Well, this will be my last post for a week and a half. I'm off at way-too-early-o'clock tomorrow morning for the lovely city of Portland, Oregon, for the Cascade Writers' Convention, where I will be participating in workshops focusing on the other kind of writing I do (fiction). After that, I'm home for only a day or two before going off to Dayton, Ohio for a friend's wedding. So with all of that to-ing and fro-ing, I'm going to take a wee break from battling the woo-woos. My next Skeptophilia post will be on Monday, August 5.
Until then, there are a few things you can do to keep your appetite for
critical thinking sated. First, you can buy my book, if you haven't
already done so. It has the creative title Skeptophilia, is a
bargain at only $3.99, and is a collection of 120 of my essays on
science, skepticism, critical thinking, and woo-woo-ism. You can get it
for Kindle (here) or Nook (here). If you do decide to buy it, many thanks -- and please leave a review.
This is also a chance for you to check out some other skeptical blogs and webpages, so here are a few of my favorites:
Science, Reason, and Critical Thinking
James Randi Educational Foundation
Pharyngula
SkepChick
The Skeptic's Dictionary
The Call of Troythulu
The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Science and Reason
Friendly Atheist
Quackwatch
Bad Archaeology
Bad Astronomy
If you, too, would like to take a break from thinking about all of the crazy things people believe, there's always fiction to be read. Mine. Yes, this is a moment of shameless self-promotion. Besides the books linked on the sidebar, there are over a dozen other titles to choose from, which you can peruse on my Amazon author's page. You will note that almost all of them have to do with the paranormal, an irony that my wife thinks is amusing. Me, I just think that this is why they're filed under the heading "Fiction." But you should still read them, because they're awesome.
If I do say so myself.
That should be enough to keep you occupied while I'm gone, don't you think? I encourage you to continue sending me topics -- I'll be ready to sit down and write again when I get back from my travels, and would love to have some ideas of what you'd like me to write about. Until then, keep hoisting the banner of logic!
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
Tuesday, July 23, 2013
The wrath of Herman
We have an interesting story developing in Illinois, where a church pastor has raised some eyebrows by calling down the wrath of god on a federal judge.
Herman Jackson, who is the bishop of the Ark of Safety Apostolic Faith Temple of Cicero (a suburb of Chicago), ran afoul of the law last October when he was arrested on charges of fraud, with allegations that he had been swindling state day care funds. Jackson was already notorious for a conspicuously flashy lifestyle, with a fleet of luxury vehicles that included a Bentley, a Jaguar, and two Mercedes, and a second home in Georgia, leading non-church-members to suspect that Bishop Jackson may have other priorities than spreading the word of god.
Be that as it may, Jackson was arrested and then freed on bond, but had a directive to live in the bedroom in his church rather than returning to Georgia to be with his family. Jackson objected to this condition, saying that he needed to drive his 15-year-old son to school, an excuse that in my opinion ranks right up there with "the dog ate my homework" in believability.
So the judge overseeing the case, Sharon Johnson Coleman, refused to let him go. Jackson blew his stack, and said, "Because of Judge Sharon Coleman’s continual mocking of God’s ecclesiastical order and the sanctity of family and marriage, the wrath of God almighty shall soon visit her home."
One guiding principle of life in the United States is, "Threatening a federal judge is a bad idea." Speaking with the measured tone that befits her position, she said that she "has concerns about Mr. Jackson’s ability to comply with bond conditions and to appreciate the severity and magnitude of the situation in which he finds himself."
In other words: you can take your wrath of god and stick it where the sun don't shine.
Jackson, however, didn't back down, and continues to claim that the Almighty is on his side. "I was in prayer. This is what God told me. I don’t have the power. God has the power."
You have to wonder how all of the "America is a Christian Nation" people are going to respond to this. On the one hand, you have a federal judge, who is clearly carrying out her sworn duty in prosecuting this wingnut. On the other hand, you have a guy who sincerely believes that he's hearing the voice of god, and that voice is fully in support of everything he does.
Because, of course, "calling down god's wrath" kind of happens all the time in the bible, and when they read these passages, most Christians seem to shrug and say, "Well, you know, god is just like that." We have, for example, 2 Kings 23-24, where the prophet Elisha is meandering about, and some kids make fun of him:
So Bishop Jackson does have some basis for his actions. Not that the wrath of god seems like it's all that easy to call down these days, for some reason. In spite of the fact that the folks in the bible seemed to be able to get god to smite people left and right, for damn near anything, nowadays it doesn't happen nearly so often. I know my dad used to regularly request that the wrath of god descend upon tailgaters and telemarketers, and I don't recall that in either case anyone dropped dead or got eaten by a bear.
Which is kind of a shame, now that I come to think of it.
So, I don't think that Judge Coleman has all that much to worry about. But it'll be interesting to see how this plays out -- if she decides that what Bishop Jackson has said actually constitutes a threat. If so, I'm guessing that even living in his church will cease to be an option, and he'll find himself being fitted for an orange jumpsuit post-haste.
So, that's our news from the wacky religious fringe. I live in hope that even the devout Christians who hear about people like Bishop Jackson don't believe his fire-and-brimstone pronouncements, although there are dozens of biblical passages that then require some rather awkward explanation. So keep your eye on the Chicago area. Let me know if you hear about bears in the vicinity. Other than these guys:
Herman Jackson, who is the bishop of the Ark of Safety Apostolic Faith Temple of Cicero (a suburb of Chicago), ran afoul of the law last October when he was arrested on charges of fraud, with allegations that he had been swindling state day care funds. Jackson was already notorious for a conspicuously flashy lifestyle, with a fleet of luxury vehicles that included a Bentley, a Jaguar, and two Mercedes, and a second home in Georgia, leading non-church-members to suspect that Bishop Jackson may have other priorities than spreading the word of god.
Be that as it may, Jackson was arrested and then freed on bond, but had a directive to live in the bedroom in his church rather than returning to Georgia to be with his family. Jackson objected to this condition, saying that he needed to drive his 15-year-old son to school, an excuse that in my opinion ranks right up there with "the dog ate my homework" in believability.
So the judge overseeing the case, Sharon Johnson Coleman, refused to let him go. Jackson blew his stack, and said, "Because of Judge Sharon Coleman’s continual mocking of God’s ecclesiastical order and the sanctity of family and marriage, the wrath of God almighty shall soon visit her home."
One guiding principle of life in the United States is, "Threatening a federal judge is a bad idea." Speaking with the measured tone that befits her position, she said that she "has concerns about Mr. Jackson’s ability to comply with bond conditions and to appreciate the severity and magnitude of the situation in which he finds himself."
In other words: you can take your wrath of god and stick it where the sun don't shine.
Jackson, however, didn't back down, and continues to claim that the Almighty is on his side. "I was in prayer. This is what God told me. I don’t have the power. God has the power."
You have to wonder how all of the "America is a Christian Nation" people are going to respond to this. On the one hand, you have a federal judge, who is clearly carrying out her sworn duty in prosecuting this wingnut. On the other hand, you have a guy who sincerely believes that he's hearing the voice of god, and that voice is fully in support of everything he does.
Because, of course, "calling down god's wrath" kind of happens all the time in the bible, and when they read these passages, most Christians seem to shrug and say, "Well, you know, god is just like that." We have, for example, 2 Kings 23-24, where the prophet Elisha is meandering about, and some kids make fun of him:
From there Elisha went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” they said. “Get out of here, baldy!” He turned around, looked at them and called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.Well, that's edifying. And lest you think that this is the sort of thing that only happened in the Old Testament, that by New Testament times god had upped his dosage of antipsychotic meds, we have the lovely tale of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11, which goes as follows:
Now a man named Ananias, together with his wife Sapphira, also sold a piece of property. With his wife’s full knowledge he kept back part of the money for himself, but brought the rest and put it at the apostles’ feet.I'll just bet it did.
Then Peter said, “Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and have kept for yourself some of the money you received for the land? Didn’t it belong to you before it was sold? And after it was sold, wasn’t the money at your disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing? You have not lied just to human beings but to God.”
When Ananias heard this, he fell down and died. And great fear seized all who heard what had happened. Then some young men came forward, wrapped up his body, and carried him out and buried him.
About three hours later his wife came in, not knowing what had happened. Peter asked her, “Tell me, is this the price you and Ananias got for the land?”
“Yes,” she said, “that is the price.”
Peter said to her, “How could you conspire to test the Spirit of the Lord? Listen! The feet of the men who buried your husband are at the door, and they will carry you out also.”
At that moment she fell down at his feet and died. Then the young men came in and, finding her dead, carried her out and buried her beside her husband. Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events.
So Bishop Jackson does have some basis for his actions. Not that the wrath of god seems like it's all that easy to call down these days, for some reason. In spite of the fact that the folks in the bible seemed to be able to get god to smite people left and right, for damn near anything, nowadays it doesn't happen nearly so often. I know my dad used to regularly request that the wrath of god descend upon tailgaters and telemarketers, and I don't recall that in either case anyone dropped dead or got eaten by a bear.
Which is kind of a shame, now that I come to think of it.
So, I don't think that Judge Coleman has all that much to worry about. But it'll be interesting to see how this plays out -- if she decides that what Bishop Jackson has said actually constitutes a threat. If so, I'm guessing that even living in his church will cease to be an option, and he'll find himself being fitted for an orange jumpsuit post-haste.
So, that's our news from the wacky religious fringe. I live in hope that even the devout Christians who hear about people like Bishop Jackson don't believe his fire-and-brimstone pronouncements, although there are dozens of biblical passages that then require some rather awkward explanation. So keep your eye on the Chicago area. Let me know if you hear about bears in the vicinity. Other than these guys:
Monday, July 22, 2013
Psychic disasters
It's been a month of mixed news in the psychic world. First, we had news that the Texas psychic who said that there was a mass grave on property belonging to a couple in Liberty County (and "bones in the house and messages written on the wall in blood") had to pay the couple $6.8 million in damages for defamation. But it doesn't always work out that way; only a few days later, we heard that "Britain's favorite medium," Psychic Sally Morgan, had won a $193,000 award in her lawsuit against The Daily Mail after a reporter claimed that she had tricked an Irish audience by getting information from an accomplice through an earpiece.
But neither of the judgments should have been a surprise to the psychics, right? Of course right.
Be that as it may, the psychics may be feeling a little beleaguered, of late. At least, that's the impression I get from Ron Bard, who calls himself "The King of Psychics," who has been trying desperately to save either Japan or his reputation, depending on which version of the story you go for.
Bard, who is US-born but who has lived in Japan for some years, recently made a prediction that the country was going to be struck by a major disaster "some time before the end of 2013." He had a press conference about it, where he told a reporter that everyone had better listen to him, for death awaits, with big, nasty, pointy teeth.
And the overall reaction he got was:
*silence*
Well, naturally, you don't get to be the King of Psychics if you're willing to take something like that lying down. So he naturally turned to the most convincing medium for disseminating vital information, used by everyone from the Pope on down: Twitter.
Here is the series of Tweets Bard wrote (translation courtesy of Yoko Fujimoto):
I'm sorry, Mr. Bard, could you be a little more vague? Because I almost felt like I had to take action, there.
So it's not like he's exactly known for giving details. If on March 8, he had said, "The spirits have told me that it's time to shut down the Fukushima Nuclear Reactor, because it's about to be hit by a bigass wave," I might pay a little more attention.
What's funniest about all of this is his last tweet, about how if we all pray together maybe the disaster won't happen after all. So this makes his message sum up as follows:
Nor will I even follow them on Twitter.
But neither of the judgments should have been a surprise to the psychics, right? Of course right.
Be that as it may, the psychics may be feeling a little beleaguered, of late. At least, that's the impression I get from Ron Bard, who calls himself "The King of Psychics," who has been trying desperately to save either Japan or his reputation, depending on which version of the story you go for.
Bard, who is US-born but who has lived in Japan for some years, recently made a prediction that the country was going to be struck by a major disaster "some time before the end of 2013." He had a press conference about it, where he told a reporter that everyone had better listen to him, for death awaits, with big, nasty, pointy teeth.
And the overall reaction he got was:
*silence*
Well, naturally, you don't get to be the King of Psychics if you're willing to take something like that lying down. So he naturally turned to the most convincing medium for disseminating vital information, used by everyone from the Pope on down: Twitter.
Here is the series of Tweets Bard wrote (translation courtesy of Yoko Fujimoto):
To everyone in Japan, once again, hello. I have some important messages to convey to you today in Japanese.Well, that convinces me. Especially since if you look carefully at his claim to have "predicted the March 11 disaster" (the day of the horrific earthquake and tsunami in 2011), his actual prediction on March 8 reads, and I quote, "Before Japan reaches a major turning point, it is going to experience a great difficulty."
Last night, I was able to see into the future of Japan. I’d like to share those visions with you.
In two or three months, Japan is going to experience a natural disaster.
My message is very important. Everyone, please retweet this so that many people in Japan will know. In particular, tell your family, friends and loved ones. Please tell as many people as possible to follow me on Twitter.
This is not a joke. If you are not going to believe this message, please go ahead and stop reading now.
But if you would like to keep your loved ones and many other safe, pass my message on to as many people as possible. Or have them follow me on Twitter.
For the next couple of months, please read my tweets carefully. As the day of the disaster gets closer, I will be able to say which parts of Japan are most at risk.
As you all know, I predicted the March 11 disaster. Around the summer of 2010, it began to become clear to me. That prediction was published in the Tokyo Sports Shimbun, but it appears few people took notice of it. That’s why I want to stress the importance of my message this time.
If you want to protect your family and friends and others around you, please take my tweets seriously. And encourage people to follow me on Twitter. In this way, many people’s lives might be saved.
When it has passed, two or three months feels like a twinkling of an eye, but when there are two or three months to go, it feels like an eternity. But time is of the essence. From this moment on, you must imagine yourself in a state of emergency, and it is important that you prepare yourself mentally, as well as stocking up necessary goods.
I was raised in Christianity and Judaism, but now I believe that Japan is the source of all the world’s religions. Everyone, please pray together with me for the safety of the people of Japan. If you pray with me, perhaps we will be able to save your family, friends and loved ones.
I'm sorry, Mr. Bard, could you be a little more vague? Because I almost felt like I had to take action, there.
So it's not like he's exactly known for giving details. If on March 8, he had said, "The spirits have told me that it's time to shut down the Fukushima Nuclear Reactor, because it's about to be hit by a bigass wave," I might pay a little more attention.
What's funniest about all of this is his last tweet, about how if we all pray together maybe the disaster won't happen after all. So this makes his message sum up as follows:
1) Please follow me on Twitter.Myself, I find the increasing desperation of the psychics, mediums, and other woo-woo con artists to be a good thing. Maybe it means that finally, finally people aren't listening to them any more, and have realized that what they really excel at are two things: (1) on-stage drama; and (2) making shit up. And I don't know about you, but I'm not paying good money for that kind of thing. If I had my way, they'd be playing to empty rooms.
2) A horrifying disaster will hit Japan in the next few months, so you need to be prepared.
3) And follow me on Twitter.
4) Except maybe the disaster won't happen if you pray a lot.
5) And follow me on Twitter.
6) So don't blame me if you don't listen and end up getting yourself killed.
7) Which is what will happen if you don't follow me on Twitter.
Nor will I even follow them on Twitter.
Saturday, July 20, 2013
Teacher scores and error bars
One of the first rules of handling data that students learn in science classes is the concept of "significant figures." Although the rules for determining whether a particular digit in a measurement or calculation is significant (i.e. reliably accurate) are a little complicated, the whole idea boils down to a simplistic concept:
When you do a calculation that combines various pieces of measured data, the result cannot be any more accurate than the least accurate piece of data that went into the calculation.
It's why you see "error bars" around data points in scientific papers. You have to keep in mind how precise the data is, so that when you combine different measurements, you know how accurate the result is. And the difficulty is that error is cumulative; the more pieces of data you combine, the greater the cumulative error becomes, and the lower the confidence that the outcome is actually right.
Which brings me to how teachers' grades are being calculated in New York state.
Our grades this year are a composite of three measures. 60% of our grade comes from numerical scores assigned by our principal from classroom observations; 40% comes from the outcome of our students' performance on tests (20% each from two different sets of tests). This year, my two blocks of twenty percentage points each came from my AP Biology exam results, and the total of my student's results on my in-class final exams. So, here are my results:
I got 60/60 on classroom observations. I got 20/20 on my AP Biology exam results, which is mystifying for two reasons: (1) the exam itself was a poorly-designed exercise in frustration, as I described in a previous blog post; and (2) three of my 27 students got a 2 on the exam, which is below the benchmark, so my score should have been knocked down a peg because of that.
I got a 10/20 on my in-class final exam results.
Why? A combination of reasons. The state, in their desperation to pretend that all outcomes are quantifiable, required that for the purposes of calculating our "teacher grade," the exit exam score had to be compared to a "pre-test." My pre-test, in AP Biology, was the combination of the students' Regents (Introductory) Biology and Regents Chemistry final exams -- both markedly easier tests. Every student in my class scored below their pre-test score on my rigorous, college-level final, so in the state's eyes it looks like the year they spent in my class actively made them stupider.
I also got graded down because of the three students in my elective who chose not to take the final exam. You might ask yourself why the teacher should be blamed for a student's choice to skip the day of the final. The state has a ready answer: "It is the teacher's responsibility to make certain that all students complete the requirements of the course." (That's a direct quote, folks.)
So, my overall grade this year is a 90, which you'd think I'd be pretty pleased with. Actually, I'm not, because my grade -- supposedly, a measure of my effectiveness as a teacher -- isn't a 90 at all. What should it be, then? Damned if I know. We've combined three measurements to get that score that were all measuring different things, at different accuracies.
Remember error bars?
Were my classroom observation scores accurate? I'd say so, and I'm not just saying that because I scored well. The principal I work for is outstanding, and has a real sense of what good classroom teaching is. Of the three measures, I'd say that this is the one I'm the most confident of.
How about the 40% that came from test scores? Honestly, I'd say that number has a wobble factor of at least ten points either way. In part, the test score outcomes are due to my effectiveness as a teacher; it'd be a sad state of affairs if how my students performed had nothing to do with me at all. But are there other factors involved?
Of course. On the plus side, there's the hard work the students put in. Dedication to a class they've enjoyed. Good study skills. Raw intelligence.
On the minus side, there's poverty. Cognitive disabilities. Lack of parental support. Bad attitude. Frustration. Laziness.
To name a few.
So, really, how confident are you that my grade of 90 is actually a reflection of my effectiveness as a teacher? Because that confidence can't be any higher than the least accurate measure that went into calculating it.
The funny thing is, this statistical concept is one that is taught in every Educational Statistics class in the world, and yet the powers-that-be in the State Department of Education have been completely unresponsive to claims that the way they're handling numbers is spurious. Of course, I don't know why we should expect any different; the way they handle scaling final exams in New York state is also spurious, and they have feigned deafness to objections from teachers on that count, too.
As an example, on the state biology final, students have consistently needed to get 46% of the answers correct to score a scaled score of 65 [passing], while on the physics exam, the fraction of correct answers students need to score a 65 has varied from 59% to 67%. Yes, that's correct; there have been years where exam scores in physics have been scaled downward. When questioned about how this can possibly be fair, Carl Preske, Education Specialist at the New York State Department of Education, responded (this is a direct quote):
So, we're basing teachers' scores on a combination of metrics based on the scaled scores of flawed tests.
Remember the idea of error being cumulative? ("Your score is a 90! ± 50 points!")
Now, you may be thinking, what real difference does a teacher's score make? How can it be used against them? My own opinion is that we are, country-wide, moving toward using teachers' end-of-the year scores for purposes of awarding (or revoking) tenure, job retention, and (ultimately) raises and salary. None of that has happened yet. But already, these scores are being considered reliable enough that they are being used as a criterion for the awarding grant money. I just saw last week an offer of research grant money that was open to teachers -- but only if you were considered "Highly Effective," that is, you scored a 91 or higher for the year.
That's right, folks. If I'd gotten one point higher, I would be able to apply for a four-year research grant worth $15,000/year. But I'm only "Effective," not "Highly Effective," so there you are.
The whole thing is intensely frustrating, because it seems like all of the rank-and-file teachers grasp the problem with this immediately, and none of the higher-ups in the State Department of Education are even willing to admit that what they're doing is statistically invalid. Their attitude seems to be that if it can be converted to numbers, it's real. And if it's real, it can be converted to numbers.
Oh, and if it can be converted to numbers, it's valid. Right?
Of course right.
Me, I'm just going to keep loping along doing what I've always done, teacher score be damned. I told a colleague this year that I didn't care what I got as long as it was above a 65, because if I "failed" I'd have to do more paperwork, which makes me sound like one of my less-motivated students. But I know that what I do in the classroom works; I know I'm effective. Whether I got a 90, or a 100, or a 72, means absolutely nothing, neither in the statistical sense nor in any other sense. What we do as teachers has an inherently unquantifiable aspect to it. How can you measure students' excitement? Or creativity? Or the sense of wonder they get at learning about the world? Or the moment that a kid decides, "I love this subject. I want to spend the rest of my life doing this?"
But the b-b stackers in the state capitol don't, apparently, recognize any of that as valuable. It's a good thing that most of us teachers still do.
When you do a calculation that combines various pieces of measured data, the result cannot be any more accurate than the least accurate piece of data that went into the calculation.
It's why you see "error bars" around data points in scientific papers. You have to keep in mind how precise the data is, so that when you combine different measurements, you know how accurate the result is. And the difficulty is that error is cumulative; the more pieces of data you combine, the greater the cumulative error becomes, and the lower the confidence that the outcome is actually right.
Which brings me to how teachers' grades are being calculated in New York state.
Our grades this year are a composite of three measures. 60% of our grade comes from numerical scores assigned by our principal from classroom observations; 40% comes from the outcome of our students' performance on tests (20% each from two different sets of tests). This year, my two blocks of twenty percentage points each came from my AP Biology exam results, and the total of my student's results on my in-class final exams. So, here are my results:
I got 60/60 on classroom observations. I got 20/20 on my AP Biology exam results, which is mystifying for two reasons: (1) the exam itself was a poorly-designed exercise in frustration, as I described in a previous blog post; and (2) three of my 27 students got a 2 on the exam, which is below the benchmark, so my score should have been knocked down a peg because of that.
I got a 10/20 on my in-class final exam results.
Why? A combination of reasons. The state, in their desperation to pretend that all outcomes are quantifiable, required that for the purposes of calculating our "teacher grade," the exit exam score had to be compared to a "pre-test." My pre-test, in AP Biology, was the combination of the students' Regents (Introductory) Biology and Regents Chemistry final exams -- both markedly easier tests. Every student in my class scored below their pre-test score on my rigorous, college-level final, so in the state's eyes it looks like the year they spent in my class actively made them stupider.
I also got graded down because of the three students in my elective who chose not to take the final exam. You might ask yourself why the teacher should be blamed for a student's choice to skip the day of the final. The state has a ready answer: "It is the teacher's responsibility to make certain that all students complete the requirements of the course." (That's a direct quote, folks.)
So, my overall grade this year is a 90, which you'd think I'd be pretty pleased with. Actually, I'm not, because my grade -- supposedly, a measure of my effectiveness as a teacher -- isn't a 90 at all. What should it be, then? Damned if I know. We've combined three measurements to get that score that were all measuring different things, at different accuracies.
Remember error bars?
Were my classroom observation scores accurate? I'd say so, and I'm not just saying that because I scored well. The principal I work for is outstanding, and has a real sense of what good classroom teaching is. Of the three measures, I'd say that this is the one I'm the most confident of.
How about the 40% that came from test scores? Honestly, I'd say that number has a wobble factor of at least ten points either way. In part, the test score outcomes are due to my effectiveness as a teacher; it'd be a sad state of affairs if how my students performed had nothing to do with me at all. But are there other factors involved?
Of course. On the plus side, there's the hard work the students put in. Dedication to a class they've enjoyed. Good study skills. Raw intelligence.
On the minus side, there's poverty. Cognitive disabilities. Lack of parental support. Bad attitude. Frustration. Laziness.
To name a few.
So, really, how confident are you that my grade of 90 is actually a reflection of my effectiveness as a teacher? Because that confidence can't be any higher than the least accurate measure that went into calculating it.
The funny thing is, this statistical concept is one that is taught in every Educational Statistics class in the world, and yet the powers-that-be in the State Department of Education have been completely unresponsive to claims that the way they're handling numbers is spurious. Of course, I don't know why we should expect any different; the way they handle scaling final exams in New York state is also spurious, and they have feigned deafness to objections from teachers on that count, too.
As an example, on the state biology final, students have consistently needed to get 46% of the answers correct to score a scaled score of 65 [passing], while on the physics exam, the fraction of correct answers students need to score a 65 has varied from 59% to 67%. Yes, that's correct; there have been years where exam scores in physics have been scaled downward. When questioned about how this can possibly be fair, Carl Preske, Education Specialist at the New York State Department of Education, responded (this is a direct quote):
I promised myself that I would not join in any discussion of negative curve and the quality of the questions. So much for promises, unless you personally have a degree in tests and measurements I doubt that you have the expertise that the twenty teachers who have worked on each question. Secondly if you lack a degree in psychometrics than [sic] comments on negative curves are useless. That being said, each subject area established their own cut points for 65 and 85 more than 10 years ago: we (those constructing the physics exam) have the advantage of having a much larger number of difficult questions to place on each exam than does Chemistry and with that greater number of difficult questions we are able to avoid what you prefer to call a negative. Since we have about 20-25 questions above the 65 cut point we are able to stretch out the top 35 scaled credits, Chemistry has between12 and 18 questions above the cut point over which they may scale the 35 credits. If you wish to remove the "negative curve" than [sic] please find a way to generate 20 difficult questions to give to the test writing group each year.Well, that was lucid.
So, we're basing teachers' scores on a combination of metrics based on the scaled scores of flawed tests.
Remember the idea of error being cumulative? ("Your score is a 90! ± 50 points!")
Now, you may be thinking, what real difference does a teacher's score make? How can it be used against them? My own opinion is that we are, country-wide, moving toward using teachers' end-of-the year scores for purposes of awarding (or revoking) tenure, job retention, and (ultimately) raises and salary. None of that has happened yet. But already, these scores are being considered reliable enough that they are being used as a criterion for the awarding grant money. I just saw last week an offer of research grant money that was open to teachers -- but only if you were considered "Highly Effective," that is, you scored a 91 or higher for the year.
That's right, folks. If I'd gotten one point higher, I would be able to apply for a four-year research grant worth $15,000/year. But I'm only "Effective," not "Highly Effective," so there you are.
The whole thing is intensely frustrating, because it seems like all of the rank-and-file teachers grasp the problem with this immediately, and none of the higher-ups in the State Department of Education are even willing to admit that what they're doing is statistically invalid. Their attitude seems to be that if it can be converted to numbers, it's real. And if it's real, it can be converted to numbers.
Oh, and if it can be converted to numbers, it's valid. Right?
Of course right.
Me, I'm just going to keep loping along doing what I've always done, teacher score be damned. I told a colleague this year that I didn't care what I got as long as it was above a 65, because if I "failed" I'd have to do more paperwork, which makes me sound like one of my less-motivated students. But I know that what I do in the classroom works; I know I'm effective. Whether I got a 90, or a 100, or a 72, means absolutely nothing, neither in the statistical sense nor in any other sense. What we do as teachers has an inherently unquantifiable aspect to it. How can you measure students' excitement? Or creativity? Or the sense of wonder they get at learning about the world? Or the moment that a kid decides, "I love this subject. I want to spend the rest of my life doing this?"
But the b-b stackers in the state capitol don't, apparently, recognize any of that as valuable. It's a good thing that most of us teachers still do.
Friday, July 19, 2013
Funeral march for HAARP and orchestra
In fiction, when an evil villain against whom you have fought long and hard is finally vanquished, you are generally depicted as being pretty happy about it. When the Ring was destroyed and Sauron defeated, there was, as I remember, a great big ol' party afterwards. The slaying of the Emperor, and the Death Star being blown to smithereens, was followed by a feast, complete with dancing Ewoks. Even Jean-Luc Picard, not known for his effusive outbursts of emotion, stopped for celebratory cup of Earl Grey tea after the Borg cube self-destructed.
I find that in real life people don't react that way.
Last week it was announced that the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program, HAARP for short, was closing due to lack of funding. HAARP, which journalist Sharon Weinberger calls "the Moby Dick of conspiracy theories," has been accused of almost everything evil you can imagine -- creating hurricanes, generating earthquakes, spawning tornadoes, triggering droughts (and floods), and even exerting direct-into-your-skull mind control over the innocent citizens of the U. S. of A. So when Deborah Byrd, of EarthSky Science News, announced that HAARP was shutting down, you'd think there would be Great Rejoicing, right?
Here's a direct quote from Byrd's article:
Nope. You should read the comments on Byrd's article. The conspiracy theorists are pissed. They also don't believe she's telling the truth, so they're really pissed. Here's a sampler, in case you don't want to risk valuable cells in your prefrontal cortex reading through them all. You'll just have to believe me that spelling and grammar have been left as-written, because I didn't want to write "sic" 548 times.
Admit that they have been wrong all along.
No way can they do that. It's too big a revision of their worldview. So the press release is an outright lie. Or the facility is being relocated elsewhere, because too many non-sheeple figured out what they were up to. Or the government has moved on to even more evil things, like making the moon flip over once a night. (Can anyone tell me what the hell that guy was actually trying to say?)
So, they'd much rather believe that the Enemy is still out there, and still ultra-powerful, rather than settle in and enjoy their victory. It reminds me of the line from C. S. Lewis' That Hideous Strength, in which Lord Feverstone implies that the college bureaucrat Curry actually likes having obstructionists to complain about: "'Damn it all,' continued Feverstone, 'no man likes to have his stock-in-trade taken away. What would poor Curry do if the Die-hards one day all refused to do any die-harding?'"
In any case, I don't think there is going to be any celebrating tonight. No party, no Ewoks, not even a nice cup of Earl Grey tea. Because, you know... you can never let down your guard. Not even for a moment.
It will be interesting, though, to see what they turn their attention to next. It's probably too much to hope for that it will be something that actually has a basis in fact.
I find that in real life people don't react that way.
Last week it was announced that the High-frequency Active Auroral Research Program, HAARP for short, was closing due to lack of funding. HAARP, which journalist Sharon Weinberger calls "the Moby Dick of conspiracy theories," has been accused of almost everything evil you can imagine -- creating hurricanes, generating earthquakes, spawning tornadoes, triggering droughts (and floods), and even exerting direct-into-your-skull mind control over the innocent citizens of the U. S. of A. So when Deborah Byrd, of EarthSky Science News, announced that HAARP was shutting down, you'd think there would be Great Rejoicing, right?
Here's a direct quote from Byrd's article:
The 35-acre ionospheric research facility in remote Gakona, Alaska – 200 miles north of Anchorage – shut down in early May 2013. HAARP has an antenna array used by scientists to study the outer atmosphere by zapping it with radio waves generated by 3,600 kilowatts of electricity. Not sure how, but HAARP became infamous among conspiracy theorists and some environmental activists, who believed it was responsible for intentional weather modification. Dire events – such as Hurricane Sandy in late 2012 – have been blamed on HAARP by people called “uninformed” by scientists and other commentators. But no more. HAARP’s program manager, Dr James Keeney, said in a July 15, 2013 press release: "Currently the site is abandoned. It comes down to money. We don’t have any... If I actually could affect the weather, I'd keep it open.""Ha!" you would think the conspiracy theorists would shout. "The American people have finally triumphed! HAARP is no more!"
Nope. You should read the comments on Byrd's article. The conspiracy theorists are pissed. They also don't believe she's telling the truth, so they're really pissed. Here's a sampler, in case you don't want to risk valuable cells in your prefrontal cortex reading through them all. You'll just have to believe me that spelling and grammar have been left as-written, because I didn't want to write "sic" 548 times.
This is the facility for the public to see. The real HAARP culprit is in Gakona, Alaska. Does anybody know if that facility is shut down. I don't think so. It's like we have two space program. NASA and the military. The military is functioning real well unlike NASA which is a shell of its former self.I speculate that the reason for all of this angst over HAARP's imminent demise is partly because in order to believe that HAARP is being shut down from lack of funding, you have to accept that it must not have been that important to the government in the first place. If they really had developed the ability to create earthquakes, hurricanes, et al., do you think that the powers-that-be would have just... given up? To accept this press release as true, the conspiracy theorists would have to do something unimaginable:
READ: According to Keeney’s press release, the only bright spot on HAARP’s horizon right now is that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is expected on site as a client to finish up some research in fall 2013 and winter 2014. DARPA has nearly $8.8 million in its FY 14 budget plan to research:
there are MULTIPLE facilities, not just Alaska!! Stationed GLOBALLY.
most scientists deny obvious Facts all the time.
most scientists are afraid to "loose credibility" if they dont repeat the nonsense they had to learn to graduate...
most scientists forget to try to disprove their own Thesis.
There is no right or wrong, just people who want to believe it's all A OK and those who suspect that it's not.
the moon is waxing to waning in a single night,doubt it,look at 3 hour intervals top lit at rise bottom lit at set,this isnt caused by cow farts .stop being stupid for a minute and think about it,,why is the moon flipping a 180 each night,it is the earth tilting on axis nightly,,face N mark spot u stand.then find earth bound 2nd optic reference and then the big dipper,,dipper N. of Polaris"N star as earth rotates always to the left big dipper north of N star should be moving W-E,,as the stars S of Polaris move E-W,,the big dipper and Polaris and the rest of the star field clearly dip ofer 70 degrees west moving against the normal ball like star pattern,our axis is being pulled 70 degrees a night or more,this is easily seen with your own eyes,,why dont you wake up and see the signs in the sun the moon and the stars
Admit that they have been wrong all along.
No way can they do that. It's too big a revision of their worldview. So the press release is an outright lie. Or the facility is being relocated elsewhere, because too many non-sheeple figured out what they were up to. Or the government has moved on to even more evil things, like making the moon flip over once a night. (Can anyone tell me what the hell that guy was actually trying to say?)
So, they'd much rather believe that the Enemy is still out there, and still ultra-powerful, rather than settle in and enjoy their victory. It reminds me of the line from C. S. Lewis' That Hideous Strength, in which Lord Feverstone implies that the college bureaucrat Curry actually likes having obstructionists to complain about: "'Damn it all,' continued Feverstone, 'no man likes to have his stock-in-trade taken away. What would poor Curry do if the Die-hards one day all refused to do any die-harding?'"
In any case, I don't think there is going to be any celebrating tonight. No party, no Ewoks, not even a nice cup of Earl Grey tea. Because, you know... you can never let down your guard. Not even for a moment.
It will be interesting, though, to see what they turn their attention to next. It's probably too much to hope for that it will be something that actually has a basis in fact.
Thursday, July 18, 2013
It's in the palm of your hand
Amongst the downsides of being superstitious is that sometimes, you find out you're in for some bad luck.
A girl I went to college with had a real thing for Tarot cards. And even considering the generally vague, this-could-apply-to-anyone interpretations of most Tarot card spreads, there are a couple of cards that are unequivocally bad. The Nine of Swords, for example, isn't good news, which you could probably tell just by looking at it:
So, just by the laws of chance (not that true believers think that's what's going on here, but still) -- every once in a while, you're going to get a bad spread of cards laid out in front of you by your friendly neighborhood fortuneteller. And what did my college friend do, when it happened to her?
She picked up all of the cards, shuffled them, and laid them out again, until she got one she liked.
It's a more common response than you'd think. Numerologists -- people who believe that everything can be converted to numbers, and those numbers control your future -- have been known to go through a legal name change if their names don't add up to a "good number."
Something similar is going on right now in Japan, where palmistry is all the rage. You know: the idea that the lines on your palm somehow tell you how long you'll live, whether you'll become wealthy, whether you'll fall in love, and so on. Now, palm lines aren't going to be so simple to change -- it's not as easy as changing your name, or picking up the cards if you don't like what you see. So, what do you do if your life-line is short, if your heart line says you'll never find a nice person of whatever gender you favor, and so on?
You have them surgically altered.
I'm not making this up. Surgeons in Japan are now being asked, with increasing frequency, to use an electric scalpel to burn lines in patients' palms to engrave a pattern that is thought to be lucky. The surgery costs about a thousand bucks, which of course isn't covered by insurance.
Small price to pay, say true believers, if the outcome will bring money, love, long life, or whatever it is you're after.
"If you try to create a palm line with a laser, it heals, and it won’t leave a clear mark," said Dr. Takaaki Matsuoka, who has already performed five of these surgeries this year, and has another three scheduled soon. "You have to use the electric scalpel and make a shaky incision on purpose, because palm lines are never completely straight. If you don’t burn the skin and just use a plain scalpel, the lines don’t form. It’s not a difficult surgery, but it has to be done right."
Matsuoka seems like a believer himself, and not just an opportunist making a quick bunch of yen from the gullible.
"Well, if you’re a single guy trying to pick up a date, knowing palm reading is probably good. It’s a great excuse to hold a lovely woman’s hands," he said, in an interview. "Men usually wish to change their business related success lines, such as the fate line, the money-luck line, and the financial line. The money-luck line is for making profits. And the financial line is the one that allows you to save what you make. It’s good to have both. Because sometimes people make a lot of money, but they quickly lose it as well. A strong fate line helps ensure you make money and keep it. These three lines, when they come together just right, create the emperor’s line. Most men want this."
As for women, Matsuoka says they mostly want to change the lines related to romance and marriage.
How could all of this work? Matsuoka hedges a little on this question:
"If people think they’ll be lucky, sometimes they become lucky," he said, which makes him sound a little like the Japanese answer to Norman Vincent Peale. "And it’s not like the palm lines are really written in stone—they’re basically wrinkles. They do change with time. Even the way you use your hands can change the lines. Some palmisters will even suggest that their clients draw the lines on their hands to change their luck. And this was before palm plastic surgery existed. However, anecdotally I’ve had some success."
I can't help but think that if any of these superstitious beliefs actually worked, they wouldn't work this way. If Tarot cards, numbers, or lines on your palm -- or any of the other wacky suggestions you might have heard -- really do control our destiny, then just changing them to a pattern you like is kind of... cheating, isn't it? You'd think that the mystical powers-that-be wouldn't let that happen. If I were one of the mystical powers-that-be, I'd be pissed. I'd probably trip you while you were carrying a full cup of hot coffee.
That'd sure show you.
Of course, a simpler explanation is that all of this is really just unscientific bullshit. To test that conjecture, I may just break a mirror on purpose today, and cross the path of a black cat (easy for me because I own two). Go ahead, Gods of Bad Luck, do your worst. I'm guessing that I'll still make it all the way through the day without having a brain aneurysm.
And in any case, no one is getting close to my hands with an electric scalpel. That has gotta hurt.
A girl I went to college with had a real thing for Tarot cards. And even considering the generally vague, this-could-apply-to-anyone interpretations of most Tarot card spreads, there are a couple of cards that are unequivocally bad. The Nine of Swords, for example, isn't good news, which you could probably tell just by looking at it:
So, just by the laws of chance (not that true believers think that's what's going on here, but still) -- every once in a while, you're going to get a bad spread of cards laid out in front of you by your friendly neighborhood fortuneteller. And what did my college friend do, when it happened to her?
She picked up all of the cards, shuffled them, and laid them out again, until she got one she liked.
It's a more common response than you'd think. Numerologists -- people who believe that everything can be converted to numbers, and those numbers control your future -- have been known to go through a legal name change if their names don't add up to a "good number."
Something similar is going on right now in Japan, where palmistry is all the rage. You know: the idea that the lines on your palm somehow tell you how long you'll live, whether you'll become wealthy, whether you'll fall in love, and so on. Now, palm lines aren't going to be so simple to change -- it's not as easy as changing your name, or picking up the cards if you don't like what you see. So, what do you do if your life-line is short, if your heart line says you'll never find a nice person of whatever gender you favor, and so on?
You have them surgically altered.
I'm not making this up. Surgeons in Japan are now being asked, with increasing frequency, to use an electric scalpel to burn lines in patients' palms to engrave a pattern that is thought to be lucky. The surgery costs about a thousand bucks, which of course isn't covered by insurance.
Small price to pay, say true believers, if the outcome will bring money, love, long life, or whatever it is you're after.
"If you try to create a palm line with a laser, it heals, and it won’t leave a clear mark," said Dr. Takaaki Matsuoka, who has already performed five of these surgeries this year, and has another three scheduled soon. "You have to use the electric scalpel and make a shaky incision on purpose, because palm lines are never completely straight. If you don’t burn the skin and just use a plain scalpel, the lines don’t form. It’s not a difficult surgery, but it has to be done right."
Before and after. Can't you just feel the luck radiating from the right-hand photograph?
Matsuoka seems like a believer himself, and not just an opportunist making a quick bunch of yen from the gullible.
"Well, if you’re a single guy trying to pick up a date, knowing palm reading is probably good. It’s a great excuse to hold a lovely woman’s hands," he said, in an interview. "Men usually wish to change their business related success lines, such as the fate line, the money-luck line, and the financial line. The money-luck line is for making profits. And the financial line is the one that allows you to save what you make. It’s good to have both. Because sometimes people make a lot of money, but they quickly lose it as well. A strong fate line helps ensure you make money and keep it. These three lines, when they come together just right, create the emperor’s line. Most men want this."
As for women, Matsuoka says they mostly want to change the lines related to romance and marriage.
How could all of this work? Matsuoka hedges a little on this question:
"If people think they’ll be lucky, sometimes they become lucky," he said, which makes him sound a little like the Japanese answer to Norman Vincent Peale. "And it’s not like the palm lines are really written in stone—they’re basically wrinkles. They do change with time. Even the way you use your hands can change the lines. Some palmisters will even suggest that their clients draw the lines on their hands to change their luck. And this was before palm plastic surgery existed. However, anecdotally I’ve had some success."
I can't help but think that if any of these superstitious beliefs actually worked, they wouldn't work this way. If Tarot cards, numbers, or lines on your palm -- or any of the other wacky suggestions you might have heard -- really do control our destiny, then just changing them to a pattern you like is kind of... cheating, isn't it? You'd think that the mystical powers-that-be wouldn't let that happen. If I were one of the mystical powers-that-be, I'd be pissed. I'd probably trip you while you were carrying a full cup of hot coffee.
That'd sure show you.
Of course, a simpler explanation is that all of this is really just unscientific bullshit. To test that conjecture, I may just break a mirror on purpose today, and cross the path of a black cat (easy for me because I own two). Go ahead, Gods of Bad Luck, do your worst. I'm guessing that I'll still make it all the way through the day without having a brain aneurysm.
And in any case, no one is getting close to my hands with an electric scalpel. That has gotta hurt.
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Tweet your way to heaven
Today I learned that the Catholic church still engages in a practice that I thought it had abandoned years ago.
I refer to the granting of "indulgences" -- the guarantee of less time in purgatory for sins you've committed (and confessed to, and done penance for, and been granted absolution) because you have done some special action in addition to all that.
Time off for good behavior, is how I see it.
I remember running into this idea when I was in high school world history class, a time when I was still a practicing (albeit rather dubious) Roman Catholic. Our teacher, Ms. Syrie, described in some detail the abuses of the granting of indulgences during the Middle Ages -- people being granted indulgences for monetary contributions to the church (the bigger the donation, the more time off you got); noblemen getting them for visiting abbeys and monasteries, where they were feasted like kings; and some folks even gaming the system by purchasing indulgences ahead of time for sins they hadn't committed yet, but intended to. ("Yes, Father, I would like some indulgences, because I'm planning on cheating my business partner next week, I'm going to lie on my tax return, and I'd like to commit fornication at least eight or nine times this month. How much do I owe you?" "That will be $8,000, my son, taking into account the coupons you brought in from Catholic Digest.")
To be fair, there was some effort to rein in the practice, especially after Martin Luther had the guts to point out how far the abuses had gone. I kind of thought that the whole thing had faded away, but it turns out that as recently as Pope Paul VI there was reconsideration of this doctrine. Apparently now, there are only a few things that can get you paroled from purgatory early:
Anyhow, the point of all this is that it's still going on today. Just a couple of days ago, Pope Francis announced that he's offering time off from purgatory if you follow him on Twitter. No, I'm not joking -- I'm not nearly creative enough to come up with something this strange.
The pope is going to be in Brazil next Monday as part of Catholic Youth Day, and the Vatican has announced that the powers-that-be are mindful that not everyone can afford to hop on a plane and go see him. So anyone who follows the "rites and pious exercises" that are being conducted there by reading the pope's tweets will be granted an indulgence. "But you must be following the events live," a Vatican spokesperson said. "It is not as if you can get an indulgence by chatting on the internet."
You also have to be "truly penitent and contrite" for whatever sin it is you're trying to get out of paying for.
"You can't obtain indulgences like getting a coffee from a vending machine," Archbishop Claudio Maria Celli, head of the pontifical council for social communication, told the Italian daily Corriere della Sera. "What really counts is that the tweets the Pope sends from Brazil or the photos of the Catholic World Youth Day that go up on Pinterest produce authentic spiritual fruit in the hearts of everyone."
So anyway, that's our weird news from the world of religion. I have to wonder how long it'll be before they start giving time off from purgatory for clicking on those "like if you <heart> Jesus" things you see all the time on Facebook, or offering forgiveness of sins via infomercial. "Call now! Hell lasts forever but THIS DEAL WON'T! Operators are standing by!"
I refer to the granting of "indulgences" -- the guarantee of less time in purgatory for sins you've committed (and confessed to, and done penance for, and been granted absolution) because you have done some special action in addition to all that.
Time off for good behavior, is how I see it.
I remember running into this idea when I was in high school world history class, a time when I was still a practicing (albeit rather dubious) Roman Catholic. Our teacher, Ms. Syrie, described in some detail the abuses of the granting of indulgences during the Middle Ages -- people being granted indulgences for monetary contributions to the church (the bigger the donation, the more time off you got); noblemen getting them for visiting abbeys and monasteries, where they were feasted like kings; and some folks even gaming the system by purchasing indulgences ahead of time for sins they hadn't committed yet, but intended to. ("Yes, Father, I would like some indulgences, because I'm planning on cheating my business partner next week, I'm going to lie on my tax return, and I'd like to commit fornication at least eight or nine times this month. How much do I owe you?" "That will be $8,000, my son, taking into account the coupons you brought in from Catholic Digest.")
To be fair, there was some effort to rein in the practice, especially after Martin Luther had the guts to point out how far the abuses had gone. I kind of thought that the whole thing had faded away, but it turns out that as recently as Pope Paul VI there was reconsideration of this doctrine. Apparently now, there are only a few things that can get you paroled from purgatory early:
- Raising the mind to God with humble trust while performing one's duties and bearing life's difficulties, and adding, at least mentally, some pious invocation.
- Devoting oneself or one's goods compassionately in a spirit of faith to the service of one's brothers and sisters in need.
- Freely abstaining in a spirit of penance from something licit and pleasant.
- Freely giving open witness to one's faith before others in particular circumstances of everyday life.
- Piously reading or listening to Sacred Scripture for at least half an hour.
- Adoration of Jesus in the Eucharist for at least half an hour.
- The pious exercise of the Stations of the Cross.
- Recitation of the Rosary or in a church or oratory, or in a family, a religious community, an association of the faithful and, in general, when several people come together for an honorable purpose.
Anyhow, the point of all this is that it's still going on today. Just a couple of days ago, Pope Francis announced that he's offering time off from purgatory if you follow him on Twitter. No, I'm not joking -- I'm not nearly creative enough to come up with something this strange.
The pope is going to be in Brazil next Monday as part of Catholic Youth Day, and the Vatican has announced that the powers-that-be are mindful that not everyone can afford to hop on a plane and go see him. So anyone who follows the "rites and pious exercises" that are being conducted there by reading the pope's tweets will be granted an indulgence. "But you must be following the events live," a Vatican spokesperson said. "It is not as if you can get an indulgence by chatting on the internet."
You also have to be "truly penitent and contrite" for whatever sin it is you're trying to get out of paying for.
"You can't obtain indulgences like getting a coffee from a vending machine," Archbishop Claudio Maria Celli, head of the pontifical council for social communication, told the Italian daily Corriere della Sera. "What really counts is that the tweets the Pope sends from Brazil or the photos of the Catholic World Youth Day that go up on Pinterest produce authentic spiritual fruit in the hearts of everyone."
So anyway, that's our weird news from the world of religion. I have to wonder how long it'll be before they start giving time off from purgatory for clicking on those "like if you <heart> Jesus" things you see all the time on Facebook, or offering forgiveness of sins via infomercial. "Call now! Hell lasts forever but THIS DEAL WON'T! Operators are standing by!"
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)