Last December my school opted to change the school calendar. The decision was made to get out two days early for Christmas (yeah!). To make up for those two days, we would be losing the MLK and Presidents' Day holidays (booooo!). What that meant for me is that I would be going from January through the first week of April without any days off. That is a long time to go without a breather. If you have ever taught before, you know what I am talking about. If you haven't, you probably think that I am a wuss (which I am, but not for this reason).
Teachers whine about a lot of things (low pay, bad kids, worse parents, overwork, administration etc); I try to refrain from whining too much about my lot in life as I did choose this lot, and there are some significant perks (Spring break, Christmas break, Thanksgiving break, summer, good kids, better parents, lots of laughter, etc). That being said, I needed some time off. I was behind in my grading, the bad kids were getting to me more than the good kids were, my wife has been sick with a bad case of the twins, the gutters needed to be cleaned out, the bills needed to be paid, and I was about to snap. So I took Presidents' Day off. And I took the day after Presidents' Day off to make up for the King holiday.
I spent my two days off in grading papers.
I packed a bundle of papers, a stack of rubrics, a case of CD's, and a CD player and headphones into my forest green LL Bean Deluxe Bookpack (an old friend from my college days) and embarked on two days of intensive grading.
I have recently discovered that the best place for me to grade is at the local public library. It is quiet, clean, and there are few distractions (if you don't count the thousands of books). I have found that I can grade about one paper every fifteen minutes at the library but only about one every thirty minutes at home. In addition, I can't really take breaks at the library. Sure, I might get up and stretch, but if I wander too far from my station, things will start to disappear, and while I would be glad to have the papers taken, I don't need my vintage Magnavox personal CD-player stolen (people looked at me like I was playing eight tracks--lay off people, I would love an I-Pod, but for now I am going old-school).
On Monday, I spent time at three different libraries. The first was my library of choice. It is new, well lit, and has plenty of individual study carrels. The bathroom was out of order. With a row of as-yet-unread-by-me new Harry Potter books resting over my right shoulder (self-control 1, Satan-worshipping adolescent 0), I graded about eleven papers and headed to lunch at Einstein Bros.
After a lunch of two plain bagels toasted with butter (they somehow got my order wrong) and more than one refill of my Cherry Coke, I realized that it would be dangerous to go back to a library without a working restroom. I reluctantly headed to the next local library only to discover that there are only four individual study carrels and that I was apparently allergic to the facility. And I had left my CD player on during lunch and the drive over, resulting in the death of four AA batteries. I graded about half a dozen essays and left.
I headed to the only K-Mart open in my area. I had three purposes in this. One, now I needed some allergy medication. Two, I needed more batteries. Three, this is The K-Mart. My first K-Mart. The K-Mart from which my first ever Lego set was purchased. It was the most holy destination of many childhood toy pilgrimages. I still remember where the toys used to be laid out. I still remember what aisle the Lego was on. So I was going for old-times' sake. Sadly, K-Mart has fallen on hard times. The toys have moved. There were approximately three Lego sets on the shelves and they were all Bionocle (argh). I departed K-Mart with batteries and allergy medications and a cheap DVD of World War II Superman cartoons and headed for library number three.
The third library is the main branch for my county. It is large, well-laid out, and the daytime home of my town's homeless population. With Hawthorne on my left and Huxley on my right and homeless all around, I went to work. Despite the sleepiness induced by the allergy medication, it was a productive time. I graded all 21 of my junior Transcendentalism papers and had made a beginning into my freshmen Lord of the Flies/Jekyll and Hyde papers. By the end of day one, I had graded a total of twenty-six papers. This beat my previous record (15) by a wide margin. A good day and I only read parts of a few books including a book of strategies for dealing with bad teachers and old book by Dinesh D'Souza.
Day two started late as my son has school on Tuesday, and we only have one car. I went back to the first library of the previous day and was glad to see that the bathroom was now open. I found a cozy carrel and plugged in my CD player (I brought an adapter this time). I quickly finished off seven essays only to find that I had brought the adapter but left the rest of the ungraded essays at home.
I returned home, had a snack, and returned to the library just in time for the after school rush. Every table was taken up with teens and math tutors. I returned to my carrel and worked non-stop for the next three hours, trying not to hate myself for not becoming a math teacher. By the time I went home after seven o'clock, I had graded another twenty-one papers for a two-day total of forty-seven papers. Sure, I still have twenty-five more to grade, and after reading a couple of dozen freshmen insights into Ralph and Jack's characters, I am ready to kill Ralph myself--just give me a stick sharpened at both ends--forget it, this red pen will do, but a successful couple of days.
If you need me, I will be at the library.
btw--I was joking about Harry Potter. While it is true I have not yet read it, it is not because of any personally held beliefs about the morality of Rowling's universe.
Peace
22 February 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Not that this is where you wanted the conversation to go, but I've noticed something about the Potter/magic controversy: you have to believe in magic to have a problem with Harry Potter.
Not that you have to believe in the supernatural. But you do have to believe that people can control the supernatural, either through natural talent, arcane study, or both.
This is not the same as prayer, which (rightly understood) is an appeal to God to intervene in our lives (as we see it). (More partiularly, it is us asking God to align our wills with his, but that's another matter altogether).
Belief in magic is this belief that there is something "out there" - mana, demons, angels, God Himself(!?) - that can be controlled by our wills through a few choice words, a smidgen of the right kinds of animal parts, the flick of a wand, etc.
If you believe this, then Harry Potter is certainly not a positive example (no matter what a swell kid he is), because the Old Testament told us not to try these sorts of things.
If you believe that magic is not real, that we can't exeert our wills on the supernatural with a Latin phrase or two, then there's no harm in children's stories where that is the case.
I am of the latter opinion, but I know perfectly reasonable people who hold the former. I think they're wrong, and they think the same of me.
P.S. Math homework is much easier to grade.
First, it's spelled "exert." My apologies.
Second, I should have been more precise. I should have said, in the first paragraph, that you had to belive in magic to have a problemm with the MAGIC in Harry Potter.
I am aware that there are other reasons not to like the books. You don't have to be a luddite alchemist to take umbrage with the grammar, for example.
I apologize to anyone who may have been accidentally offended.
*problem
You are absolutely right--this is not necessarily where I wanted this to go. You have opened up quite the can of lizard tails.
I am glad that you qualified your remarks in your second comment as there are legitimate concerns about the morality of Rowling's world that do not relate to magic. The treatment of muggles as an unenlightened underclass can be excused as basic adolescent fantasy about having power over those who just don't get poor little me.
But there is a serious streak of moral relativism in Harry and friends that is continuously rewarded. Lying, cheating, distrust and disobedience of authorities, and other misdeeds are generally excused as serving a higher cause. The worldview of the books is also strongly individualistic. Sure, Harry has a strong group of friends who stand by him, but Harry is ultimately alone and free to manipulate the world according to his own set of rules.
I would also qualify your remark "you have to believe in magic to have a problem with Harry Potter." Granted, most of the people who get caught up with the magic component of HP are a little nuts, but I would say that you have to believe that some people believe in magic to have a problem with Harry Potter.
You do not have to believe what Wiccans believe to understand that their beliefs can be a powerful temptation to a young adolescent brought up on too much Buffy and Charmed and frustrated at his or her powerlessness in the world. I think that is the point that many of those who criticize the books are trying to make. In other words, they know that there are people who believe in witchcraft out there and wonder if Harry Potter is more likely to lead a vulnerable youth to explore those beliefs.
I generally see the books as basically harmless. My concerns are generally more with the overall worldview than with the magic. That being said...they are fun and I look forward to reading the next one (which for me is the last one).
Hmm. That's certainly something to think about, although I must say 2 things.
First, I think that your morality issues with HP come from a quick or surface reading of the books. Read some stuff from Quoth The Maven and then read through the books again. Don't pay so much attention to Harry, and especially don't read too much permissive permission into his behavior. That's like thinking The Simpsons is about Bart. Watch Snape and Dumbledore. Especially in book 6, where a lot of this comes to fruition.
Second, the age at which kids are reading HP is an age in which a) they are surrounded by magic and think nothing of it, and b) they are WAY too young to watch Buffy or Charmed. My kids will probably be driving before they watch Buffy. There is crap out there aimed at younger kids that is harmful in the way you suggest, (W.I.T.C.H. comes to mind). I do not believe HP is like that at all.
You say: "I think that your morality issues with HP come from a quick or surface reading of the books." Exactly true. That is exactly how young people read, on the surface. They are not going to look up the Maven. I also think that seeking to make the HP series a Paragon of Christian virtues is flawed in the same way that I think the Simpsons has been fraudulantly recast by mainstream Christians as some kind of pro-family values comedy. Sure the Simpsons stay together, but they are also types of various vices: arrogance, selfishness, arrogance, drunkeness etc. Yes, disfunction is funny, but it is still disfunction.
I don't believe that there is any single "age" of people that read HP. Look at us. We have an entire generation of young people (in HS or college now) who have grown up with HP. While many are too young to watch Buffy or Charmed, many are not, and many who are too young watch those shows anyway. I am sure it is no shock to you that most middle school students regularly watch rated "R" movies and watch whatever they will on TV. It is naive to think otherwise.
All that being said, I will repeat my original conclusion, though I will change one word as an allusion to another fun book: "I generally see the books as mostly harmless".
Post a Comment