recalculating one's bearings

My old Garmin GPS navigation device -- the one I stubbornly rarely used -- intoned "recalculating" if you made a wrong turn or if you were making a correct turn because your eyes were telling you the device was wrong and you were right. (Some apps still do that.) As if I would know. I was the last person in North America to employ the tool. Why? Stubbornness? Male stereotype about directions? A Luddite gesture? Too stingy to spend the money? All are possible, or all of the above. I don't recall, but no doubt I would have spared myself lots of anxiety if I had used one. I remember a particular incident in 2012. I drove from Syracuse to Charlotte on a maiden voyage with my just-purchased 2007 VW Rabbit. I had nearly reached my destination, the residence of my friend Denis (yes, one N; he prides himself on that). I couldn't make it to the goal line. I traversed a highway back and forth, near the airport, east and then west; or, who knows, north and then south. A boatload of vice versas. It was blistering hot. I was exhausted, spent. I gave up. Totally surrendered. I was in a strip mall parking lot. "Come and get me, Denis. I'm lost. I need your help. Help me." He did. And it was, what, 10-12 miles. Presumably a GPS would have rescued me before reaching that point. But not necessarily. I recently experienced an incident whereby the GoogleMaps app on my phone (smartphones, the death of stand-alone GPS devices) had me repeating a loop of the same streets, trapping me in a nightmarish web of suburban culs-de-sac and winding drives, lanes, and places (scarier by far, to me, than urban equivalents). 

Back to "recalculating." *

What a relief.

It's so judgment-free, so neutral. So matter of fact. You might say scientific, objective, disinterested.

Certainly not conveying coldness or scolding.

Recalculating.

Get some new data or more data and adjust from there.

Whooooboy!

This is not how my personal history transpired, either on the receiving end or the bestowing end. How about your personal history in this regard?

I'm not merely talking of family upbringing. What about education? Being wrong or in error evoked wrath or displeasure at the least. No, this is not an argument for education rooted in touchy-feely, everybody is right, let's not hurt feelings. No, not at all. It's an altogether different perspective, and practical at that. I was always struck watching my older daughter's professional ballet classes. Dancers wanted to be corrected, to recalculate, if you will, to get it right, to improve. If the teacher ignored you, that was not good. Every class was an opportunity to recalculate, which is my way of saying correct and improve. It's not a punitive process.

Exactly 139 years ago, I was a high school English teacher. If I were to do it again, I'd apply the notion of recalculating to writing assignments, such as essays. (As an aside, they're still teaching English as they did when I was young. Foolish. The world does not need more essays on Dickens or Bronte or Shakespeare or Dante. It is of no value in the workplace. I'm for the humanities; they have their place. But writing at work varies from reports to memos to letters to white papers.) In other words, I would allow as many writing drafts as needed or wanted. Maybe the whole semester would be one, and only one, piece of "recalculated" writing. I believe this used to be called mastery learning.

Parents don't tend to be recalculators, nor spouses or lovers. Friends, more so. On second thought, some people do take that approach without uttering the word recalculating. Kudos to them.

What about ourselves?

Do we tell ourselves to recalculate, or do we indulge in an orgy of remonstrance and self-recrimination?

Most likely, when it comes to myself, I'll forget these thoughts the next time I say the wrong thing or perform the wrong action.

Recalculating.

It's not Sanskrit, but it's not a bad mantra.

* Disclaimer and Credit: This notion of applying recalculation to human events and affairs is not my original concept. I heard it from someone else; I can't remember exactly who. So, I borrowed it. Or appropriated it. Imitation is flattery. So thanks, whoever you were/are.

Everyone Is Approved Here

As you drive along the busy boulevard, an A-frame sandwich board all but shouts, "Everyone is approved here!!!" It is an unabashed, traditionally American, free-enterprise invitation to buy “pre-owned” automobiles. The sign says, in effect, "No matter what your financial history is, no matter how reckless or foolish or disastrous or triumphantly capitalistic, we can lend you the money to buy a vehicle." (Naturally, such generosity has its own price. That price goes by the code words “interest rate” and “months.”)

Which got me to thinking.

Imagine if "Everyone is approved here!!!" referred to real people. What if actual living humans were approved “here” just as unconditionally and with the élan of three exclamation points as a used-car dealer approves all?

"Everyone is approved here!!!" could be a statement of credit beyond financial history, and instead it could apply to redemption that reverses personal misdeeds and waywardness.

Does unconditional approval get the cold shoulder in our society because of our puritanical past? One can reasonably argue that the reward of virtue and the punishment of transgressions is the right path. It’s wholesome for society. It sets the right balance and the right example.

But is that notion more cultural than theological?

After all, the New Testament offers ample weight and rich testimony for what we will call the Mercy Rule, as opposed to the Justice Rule.

In the early Seventies, when I was a fledgling English teacher, a colleague just as new to the profession announced to his social studies students on the first day of class for that marking period: “You all have A’s. That’s it. You have an A.” This was not contract learning. It involved no quid pro quo. The students were dumbstruck at first. Looking back, I would venture to say the teacher risked disciplinary punishment or job loss for this daring, if not foolhardy, move.

The teacher later trumpeted the success of his gambit. He said no class collectively or individually ever produced more or learned better. They rose to the occasion and justified someone’s belief in them, however dreamy or utopian. All were not merely approved. They were rewarded in advance, unconditionally.

Not being a sociologist, I cannot safely draw any generalized conclusions from this small sample. I cannot go from point A to point B to establish a theory of education or a social construct rooted in unconditional “all are approved here.”

But being a columnist, I can pose leading questions, and draw inferences till the cows come home — home from wherever they wandered to in the first place.

Taking literally the declarative sentence “All are approved here” (with or without accompanying punctuation denoting interjection, surprise, or excitement) yields a multitude of questions, the answers to which will remain speculative.

Could you successfully apply this approach to child-rearing?

What about the justice system? Would the Radical Advance Approval Method cause chaos and imperil public safety? (Incidentally, my former teaching colleague went on to become a top official at the U.S. Department of Labor. I was shocked to see him one evening making a comment on the evening’s national news.)

Speaking of labor and industry, what if supervisors and managers gave employees automatic A’s on annual performance reviews? (I had a manager do that; I loved working for him.) Would quality and production improve?

Consider the implications for the alcohol and substance rehabilitation industry. Would outcomes be better or worse than those produced by current methods?

I’m just a columnist. I get to grade myself with an A no matter what anyway.

I said yes

. . . to education and community at a City Hall hearing tonight.

The vocabulary of "investment" and "opportunity" drowned out, by far, the drumbeat of me, me, me, lower my taxes, hear my anger, dissent, etc.

People were overwhelmingly positive and supportive of their community, with caveats for elected officials.

People -- perhaps 47 out of 50 -- said: raise taxes if you must, but do it to help kids and their education (and to maintain excellent fire and police services, too, as two representatives of those servant leaders robustly noted).

Syracusans said yes.

Syracuse said yes.

Did official Syracuse listen?

Say Yes to Education

I say yes to education.

I say it through supporting my child and her educational endeavors.

I say yes to education by demanding excellence of our children, teachers, parents, and administrators.

I say yes to education by supporting her school and the school district's programs and by participating in parent-teacher activities. (In fact, I just came home from a Superintendent Parent Council meeting.)

We say yes to education in Syracuse as homeowners and as taxpayers.

Therefore, we demand that our elected officials (members of the Syracuse Common Council and Mayor Stephanie Miner) also say yes to education by appropriating at least a portion of the anticipated 6% property tax increase for the Syracuse City School District.

Say Yes to Education.

It's not just a slogan.

It's an investment.

Do you say yes to education?