AN IGNORANT QUESTION

“What Would You Do If …?”

In case you missed it, both the Republicans and the Democrats are holding “debates” to sell people on who is the best candidate for the next President of the United States. These debates are held in public forums with a moderator from the news reporting media. At some point during the “debate” the moderator will ask one of the most asinine questions ever uttered by a supposedly intelligent person: What would you do about another terrorist attack on the US?

To illustrate how robotic each candidate is, not one candidate will put an end to this silly question by stating that, Americans don’t live in fear of “what ifs”. The real threat comes from those who use fear to manipulate the government and legal system to reduce the freedom of all US citizens. To quote FDR: “There is nothing to fear but fear itself.” The US needs the media to stop playing the fear card and instead play “the future is exciting” card.

The US, just as other democratic civilizations in bygone eras, can expect to be attacked by those who want to dominate and rule “free” cultures. And these attacks on the US didn’t just start on 9/11/2001. There was the British invasion of Washington, DC in 1812 (including the Battle of New Orleans after a truce had been declared), the attacks on US merchant ships by the pirates off Tripoli (that led to President Jefferson creating the US Marines), the sinking of non-military US ships by German warships prior to World War I, the attack on Pearl Harbor, the hostile takeover of the USS Pueblo, the bombing of the US Embassy in Lebanon and numerous other incidents of kidnapping and murder, the unfortunate result of collateral damage.

But, world terrorism is not our biggest homeland security worry. The majority of our worst terrorists are home grown, using handguns and assault rifles to attack and kill thousands of Americans every year. According to the NY Times, over ONE MILLION Americans have been killed by gun toting criminals and deranged family members over the past 30 years. That’s more deaths than all the casualties of all wars fought by US soldiers over the past 200 years. For children under 16 years of age, only deaths by auto accidents and cancer outnumber the deaths due to handguns (legal and illegal). Think about it: is there ever a week that doesn’t end or begin where some gunman enters a building/house and kills multiple victims?

The real threat to the future of the US is its domestic policies. Healthcare is undermining employment; it is getting much more difficult for men over 50 to find high-wage employment as employers don’t want the added burden of higher insurance costs. According to the US Department of Labor less than half (48 percent) of men ages 55 to 65 are working full-time, down from nearly 70 percent 20 years ago. Healthcare has already reduced the manufacturing workforce by over 70 percent since the 1980’s.

Retirement is becoming more elusive as Social Security and Medicare become increasingly more fragile. The fastest growing bankruptcy filings are among those over 65 (mostly because of medical bills and medication needs). According to Fidelity Research Institute, among the top three reasons that prevented 58 percent of working Americans from saving for retirement needs were paying basic living expenses and paying off credit card debt. Less than half (44 percent) feel they will have a financially stable retirement.

Finally, there is the entire issue of consumption versus conservation. Everyone acknowledges that the consumption of petroleum products cannot continue at the current rate. Higher fuel prices will eventually limit the ability of people to maintain a quality standard of living. Yet, candidates on both sides stammer when asked what his or her plan would be to create a more energy-efficient society.

For the sake of our culture and society it is time to stop focusing on “what-ifs” and fear mongering and begin addressing real needs.

Follow-Up: Elite Students

In the June 14, 2007 issue of USA Today, the editorial dealt with the discrepancies between state and federal reading and math test results. In the discussion, one of the solutions was to forego the challenge of having every student achieve the same results: “Making ‘every’ child proficient in math and reading by 2014 is a nice political soundbite, but it’s about as realistic as Garrison Keillor’s Lake Webegon, ‘where all the women are strong, all the men are good-looking and all the children are above average.’”

Concentrating limited resources on the very best students will yield the most favorable results that benefit everyone.

Reading Is Fundamental Even For the Wealthy

According to USA Today research, the 2008 Lexus LS600h L owner's manual is 1097 pages! (A Kia Rio is 256 pages). Compare that volume of reading with its unending pages of technical understanding to entertainment such as Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (784 pages) or Gone With The Wind (960 pages) and it's easy to understand why everyone should have reading comprehension at the college graduate level.

Visit www.3MinuteLearning.com

GROWTH <> LEADERSHIP <> EXCELLENCE

© 2007 3 Minute Learning LLC

ELITE IS A GOOD WORD

Too Much Leads to Mediocrity

(Sports are a microcosm of our culture. It is constantly measured and evaluated and the seasons represent real-time project management. Sports can be useful to draw parallels to other social issues.)

If you discuss professional baseball with purist, they will say that there are too many teams in the major leagues and as a result, the sport has been diluted. The claim is that there are not enough elite professional athletes that can keep all teams competitive. A look at the current leagues standings and the woeful performances of the bottom half of teams and it is hard to disagree.

The result of major league team expansion has been to create a few outstanding teams, a majority of mediocre teams and a few very poor performing teams. The winning percentage of the teams create a bell shaped curve where the bulk of the teams fall within one standard deviation of the mean and the extremes with around 10 percent of the outstanding good or bad teams.

To preserve the concept of players that comprise the major leagues are the elite athletes of the sport, it would be necessary to eliminate the lowest performance teams each year and stock the remaining teams with the best players. The result is 12 to 16 teams that survive and the quality of the game ultimately defines the standards for an elite professional baseball player.

Considering that this is a sport played by young men across the world, plus the hundreds of thousands of US-born ball players, it is hard to imagine that there are not enough quality players to stock all the pro teams but the reality is a shortage of elite players.

Players are drafted, given professional coaching, play in the minor leagues to sharpen their skills and eventually, if they are good enough and they avoid injuries, they reach the major league level. These athletes are seasoned veterans at that point having played five or more seasons in the minor leagues before the call-up to the “big show.” So why aren’t there more elite athletes? Dilution because of quantity.

With so many young men vying to become professional baseball players there are not enough quality coaches available to teach the game, its strategy and develop skills. As a result only a few continue to advance, mostly based on talent not coaching. The sheer multitude of numbers prevents most players from advancing as coaches can’t spend enough time teaching. Instead of a higher quality product because of well-coached and talented athletes, the game is dominated by average players with minimal chances for long-term success.

It seems contrary to think that fewer would be better, but in the case of creating elite talent, fewer are better. In professional sports were the individual is the focus such as golf, tennis, swimming or track, athletes are coached one-on-one. There aren’t as many participants just the elite athlete representing his or her sport.

So where does this analogy lead us? The questions surrounding a political concept like Leave No Child Behind. Do we really need every student to succeed at every level through grade 12? Or is it only necessary to be proficient in reading and math at the eighth grade level? Is it realistic to expect high performance from a large volume of students or just from those in the upper percentiles as measured by academic performance?

In the real world, be it sports or business, there is a funneling effect where only the best continue. In school, only those students demonstrating a talent and dedication for learning should continue. The very best or elite students are the high school students who go on to college. (The ripple effect means that there will be fewer students at the college level thereby increasing access to professors and individualized teaching.)

Just like the case of individual one-on-one sports, elite high school students are now engaged in small classrooms where teachers are focused on the needs of each student and students choose to excel because they are part of a highly-motivated select group. Mediocrity is now out of the equation; even the lowest performing students will be above the mean.

So does this suggest that there will be a greater distinction among the classes? Yes; and it has always existed and it will continue to exist. The difference is the enhanced preparation of students to embrace quality thinking and problem solving creating new opportunities ultimately benefits everyone.

Does this mean there will be an even greater number of people under-educated and dependent upon social systems to live? No. From the very first day of school until the end of eighth grade, all students get the same fundamentals of reading, writing and math. The goal is to eliminate reading and math illiteracy and create a functioning society.

At the end of eighth grade, school becomes one of two tracks: education or training. Education prepares students for the scholarly pursuits of learning that creates the critical thinkers needed to address future needs and problems. Training prepares students for a variety of work related opportunities (apprenticeships or service skills such as practical nursing).

This solution is about maximizing resources. It is not a closed door or one-shot deal. Some scholarly-bound students will drop out and choose to go into a training curriculum. Conversely, some training students will realize they underestimated their talents and choose the scholarly track. This should be allowed to occur at any age, not just before 18. As it is often stated, commencement is the beginning not the end.

If we embrace the concept that education is a life-long commitment, the idea of high school for all and finishing 12 grades is irrelevant. What we need are options that develop the best students at the highest possible levels and at the same time provide employment training opportunities for all others.

Visit www.3MinuteLearning.com

GROWTH <> LEADERSHIP <> EXCELLENCE

© 2007 3 Minute Learning LLC