, which, in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, would be worth well over ten billion dollars in today's money. Carnegie was also a very charitable man. When he sold his company for roughly $400 million, he began to dispose of it at a rapid rate, funding libraries and other such public buildings to further education, donating and giving away all but about fifty million.

Carnegie believed no one needed that much wealth, and that holding that much wealth was a sin against the fellow man. He believed it was one's human duty to aid those in need when one had that kind of wealth and power with which to do it, and if one held that vast amount of riches by the time of his death he was an evil and disgraced man.