Regrets

I've been doing a lot of reflecting of late. I spent time with a very dear friend recently and we did some of that reflecting together - our
conversation is actually what has motivated this bout of introspection. One of the things we talked about was the question of regrets. Did we have any - what were they - did we see ourselves doing anything about them at this point in time - would those regrets change our future actions. Maybe you've had similar conversations, similar thoughts.

At the time, I said that I didn't really regret much of anything that I had done. And in big terms, that's true. I can look back and freely admit that I have done things that others probably regarded as monumental mistakes. And, considering some of the outcomes of those choices, perhaps they aren't that far off. But I don't really regret those things. In terms of things I've done, I regret small things - character things. I regret the times I've spoken thoughtlessly, the times I've been careless with others' feelings. But in terms of Big things - I tend to look back on all those questionable choices and outright 'mistakes' in my life as 'opportunities for growth' as opposed to things to regret. It's served me pretty well or at the very least has kept me going forward.

However, the more I've thought about this the past few days, the more things have come to my mind. And I guess that I do have a few regrets. The thing that they all have in common is that I didn't do them - as apparently others have decided as well if a Google search of 'regret quotes' is anything to go by. This one, by Zachary Scott says it in exactly those words - "As you grow older, you'll find the only things you regret are the things you didn't do." Damn. Don't you hate it when people are right about something like this?

How many times have we skipped the opportunity to take a risk and try something new -- explore some new activity, meet a new person, travel to a new place, listen to new music, eat a new food, learn a new skill. The list is endless. I don't regret not buying anything or not having certain things. I don't regret not having a certain house or other things that might be considered 'impressive' or 'important.' I don't regret not having a job that would pay more money or have more prestige or, in today's terms, cache.

For me, the list seems to circle itself around experiences and people. As Hurricane Katrina came closer and closer to New Orleans, I regretted never having been to Bourbon Street. When my mother became ill, I regretted not hounding her to get her passport earlier than I did so that I could have taken her to see more of the world. I regret not having taken some chances with people in my past, instead choosing to stay safe and avoid the possibility of hurt. I regret not saying 'I love you' soon enough, or often enough.

When you scroll through all those quotes that smart people have said about regret, the main theme that comes through is primarily that you shouldn't do it. It's a waste of time and energy. It solves nothing. It's even destructive. But, then, there's our old buddy Henry David Thoreau. He had a different take on regret. He says: "Make the most of your regrets; never smother your sorrow, but tend and cherish it till it comes to have a separate and integral interest. To regret deeply is to live afresh."

"To regret deeply is to live afresh." It's a curious thought. I think I'm beginning to understand a little bit of what he means. And, I'm thinking I'm ready to learn a little more.


Of course, I regret not coming up with today's picture myself. Truly. I think it's pretty funny and, of course, oh-so-true. Instead, I lifted it from:
blogoscoped.com

Ownership

So I got in a little Facebook argument the other day. If you know me you know how odd that statement is. I generally limit my comments on people's FB posts to clicking 'like' (actually I click 'j'aime', as I have my FB page set to French) or saying things like "cool" "nice pic" "congratulations." Original, I know. But this time, I made a comment - a real comment.


The post was by a friend who is actually a former student. His political views and mine are far apart and it's something that we good-naturedly joke about pretty regularly. Every now and then I try to remind him that he is to use his power for good and not for evil. He doesn't listen.

But this time I commented and criticized - and I was serious. He posted a link to an article and in his post he said "this person CLAIMS..." So, I followed the link and read the article. That person did not claim.

He was referencing an article that is on the extreme side - I'd call it one of those pieces that is designed to be inflammatory. My friend said "He claims if X happens, then Y WILL happen." That's not what the author said. The author said if X happens, then Y CAN happen." Those are different statements.

So, I called my friend on this. Specifically I said, "this is the type of comment that I would nail you for if you did it in a paper or in a speech. Go back and read again. He does not claim that this WILL happen. Twisting the actual words of others to make your point is cheap and inflammatory. It's something we discussed in the basic Public Speaking class under Rules of Evidence and the Ethics of using evidence to prove your point." If you're going to quote, do it accurately.

That comment seems to have started quite an argument - with my friend and also with another poster who commented. She defended my friend saying that he was not misquoting, that those words had been used in the article. He was misquoting. Yes, those words were used in the article - but they were not used in the order in which he claimed they were - hence 'misquoting.' He was giving his interpretation of the author's intent based upon those words - perhaps accurate, perhaps not.

While I may not disagree with the conclusion my friend came to, I do disagree with the way he presented his point. It's easy to take another person's words and twist them to mean what we want them to. We repeat part of what someone says, leaving out or adding in a significant word or two and we put it out there as being what the person actually said. I'm sure we all do it on occasion.

But just because we all do it now and then or at least understand why people would want to, doesn't make it the right thing to do. If people are saying something stupid - the stupidity will shine through. We don't have to twist their words and claim that they said things they didn't say. When you misquote and misrepresent what people say, you weaken your own point and leave yourself open to charges of being dishonest and unethical.

One of the comments the other poster made was to my friend was to say "thank you for having the courage to call out such high brow crap as this. Hitler’s adage “Make the lie big, keep telling it, and people will believe it” is as true today as it was back then. This rabbi gets the award for most incendiary, divisive, and intellectually dishonest article of the year. We have a moral obligation to call out these lies, not just sit back and just 'dismiss.'"

I laughed out loud when I read her post. I find her reaction - and my friend's as well -- as being absolutely over the top. They are crediting this writer with far more influence than he deserves and they are making far more out of this article than it merits. Really - the majority of thinking people who read this will dismiss it as the rantings of a nut. I could post links to at least a hundred articles that are more divisive and incendiary than this one that have been printed in the last month - not year. His reposting of the article as well as the reposting by his friends who are 'sharing' it gives it far more scope than it ever would have had if they had done what most people would: read the article, get to the offensive part, say to themselves 'Oh, for Pete's sake,' and move on.

But then, I wonder if that really isn't the point. We look for offense - we look for something to be angry and upset about - we look for something about which we should have 'a moral obligation' to speak out. I suppose it's human nature. And, I guess I can accept that.

What I can't accept is the misquoting. If you are going to quote someone - do it accurately. Don't claim that someone else said something that they didn't say. If you INTERPRET what he said to mean something specific, then say that - and OWN it.

I own the fact that I lifted this image from:
zazzle.com

Opinion

A few weeks ago I seem to have put my foot in it, as I am sometimes wont to do. I am currently serving on a committee to which my colleagues elected me a year and a half ago. This committee is charged with hashing out the various issues on which administrators and faculty often disagree, but upon which we must come to resolution.

Over the years, I have been pressed by a variety of my colleagues to serve on this committee and I have resisted. I felt that I didn't necessarily have the skill set that was appropriate for this environment -- specifically, I felt that I was too
inclined toward compromise to be effective in representing the faculty interests. While on my last sabbatical, a couple of individuals approached me again and seriously spoke with me about serving on this committee. Their arguments were compelling and I gave in and agreed.

As they say, all things are learning experiences and this has been no exception. It turns out that I was right about my hesitation but for all the wrong reasons. I am inclined to compromise. I am also inclined to give second and third chances. In this venue, though, I have made it a point to put to the side my personal views and to seek out the views of my colleagues, those who chose me to represent them. And in representing others, there is an obligation to speak out where there might not be if you are only considering your own interests.

Recently I did just that. I spoke out. The fallout has been interesting, to say the least. Going into this circumstance I knew that I might need to speak up, though prayed I wouldn't have to. I am my parents' child, after all, and learning from two masters I prefer to avoid conflict whenever possible. However, I was prepared. I had done my research, reviewed my notes, and spoken with several faculty seeking out their opinions and perspectives before the meeting to make sure I wasn't speaking inaccurately. I even had my favorite Maggie Kuhn (founder of the Gray Panthers) quote written on my notes: "Speak your mind, even if your voice shakes." I needed Maggie's support.

After a current issue we are facing was presented and a certain perspective on that issue was expressed, I stood (shaking internally) and introduced myself. I specifically started my comments by saying that I had a different opinion and wanted to offer a different perspective. I then presented my perspective concisely, with specific pieces of evidence to support it. Upon finishing and sitting I was shocked to hear the previous speaker's response: "Well, now that Judy has called me a liar..."

Is that where we are now? Are we in a place where any opinion that differs from our own means the person expressing it is calling us a liar? Seriously? I was absolutely stunned. I also was quick to point out that no, I had not called him a liar, that what I had done was express a different opinion and had identified it as such. The response to this was a "well, whatever" and a reiteration of the previous point.

Since the meeting I have been approached by several individuals. I've received emails. I've received phone calls, even a few at home as those calling were nervous about expressing their opinion at the office where they might be overheard. Several people sought me out in my office, or caught me in the hallway or on the mall on their way to classes. All of of them (with one notable email exception chastising me soundly) were very supportive. The majority thanked me for speaking up on their behalf and for sharing the information I had. Others thanked me for speaking for them as they were uncomfortable or afraid to speak up for themselves. Many of them also questioned the reaction that I received.

One of the individuals to seek me out was apparently as confused as I was. He asked "What was that about?" and I used the opportunity to check my perceptions. I asked "Did I? Did I call him a liar? Because if I did, then I need to apologize." My colleague said "No, you didn't call him a liar. You said that you had a different opinion." After a moment's pause he went on to say "Although, now that I think of it, by saying that to you he was kind of calling you a liar!" I decided to let that slide - while that is certainly one way to interpret it I guess, I'm not looking to pick up offense around every corner.

It was an eye-opening experience to say the least. It has caused me to reflect on a number of things. I've thought about how easy it is to speak carelessly or thoughtlessly. I've thought about how easy it is to become overly certain of our own positions. I've thought about how thin-skinned we sometimes are and how easily we take offense, often when none is intended. And I've thought about truth and lies and ethics.

When I was elected to this position I knew it was a 2 year commitment. Six months into it, I knew I had been right to resist for all those years and also knew that this one term of 2 years would be my last. With 6 months left to go, it would be awfully tempting to simply give in -- be silenced, keep quiet, smile and nod, be agreeable and not make any waves. And while it would be the easy choice, I have to admit to myself that it wouldn't be the ethical one.

Opinions are just that - opinions. Some are popular and some are not. Some are welcome and some are not. Either way, expressing your opinion does not mean you are calling all others with a different opinion liars - and it doesn't mean you shouldn't speak - even if your voice is shaking.

today's image:
zazzle.com

Acceleration

"We are always getting ready to live but never living." ~Ralph Waldo Emerson

It is midterm and I have just finished teaching an Accelerated course. I'll start teaching a second one on Monday. What is such an animal? It is the regular semester-long course done in half the time. Sixteen weeks of work done in 8 weeks. Class meets 2 times per week for 3 hour blocks. Each class period equals one week of the regular semester. 2 class periods per week = 2 weeks of class material for every calendar week. Crazy you say? You would be correct.

Apparently we began offering this option for those 'returning adult' students whose lives are supposedly so complex that they cannot take a class during a regular semester. They can somehow manage 2 afternoons a week for 8 weeks, but they cannot manage one evening a week for 16 weeks? When you stop to think it through, it becomes clear that the logic just doesn't hold up. (Add to that the fact that I have NOT ONE returning adult in this course. It is full of 18 - 20 year old traditional college students.)

On the first day of the class, I told my students the facts: This class is the same as the class that runs the entire semester - it's just done in half the time. Half the time does not mean half the work, half the assignments, half the quizzes. It means all the work, all the assignments and all the quizzes done in half the time. You're not getting an easier course here -- it's the same course, just twice as fast. This means a minimum of 2 chapters a week, 2 quizzes a week, and 5 or 6 assignments per week. If you are taking this class because you think it is going to be easier - you are kidding yourself. It will be harder.

For a regular class, the understood ratio of outside preparation and work to in the class time is 2 to 1. (Some instructors advise their students it is 3 to 1.) This means for every one hour you spend in the classroom, you should plan to spend 2 to 3 hours studying, working and preparing for class - reading, writing, thinking, processing. In a normal semester class - this would mean 3 hours per week in class and an additional 6-9 hours per week outside of class. For an accelerated class this means 12-18 additional hours per week.

I took the time to tell my students exactly what to expect and then I advised them, with all seriousness, that if they were not prepared to do this work, it would be in their best interests to drop the course. None dropped. I expect to say the same things on Monday when my new accelerated course starts. I expect the same response.

For some reason there seems to be, among some students, the desire to get through classes as quickly as possible. It seems that they have begun to see the individual classes they are required to take as obstacles, rather than as opportunities. They see that class as standing between them and their goal. The end goal is what's important and the class is just some hoop they must jump through to be given the 'prize' at the end.

Unfortunately for many (a full 1/3 of this set of students) they will not get the prize because they did not pass. You read that right - one-third. This is not my normal success rate, believe me. I generally have one or 2 D's in a class and maybe an F, but all of those are because students chose not to come to class and do the work. However in this class - one-third. Clearly, trying to do a semester's worth of work in half the time is, for many, not the road to success.

I am concerned that this is reflective of a larger tendency - the desire to simply get through something in order to get to the next phase or step as opposed to experiencing something while you are
actually in it. I wonder how often we approach our lives like this - so focused on tomorrow that we don't take time to enjoy the moment we are actually living in. So focused on getting somewhere that we're willing to take any short cut to get there quicker.

We see the present as a burden, something to be endured in order to receive the promise of that golden 'tomorrow' that is out there somewhere in the future. Unfortunately, I think, the more we focus on that thing 'out there' the more we miss of what is here and now. In focusing so much on tomorrow and its preparation, we miss the absolute joy of the moment we are in. In attempting to short-cut the process, we short ourselves of the experience of our lives.

Confrontation

I had one of those disconcerting experiences the other day that I have been processing ever since. I was speaking with someone who was commenting on a mutual acquaintance of ours. It wasn't gossip or criticism as much as it was an observation of how this particular individual operates. One of the things this person mentioned to me is that the other individual had a 'list' - a list of people that they absolutely could not stand. I jokingly replied "I sure hope you let me know if I ever get on that list!" There was silence.

I was brought up short. "Really? I'm on the list?" The response was No, I wasn't but the truth was that the other person didn't like me at all. When I asked why, the response was that, according to this individual, I was "confrontational and argumentative."


I admit to being initially surprised, perplexed, curious and, of course, a little hurt. I don't know that many of us want to be on someone else's don't-like list. Of course, as a teacher you have to get used to it -- all sorts of people don't like you on a pretty regular basis and are not afraid of letting you know. But it always gives you a bit of a pause when it's someone who is a peer.

Whenever someone criticizes me, I try to objectively look at what they're saying. So, since this conversation I have spent time reflecting on the comment and evaluating its veracity. Am I those things? Have I shown that behavior in my interactions with this person? The answer is - it depends upon how you view Confrontation.

It's my opinion that the word gets a bad rap. People see or hear it and they immediately perceive it as a negative thing - a conflict full of raised voices, angry comments, and unsurmountable obstacles. But if you really examine the meaning of the word, it doesn't have to mean any of those things.

If you look at a reference source, there are many definitions of the word. The definition that I believe is most helpful and useful is this one: "conflict between ideas, beliefs, or opinions, or between the people who hold them." Personally, I view a confrontation as an opportunity to explore those differing ideas or opinions in order to try to understand the other party and to try to come to a resolution to those differences with which everyone can be satisfied.

I realize my understanding and use of the word comes from my training. In Interpersonal theory, we encourage the idea that burying or ignoring differences is usually less than productive and helpful and that successful and healthy conflict resolution usually requires facing (confronting) the issues that are before you and addressing them openly.

So as I look back over my interactions with this person I have to conclude that this person's definition of "confrontational" and "argumentative" are different than mine. I also, to be very honest, conclude that perhaps this individual needs to grow a thicker skin.

I have had a very limited number of interactions with this individual - I'd be stretching to call it a dozen over the period of a year. The situation in which we most often interact is one where we are representing opposing interests. As such, we often have differing opinions. While I haven't been overly vocal in this setting (as there are many others present who are much more vocal and assertive and, quite frankly, argumentative), I am generally direct in expressing my views while taking care to communicate in ways that are respectful. I don't raise my voice. I don't use sarcasm. I don't snip. I don't roll my eyes. I don't use the 'heavy sigh.' I use phrases such as "I see your point and I'd like to share a different perspective," or "tell me more about this," or "can you give me a specific example of what you mean" or "I understand your position and I don't agree" or even "I don't think we're as far apart in our positions as you might think."

If that behavior is 'confrontational and argumentative' then I guess I am guilty.

People differ. We have different interests, opinions, thoughts, skills. I find those differences to be interesting. While they can sometimes be frustrating, more often I believe those differences are what create new ideas, new approaches and new possibilities. If we are willing to talk openly about them, and thoughtfully and open-mindedly consider the opposing viewpoint, I believe those differences can move us forward and result in positive change

I suspect that maybe this individual might be one of those who defines and categorizes anyone who holds an opposing opinion, and is willing to express it, as confrontational and argumentative. Personally, I don't find this approach particularly helpful or - quite honestly - particularly professional or adult. But for now, I guess I'll have to be content to be on someone's list.

Scales

The first time I was called "fat" was when I was 8 years old. It was in school and our gym class was going through a height and weight check. The gym teacher said our measurements aloud as she marked them in her book. I remember her words clearly - 46 inches, 62 pounds. The girl who was directly ahead of me spoke clearly and convincingly - "62? You're fat!"

If you look at height/weight charts, 58 pounds is average for an 8 year old child.
So, yes, I was 4 pounds above the average but I probably wasn't fat. But that's all it took. That's when the scale entered my life.

I've mentioned before that I grew up in a poor family. I don't say that for effect - it's simply truth. My mother did wonders with her food budget and we went without in many areas for her to put meat and potatoes and bread on the table. Those were my father's favorites and she did what she could to supply them. I don't remember many suppers where those three things were not on the table. Not eating was not an option. You didn't turn your nose up at food.

As time went on, my self-consciousness grew. As I look back at pictures from my childhood, it appears that the weight started coming on in junior high. I judged myself as fat. I compared myself to thin friends and classmates and always saw myself as too big. Of course, I didn't compare myself to those who were heavier than I - I just didn't see them even though they were there. The slow creep of weight continued into high school and then college.

I played racquetball in college - during my Freshman and Sophomore years - up to three times a day but let that slide when I got involved in theatre and competitive speech. But when I moved to Minneapolis and took a full-time job here, I decided that it was time to grow up and really make a conscious effort to be healthy. I started exercising every day and making healthy eating choices.

My weight, however, continued its upward creep. My size 12 went to a size 14 and then to a 16. Doctors said 'eat less - exercise more.' So I did. I ate less and less and less. I exercised more and more and more. No change. I ate carrots and fruit and fish. I cut out bread and potatoes and sweets. No change. I swam 40 laps a day in an Olympic size pool. No change. I started every morning with a 4 mile walk, then later in the day did 45 minutes of cardio on the elliptical machine and did a circuit on the nautilus equipment. No change.

Last year, my new chiropractor asked me to keep a food diary. I did. I was diligent. I wrote down everything I ate - and I do mean everything. If I ate a grape from the bowl on the counter, it went on my list. If I took a yogurt raisin from the bowl in the break room at the office, I wrote it down. When he examined my three week diary, he questioned me - "Did you write everything down?" "Everything" I said honestly. His response - "You don't eat very much." That's what I've been trying to tell people.

I will be honest with you all -- I got tired of the fight. I got tired of people in restaurants looking at me with disdain if I ate food. I got tired of people, sometimes total strangers, commenting on my weight. I got tired of doctors and nurses reacting with surprise when they see that my blood pressure is a relatively consistent 110/60. I got tired of my friend saying to me "If I exercised as much as you do, I'd be a pencil."

I'm not a pencil. I will never be a size 6. And, finally I decided that I am who I am and I am happy with who I am. I am healthy. My blood pressure levels are excellent. My cholesterol levels are within normal standards. I exercise daily. I eat fresh fruits and vegetable and lean proteins. I am no longer listening to doctors tell me that I need to eat less and exercise more.

When I relayed this decision to my accupuncturist, she applauded me. Then, because she's been treating me for several years now and has agreed with me that my lifestyle and my weight just aren't in sync, she referred me to a doctor. Because I trust her, I went to see this doctor. Who did some tests. Who discovered that I have a thyroid condition. And I have had. For years.

What are the symptoms of this thyroid condition? "Difficulty losing weight. Fatigue. Abnormal menstrual cycles. Cold intolerance. Muscle aches. Dry skin." I think my friends and family will recognize me in the description. Years worth of these symptoms. What's the answer? Eat less and exercise more? No. The answer, apparently, is medication.

So I haven't really changed my exercise habits or my eating habits. I still swim and walk. I still eat fruits and veggies. I still go out for happy hour with a friend now and then and I still have the occasional pizza or ice cream. And I now take one little pill every morning. And, as of today, I'm down 30 pounds.

If that weight stays off - great. Dropping a few pants sizes is never a bad thing. If the weight comes back - well, I guess that's fine too. I am who I am, and I've decided that every pound of it is good.

Today's image: emmadaffern.com

Exceptions

"The essence of immorality is the tendency to make an exception of myself."
- Jane Addams

As a teacher, I suspect that I might see this tendency a bit more than others in many professions, even though in conversation I hear that others have begun to notice this tendency becoming more and more common as well. "I am an exception."

The expectation that I give an exception comes to me certainly weekly but within the past year, it seems to be, almost daily. Sometimes it comes in the form of a demand, sometimes a request, and sometimes a plea. Most times it is accompanied by a complex, often deeply dramatic, story as to why this situation warrants an exception for this particular person.

The exception is requested for any number of things -- a due date, an alternative assignment, extra time, extra credit, or even a complete rewrite and resubmission. The most recent request for an exception came this morning. It was for the actual grade for the course. A student sent an email asking that I 'give him' a higher grade in the class. That's right. He thinks I should give him a higher grade than the one that he earned. He did not come to talk to me in person. He sent his request via email and from the tone of the note, seems to think he is quite justified in asking this. It certainly seems he sees nothing wrong in his request.

This, of course, is not the first time I have received this particular request. It happens most semesters, sometimes I even receive multiple requests. And even though this is nothing new, I'm always surprised when it comes. Think about it. These students are asking me to lie and cheat on their behalf. I'm not their classmate or their BFF. I'm not their sibling or their parent. I'm their teacher and they are asking me to lie and cheat. It astounds me.

During the first session of every one of my classes, I take care to
clearly explain the grading system for the course. Unlike some instructors I had when I was in college, I do not make my students guess about grades. I spell it out. In my course, you do not start the semester with an A and then lose points from there. You start with zero. Zero points. Everyone starts at the same place. Everyone has the opportunity to earn the same number of points. I don't give extra credit.

The majority of the grade, as much as I can possibly make it, is based on objective points. Approximately 1/3 of the points are earned through quizzes. Questions are multiple choice and true-false. There is a right answer. And, I give a study guide indicating to students the topics that will be on each quiz.

Approximately 1/3 of the points are earned through in-class exercises and activities. The majority of those points are also objective - matching exercises, identification exercises, application and analysis - where there are X number of questions with an equivalent number of answers. Again, there is a right answer.

The remaining 1/3 of the points are earned through a group presentation and an individual paper. For these points, students are given detailed assignment sheets that clearly articulate every requirement and also clearly articulate the criteria that will be used in evaluation. While there is, admittedly, some subjectivity in evaluating this kind of work, I have earnestly attempted to make the evaluation procedure as objective as possible. And, given that 2/3 of the course grade is based upon objective work, it seems that even if I were biased in some way it couldn't be enough to really damage a student's grade.

So, the criteria are spelled out. The points are there to earn. I provide the appropriate supplemental material to the textbook. I advise students on ways to study. I give hints on test taking. I willingly read rough drafts of papers before the due date. But once the time comes, students earn points. They earn what they earn. I can't give them more points if I like them particularly well. I can't take away points if I dislike them. They earn points.

I'm not sure when this "I am exceptional" attitude gained so much ground. I suspect it might have started when we stopped keeping score in T-ball and started giving a medal to everyone for 'participation.' No matter where it started, it seems that it is here to stay.

Maybe you are exceptional. Maybe you do deserve special treatment. Maybe I don't really understand how truly unique and deserving of deference you are. And, if in all your 'exceptionalness' you need to cheat and lie to make it through life - that's your decision and needs to be on your conscience. Don't ask me to do it for you.