Bigger version of new pic over at the side

My small family, at Thanksgiving: Andrew, Daniel and Kathryn (the kids) and me

Why we blog

I'm anticipating complaints here, that the blog assignment is nothing but busy work.

It isn't.

In my nine years of teaching, one thing I've noticed is that modes of communication and transmission of information have changed, but that composition classes have, for the most part, remained the same. I've also noticed that many, if not most, of my students haven't really internalized the idea that writing is communication, that by writing papers that reference other works (whether visual or written), they're entering a conversation.

The blogging assignment is my attempt to update the way I teach you to write, and to help you internalize the idea that you are entering a conversation. I can and will modify the blog requirements over the course of the semester, based on your feedback (though I likely won't modify the frequency required).

I will comment on your blogs. Maybe not every day. Maybe not even every week, since I rarely say anything unless I have something substantial to say, but I will be following them.

Besides. You'll be commenting on each others' blogs, so you shouldn't lack for feedback.

Week from hell

My pixie decided, very early Monday morning, to jump out of my arms just after I'd lifted her out of her crib.  I barely caught her by her left arm, and heard a pop.  She started screaming, but didn't seem like she'd broken anything, since she settled down, nursed well, and fell back asleep.  She woke up about an hour and a half later screaming again when she tried to push up to resettle herself against my shoulder. 

We took her to the urgent care clinic, and the doctor diagnosed her as having nursemaid's elbow--a mild dislocation--but couldn't put it back.  He gave us the name and number of a specialist to call Tuesday, and put a splint on her to protect her little elbow.

She spent most of Monday in my lap, nursing and sleeping.  She wanted down to play a couple of times, but got incredibly frustrated because she couldn't crawl with the splint, which stretched from an inch or two below her shoulder to her knuckles.

We got her in to see the specialist on Tuesday, he got her elbow put back in (with much screaming and crying on her part, and flinching and nearly crying on mine), and sent her for some x-rays to make sure her tiny bones didn't take any damage.  She finally started using her arm again, but acted like it was still really sore (big surprise, there).  It was sore all day Wednesday, and much of the day yesterday, making her really cranky, and inclined to want to nurse all the time.  It was only late yesterday afternoon that she started acting like her normal, happy, active self.

So, for most of this week, I've been limited to one hand to do anything with--which really sucks when it's my retarded left hand.  And I've not had nearly enough sleep.

Sample posts for 102

Sample linked pieces:

A teachable moment: Facebook isn't private

We don't need no thought control.

Sample rants/personal pieces:

Sample rant

Firsts

Sample embedded video (e-mail me if you can't find the instructions in Blogger Help and you want to use videos):

My kids

On December 4, 2010, Kathryn Aubrey Chism decided that 36 weeks was long enough, and she wasn't going to wait those last four weeks before making her entrance into the world. She weighed six pounds, and was eighteen and a half inches long.

Frankly, after her brother's impatience, I'm surprised (though very pleased) that she waited as long as she did to make her entrance.

Her brother Daniel, who'd stayed with my husband's parents while I was in the hospital, got to meet her the day we got to bring her home. He pretty much fell in love with her right away.

It's not hard to see why. She's incredibly cute, and has been since day one. Below is her first day home.

These are more recent picture of Grandma holding Kathryn, with Daniel kissing her little head in the first, and looking up at Grandpa's camera instead of ours with the second.


Daniel adores his baby sister, but since he's only two years old, he has to be penned out of her room sometimes (no matter how adorable he is begging to come in), like when she's in her swing. He may be gentle with her, but he's a klutz, like any toddler is.



One of the funnier things is how protective he is. If she cries at all, he freaks out and runs to make sure she's okay. If I'm in the room and the gate is open, he'll run up to her and touch her to make sure everything's all right. If I'm not in the room, he'll come find me and point at my chest to tell me to go feed the baby*. It's really sweet--he takes his duties of being a big brother seriously.

*Have you seen how expensive formula is?! If we weren't breastfeeding her, we wouldn't be able to afford to eat!

So, if it sometimes seems like I'm taking forever to get back to you on the discussion board, with your blogs, or your e-mails, it's probably because I'm taking care of these two little gifts. You really wouldn't believe how many hands I need to wrangle a toddler and an infant, and do the other things that need doing on a daily basis.

It's a girl!

I know I could have, should have posted this a couple of weeks ago, but on August 20, we found out that we'll be having a girl.

Yes, we do have names picked out--her name will be Kathryn Aubrey.

Plagiarism

I recently ran across a news story that made me realize that you guys might not know what is or isn't plagiarism.

Basically, any time you go to a source outside your own head, you need to cite your source. My 101 students don't have to use research; my 102 students don't need to except for the last paper. However, if you do use any type of outside source, you have to cite your source internally, in a parenthetical reference (explained in your Hacker handbook), and in a Works Cited entry at the end of your paper.

When it comes to blogs, I expect you to link your sources, like I did above. It's explained in the textbooks I created for you, in the Course Documents section of whichever class you've signed up for. If the linking doesn't work for you, e-mail me at hollychism@hotmail.com, and we'll try to figure out what's going on.

There are consequences for not properly citing your sources. The least that will happen if I determine that you've purposely plagiarized is that you'll fail the paper (101) or the class (102), and get reported to the proper authorities for it to go into your permanent school record. If I can tell it's not on purpose, you fail the paper until you revise to cite your sources.

Let me know in the comments, in the General Questions thread on the course site, or by e-mail, if you have any questions.

Pregnancy update

According to BabyCenter's due date calculator, I'm about 9 weeks into things. For the most part, morning sickness has settled down to only half the day, rather than all day like with my first baby. And it's not "morning" anymore when it hits. Mine starts about 2:00-3:00 p.m.

I'll be having my first prenatal care appointment with the midwife that I saw with Daniel. I can't recommend Sue Lazarus with OB/GYN Associates enough. She and her colleagues are first rate.

Another thing I can't recommend enough is that, if your insurance doesn't include maternity coverage, they offer a HUGE self-pay discount: two years ago, the discount was almost a full grand. Freeman Hospital, which is what OB/GYN Associates is affiliated with, also has a HUGE self-pay discount.

Well, I guess that'll be all for now. Next time I update will be sometime after we've heard the heartbeat. Take care, all.

Coolness.

I will admit it: I'm an Anglophile*. I like, specifically, info about British history around the Medieval period, and earlier. That's why this story caught my eye.

Basically, archeologists in Germany believe they may have found the bones of a Anglo-Saxon British princess from the tenth century who was the Princess Di of her times. According to the news story, Princess Eadgyth (pronounced "Edith") was sent to marry an ambitions Germanic Saxon duke who later became the first Holy Roman Emperor. Note the story says they may have found her: apparently, during those times, it was common to move remains around, possibly to make room in crowded church environs, possibly to preserve the dead from grave robbers looking for her jewelry, or perhaps a relic. They will be doing tests to figure out whether it actually could be her, or if it's someone else.

This story interested me for a few reasons: first, the idea of a lost princess appealed to the romantic in me. When I pulled the story up, I was even more intrigued, because she dated back to one of my favorite periods, that before the Norman conquest of England. During that particular time--between England belonging to the Celts and being conquered by the Norman French--society had had far more in common with ours, with regards to equality between the sexes, and responsibility between the classes. Literacy, in this period, was fairly common, as well, as was demonstrated by just how much information there is about Princess Eadgyth.

According to the widespread writings about the princess, and according to the way she was written about, she really was the Princess Diana of her century.

Another reason I chose this story is simple: it has nothing to do with politics, foreign policy, or economic policy. I do follow such, but there's so much out there that's depressing that I simply needed--and still need--a break from writing about it.

*Anglophile: someone who enjoys most things British

Don't you just love bureaucracies (Sample rant)?

I love bureaucracies. They make life easier for all of us, don't they?

Okay, okay. No more sarcasm.

I am about ready to blow a fuse, right now. I cannot access my Lionet account. My account has been "disabled." That means I cannot access my class rosters, my pay information, or anything else like that I need.

Why?

As an adjunct, I'm employed by the semester. That means every semester, I have to sign a new contract. Which is then sent to human resources. Who won't take it if it's too early (and then the contract employee gets their contract back, usually after the deadline to submit it, and has to rush to get a new one turned in), and pitch a fit if it's too late. All in all, there's a window of about a week where they want to get all the contracts put through.

So, where does this tie in with me not being able to access anything? Well, the human resources cooperate with the tech department to let them know who needs an account with Lionet for work, so that accounts can be up and running for those who are university employees.

They also let the tech department know who's not working, so that accounts can be disabled. Like mine was. Because they don't know who's going to be working for them until they get the contracts. And they won't accept the various departments' words that so-and-so will be teaching for us next semester--not until they get those contracts. Which they won't accept until between this date and this date. But they tell the tech department that so-and-so won't need an account the week before they are willing to accept contracts.

And don't ask me why, but they won't accept contracts that so-and-so agrees to teach for the university for Fall semester of x year, and Spring semester of y year (one full academic year). Nope, they want new contracts for each semester.

And, in the meantime, those of us stuck in the cogs of the bureaucracy have to remind them "Hey, I'm still working for you guys...can I have access to the software I need to work for you guys? And can I please see my pay stubs? Pretty please?" with each semester.

(There's another rant there--but I'm sure you don't want to hear it.)

I love my job. I really do. There's no feeling in the world like being able to help students learn what they really need to know to be successful (and writing is one of those skills that's kind of vital, no matter what you end up doing--unless it's flipping burgers or pushing an idiot stick*, and you don't need even a high school diploma for that). I even love this university--I loved it when I was a student, and I still love it from the other side of the desk.

What I don't love about it (or any other large organization, really) is how the bureaucrats adore making the rest of us miserable in their petty power trips.

*idiot stick--a stick with a shovel or mop head at one end, and an idiot on the other.

Firsts

This past year has been a series of firsts: first child, first terror for the child, first night home with the baby, first full nights' sleep after the baby's birth...you get the picture.

Last week saw two more firsts with Danny: his first birthday, and his first time pulling up onto his knees on something.

His first birthday was a lot of fun. We started the day taking a different route to visit his paternal grandparents, because he won't sleep in the car--at all, no matter how tired he is--if he knows we're going there. So, we had to trick him into taking his hour-long morning nap.

He refused his cake, at first. I'd given him his lunch, then handed him a slice of homemade bread to gnaw on while everyone else ate lunch. And he refused--refused-- to give up that slice of bread. Even for cake. It wasn't until that was gone that he was willing.

Then again, after we'd gone to Bella Peppers the week before, we knew he liked bread. Especially garlic bread.

After lunch and playtime with Grandma and Grandpa, we tricked him into taking another nap, by taking a country highway from Andrew's parents' home to my mother's. He got a little bitty burger patty that my mom made (and put through the blender) especially for him, and fries. He loves fries. And then we realized, as we watched him demolish two cupcakes (instead of eating them), that we'd forgotten our camera.

We tried to get a good monkey picture to compare with the ones I'd previously posted, but he wouldn't stay still. I'm posting one where he'd rolled against the monkey, and gotten up on his hands and knees next to it. Should show just how big he's gotten, in contrast to the four day old picture.


The other big first comes with a funny little story. My husband and I have watched the baby watch the cat with delight (it's furry, and soft, and I want it!), and the cat watch the baby with horror and revulsion (it screams! and it moves! and it's bigger than me!) for the past year. The cat laying on the floor is what spurred Danny into rocking forward and learning to crawl. My husband and I joked that it would be the cat, asleep on the couch, that would get him to pull up.

Well, not quite. The cat was asleep on my lap, not on the couch. But it was Danny's desperate desire to get his hands on the cat that prompted him to walk his little hands up the front of my chair, and get up onto his knees.

And the cat promptly ran up my chest, up the back of the chair, down the other side of the back of the chair, and through the baby gate and the kitchen, all the way back to the den. It's the only place she knows the imp can't get to her.

It's been a hectic year, and a hectic week, and I wouldn't trade most of it for anything.

In case you're all curious...

My son, Daniel Marcus Chism, was born eight weeks early, right in the middle of last fall semester. I had to switch the class from being a traditional classroom class, with Blackboard enhancement (i.e., all handouts on Blackboard, with the students responsible for printing the ones they needed for class--which were listed in the schedule, and I'd remind them the class period before they needed them), to being solely online starting October 6. He was 17 inches long, and 3 pounds 13.3 ounces at birth.

He spent his first five weeks in Freeman Hospital's NICU, or Neo-natal Intensive Care Unit. I can't say enough good things about the staff there. When we brought him home, he was 5 pounds 7 ounces.

He's nearly a year old, now. He's gone from teeny-tiny to nearly as big as he should be for his calendar, rather than adjusted, age: 28 inches, and 18.5 pounds. He eats about 6-8 ounces of baby food every day, and one 4 ounce snack, besides nursing. He's crawling (and getting into everything), but not pulling up, yet. He doesn't seem confident in standing even when I'm holding on to him, but the doctors did tell me he'd probably be delayed on some things.

One thing he doesn't seem to be delayed on is talking: he's already calling me "mama" and my husband "daddy," rather than applying one name to both of us. He says "kitty" (pronounced "giddy"), and tries to call the cat, who looks at him like he's lost his mind.

He's a happy boy that very much likes girls. In fact, there are very few people he doesn't like. It seems like the only way to get on Danny's bad side is to baby-talk to him.

Here are some pictures, to show how he's grown. In the first one, he's four days old. The monkey he has with him for size comparison is about 10 inches long. In the second picture, he's three months old, with the same monkey for size comparison. In the third, six months; in the last, nine. I'll post his 12 month picture next month.

A teachable moment: Facebook isn't private.

An individual wrote to New York Times ethicist Randy Cohen, discussing a friend who teaches eighth grade, and whose class all "friended" her on Facebook, which led to her learning about questionable activities the kids engaged in (such as drinking, drug use, academic dishonesty. He or she asks Cohen what the teacher should do about what they learn. Cohen responds with suggestions that, rather than turning the kids in, she should use the knowledge of what they're doing to teach them that Facebook isn't like a diary left on the kitchen table, that anyone can see what they're doing, should they choose to look. He goes on to suggest several ways she can act as a teacher, not a "cop," as he feels her role should be.

Beyond the obvious oxymoron of being an ethicist for The New York Times (where was he when Jason Blair was making up sources and plagiarising?), I see several issues with his suggestion, both as an educator, and as a student.

First off, I heartily disagree with his statement that she shouldn't really do anything but mention that incriminating photos of students drunk or high might cost them opportunities later in life. Hello, this woman isn't a college instructor. She teaches eighth grade. That's kids that are 12, 13 years old. Maybe 14, at most. Cohen says

"...the most significant peril you describe may not be a little teenage drinking or recreational drug use but the public exposure of this “mischief.” Your friend has a chance to teach these students about Internet privacy or the lack of it. She should carpe that diem. Were she simply to bust these online doofuses, she would squander a chance to convey something of lasting importance and leave them feeling that she had betrayed their trust.

To them, Facebook and the like occupy some weird twilight zone between public and private information, rather like a diary left on the kitchen table. That a photo of drunken antics might thwart a chance at a job or a scholarship is not something all kids seriously consider."

WhileI agree that they, and all Facebook users, need to think about how pictures they take and post now might affect their chances later, I'm horrified that he seems to brush off kids not far into puberty altering their body chemistry on a regular basis. That, right there, seems as if it could pose a serious threat to their health and development that he simply doesn't address. It's almost as if he thinks that kids cannot be expected to learn self-restraint about anything, so why punish them for putting themselves in danger?

As a teacher, I think the eighth grade teacher definitely should make sure these kids understand that, by "friending" her, they've given her the key to their "private" diary. She should warn them once, in general terms, that they've got one chance to remove any photos or mentions of illegal or academically dishonest activities from their pages, and that, should she see it the next time she logs on, she's required--by law--to report the underage drinking and drugs (which she is).

As a teacher, I think she was absolutely in the wrong to accept "friend" requests from her eighth grade students. She needs to remember that, as a young and popular female teacher, she's going to be coming under more and more scrutiny in her interactions with her students, thanks to young, popular female teachers like Deb Lefave.

And, as a student who never cheated, and never plagiarized, I'd really resent her if she didn't take a strong stance against academic dishonesty by making sure those who cheated and plagiarized were punished, when convicted by their own words.

Via Joanne Jacobs' blog.

We don't need no thought control.

The University of Delaware has done some things that go way beyond the pale. They've not only invaded the privacy of students living in the dorms, but trampled their rights to think for themselves, not to mention sent a message of "You'll believe what we tell you is right to believe."

The program, later dropped because of the publicity brought to bear by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, or the FIRE (linked over at the left), and the huge outcry that publicity created.

So, what was so wrong with the program? Well, for one thing, it redefined racism:

"A RACIST: A racist is one who is both privileged and socialized on the basis of race by a white supremacist (racist) system. 'The term applies to all white people (i.e., people of European descent) living in the United States, regardless of class, gender, religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be racists, because as peoples within the U.S. system, they do not have the power to back up their prejudices, hostilities, or acts of discrimination….'"

In other words, the designers of the program are well aware of the link between language and thought: that thought is so dependent upon language for its shape that, if you control the language, you control the thoughts of the people using the language. Politically correct speech seems to be another example of this type of thought control.

Further, the program attempted to stamp out any type of intolerance, whether based on sexual orientation, gender roles, socioeconomic standings, or anything else their fertile senses of offense could come up with.

But stomping out intolerance is a good thing, right?

Maybe. Are you supposed to tolerate violence? Are you supposed to tolerate anti-Christian sentiment? Are you supposed to tolerate drug use?

Maybe. It probably depends on the race of the violent, anti-Christian drug abuser.

In any case, they went too far in trying to root out the attitudes of intolerance. Pushing people about their opinions is a form of intolerance in and of itself; however, the program in question likely pushed that thought aside in the pursuit of the greater good of making sure their students were open minded and mulitculturally literate. And if the student wasn't initially multicultural and open minded, they provided retraining to become the model University of Delaware student.

World Net Daily provides an example case that they, and the FIRE say demonstrates the attempt at thought control and reeducation:

"A female freshman arrives for her mandatory one-on-one session in her male RA's dorm room. It is 8:00 p.m. Classes have been in session for about a week. The resident assistant hands her a questionnaire. He tells her it is 'a little questionnaire to help [you] and all the other residents relate to the curriculum.' He adds that they will 'go through every question together and discuss them,'" according to the report.

When the student is asked, 'When did you discover your sexual identity?' she responds, 'That is none of your d*** business.'

Because she did not respond correctly, the residence assistant 'becomes so appalled by her resistance that he writes up an incident report and reports her to his superiors,' the report said."

Telling. I don't think I need to explain much about how wrong this is. How it tramples students' rights to their own thoughts and beliefs.

I believe that you have the right to think what you want. I believe you have the right to express those beliefs in the way you want to express them as long as you don't cause physical harm to others.

In other words, I believe it's my job to teach you that you already think, and how to express those thoughts, not teach you how and what to think.

Please, feel free to comment on this story. Just click on the word "comments" below the post, type in your thoughts, and follow directions. If you like, you can even choose to be anonymous.

Neat!

I had no idea that a local business was so necessary to NASA! Turns out EaglePitcher Technologies makes the batteries for NASA's satellites, as well as the International Space Station.

Absolutely cool!

Why isn't it the adults that have the common sense in these situations?

I found, on Joanne Jacobs' blog, a story that just irritated the heck out of me. It reminded me of all of the "zero tolerance" policies that are carried out without regard to common sense.

Basically, a bunch of girls at a slumber party took pictures of themselves in their bras with their cell phone cameras. Like any stupidity, the pictures got out. The prosecuting attorney in the county decided that it was child pornography, despite the bras covering more than some bikinis, and decided he was going to bully the girls into taking a class on pornography and sexual violence. With adults. Who had been on the edge of sexual offense.

Two of the girls refused. And the prosecuting attorney says he's going to charge them with sexual molestation and child pornography.

I know that "sexting" is a dangerous trend among our young teens, potentially damaging their self-image and leaving them vulnerable to predatory adults. I know that, when the pictures that these kids take of themselves get out, that the pictures are out there forever.

I do not, however, consider it on the same level as an adult taking nude pictures of a child. It's stupid, not criminal.

This sounds like a public official whose puritanical* bent, combined with his personal political power, went to his head and deleted his common sense. This sounds like a major case of bullying.

Honestly, where's the common sense?

*Puritanism: the fear that someone, somewhere, is having fun.

As Thoreau says, "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds."

He did not, however, have to deal with Missouri politicians.

Recently, Missouri law enforcement released a report about the dangers posed by modern militias. And by "modern militias," they meant any political group that the current national administration might not like too much--like anti-abortionists, like fiscal conservatives, like pretty much any truly traditional values that the nation was built upon. In fact, that particular office of law enforcement suggested that these individuals might well be potential terrorists.

Some citizens didn't really care for that idea. And our Lieutenant Governor, Peter Kinder, among others, set up such a fuss that the report has been rescinded. In fact, Nixon backpedaled so fast that, to an unbiased observer, he resembled a small, freshwater crustacean distantly related to lobsters. He said

"Under a previous system, MIAC would prepare and distribute these reports to law enforcement agencies without review or approval from the colonel of the Highway Patrol or the director of Public Safety. ... That’s simply not acceptable."

In other words, "I didn't do it. It wasn't my fault. It was the other guy's fault. And even if it wasn't, you can't prove a thing."

"A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds," said Thoreau. However, I don't think he ever meant that one should become a wind sock when opinion blew against one's beliefs.