Higher Education is Ripe for Deconstruction

Higher education has some problems, the cost of college being only one concern. Our global model of higher education has served us well for a century or so but the time is upon us for those in higher education leadership to step back and deconstruct education.

I walk around my campus and talk to people. My job as a GIS Manager/Programmer and ESRI Higher Education Contract Representative for my campus puts me at the crossroads to meet various people, from interesting backgrounds, working in departments and offices trying to accomplish different tasks.

Sometimes, I travel to nearby public schools, other universities or community colleges. Going to a conference or a meeting exposes me further to different ideas. I also subscribe to a variety of newsletters which cover pedagogy in higher education, technology in higher education, leadership topics in higher education. I try to stay aware of what is going on in my discipline, and the greater university community.

Taking all of this in, plus the disruption of online education, I’m thinking higher education should be considering deconstruction. Regardless of how one feels about online education, whether one class at a regional university or a MOOC, higher education is ripe for some serious disruption. Here is what I mean, and bear with me, as I’ve got to build to my point.

Education is a subset of learning. Learning happens all the time, every day, and encompasses all forms of knowledge transfer, from touching a stove to learn about burns and blisters and heat transfer, to sitting a brick-and-mortar classroom listening to a lecture on the Warsaw Pact. Education is the formalized approached to learning, with textbooks, and exams, and Powerpoint, with grades, and transcripts and portfolios. But, how did we get here?

Reading some history paints an interesting picture. As with any argument, I’m going to begin with the Greeks. Look at the biographies of any Greek scholar. Examine their interests and skills. Eratosthenes, the father of geography, calculated the circumference of the Earth, developed a means of communicating the passage of time, so people could talk about “when” some event occurred. He worked on prime numbers, created maps, and wrote. Plato also studied math, writing, philosophy, and gymnastics.

I don’t want to give an extended treatise here, so let me provide a couple more anecdotes. Carl Linnaeus (18th C.)[link], the father of the modern naming system in biology, and a founder of the discipline of ecology, was interested in botany, zoology, and later became a physician. While traveling throughout Europe, he developed classification schemes for animals, plants, and minerals – making him a geologist, too. James Hutton (18th C.) was a Scot and is considered the father of modern geology. [link] Hutton’s interest was not limited to rocks, though. He also was a chemist, studied medicine, and was a farmer. Together with David Hume and Adam Smith, Hutton was an important part of the “Scottish Enlightenment.” He, Hume, Smith, along with John Playfair, Joseph Black, and Erasmus Darwin would establish the Royal Society of Edinburgh.

The idea I want to argue is people who were fascinated by the natural world gravitated towards others who also shared a similar fascination. Some universities and colleges did specialize in certain areas, like medicine, or astronomy, but by and large, students could attend a college and be exposed to the lectures of well-traveled, well-read, and well-educated instructors who were experts in a variety of fields, at least for the time. These student could drift from one lecture to another, from one instructor/lecturer to another, and learn from a wide variety of experiences.

Education was more like learning as I established by definition earlier, broad and holistic in nature with little bureaucracy and regimentation. Transcripts, letters, diplomas were hit-or-miss. Students and teachers were recognized by reputation, how well they communicated, how well they were able to convince the common people, and perhaps, how well they could read.

Education, like any other organism, evolved over time. Education organized, either by intrinsic design or by exogenous forces, into college and universities which have come to specialize in discipline-specific areas. Think about Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, Harvard, Johns Hopkins; I know the list is not exhaustive but you get the idea. Engineering, for example, brings to mind Stanford, MIT, Purdue. I’m sure I missed a few.

Today, schools have become specialized, to a degree. Young adults scrutinize reports published by U.S. News regarding, “The Best Colleges for {insert field or discipline here}.” For some, people look for, “The Top 100 Best Value Universities.”

Within schools, though, even more organization and compartmentalization has occurred. In prior years, even centuries, a student could float among philosophy, botany, or math lectures as a breadth of experience and knowledge was truly valued. Today, student must engage separately the “school of agriculture,” or the “college of science,” or  the “college of business” as if these are green beans, potatoes and gravy, and Salisbury steak which cannot touch lest the dinner be ruined.

The compartmentalization I refer to is euphemistically called, “stovepipes,” or “educational silos.” Students do not understand why they have to take a humanities course about Western Civilization, plus read a book by Jane Austin, then sit through a lecture on plate tectonics. Even some in education have lost touch with our educational ancestry, and argue for the elimination of general education requirements.

I hit upon the notion recently – and I admit, I may be late to the party – general  education, a liberal education is not a bad idea for a simple reason.

Professors are not hired to “tell” or “recite” information, really. Professors are hired to coach the uneducated among us through a process of discovery and formal education, under the umbrella of learning. We – professors, adjuncts, lecturers, we cannot ultimately prepare a student for the unknown. The idea of transferring a person 100% knowledge to make them successful is impossible. All we can do to prepare students for success is to expose uneducated or under-educated people to a variety of experiences in an intellectually safe yet challenging environment in hopes the academic hurdles we throw at them will adequately prepare them to handle what the non-academic world will throw at them.

The question, “I don’t understand why I have to learn about Western Civilization,” actually has some good responses, and one I would like to supply goes something like:

I don’t know what you will be faced with in the world you have selected to make a career in. We, faculty, have to expose you to a variety of experiences, history, culture, language, etc. This is not a vocation school, simply challenged with teaching you a skill. We are charged with helping you become a better thinker, more contemplative, more thoughtful, and have a better set of experiences to draw from than 70% of the U.S. population, and most of the world, actually.

However, what seems to be happening is universities are collapsing towards the mission of community colleges while community colleges are expanding their mission towards regional universities. Coupled with these realignments, internal changes within universities are further isolating colleges and departments as each stake out academic territories, promote reducing academic hours yet want their courses to replace the general education courses offered by other colleges and departments.

Let me see if I can clean this up by offering a few anecdotes. At my workplace, we have reduced the number of required writing courses from 2 (6 hours) to 1 (3 hours). Each department is then charged with developing more writing assignments to account for the lack of writing instruction. At my workplace, we have reduced the number of hours required for Humanities by at least 3 hours. My workplace has also reduced the number of hours required for most bachelor’s degrees, from 128 to about 120.

The effect I see occurring is singular: reducing the exposure of the uninformed, undereducated, and possibly ignorant to ideas of problem-solving, ways of thinking, and philosophies which have the potential of being life-altering. By reducing a student’s interaction across disciplines, they miss out by not being exposed to computer science, political science, history, literature, geography, biology, and all of the realms those disciplines touch. The result is learning is moving away from the roots of being holistic and into an insular realm where few people will be able to think creatively, to think not just “outside the box” but “destroy the box” and approach problems with new perspectives, new energies, and a reinvigorated vision.

Twenty-first century thinking, no; 21st century society must be one where people draw from many disciplines and experiences. I’m not suggesting people must be experts in a multitude of areas. What I am suggesting is to be aware of these disciplines and to be open and receptive to seeking out solutions beyond one’s own experience. Computer scientists must seek out biologists; biologists must seek out engineers; engineers must seek out mathematicians. Actually, everyone should seek out a mathematician – and this coming from a geographer.

Higher education, by definition, and specifically universities, must fight against those who would drag higher education into mediocrity. Those in higher education must encourage multidisciplinary efforts that refuse to build barricades against other disciplines and departments. Nothing is gained, and must is lost, by refusing to acknowledge, accept, or be dismissive of the work of other disciplines, no matter what personal attitudes might be.

How can a professor ignore the field of criminology based solely on one’s own perception? I mean, yes, technically a person can be an irrational actor and choose to be ultimately dismissive of a field or discipline. Sociology and psychology fight this battle frequently, as does geography. “You aren’t a real science because you just borrow from all the others.” The problem with this thinking is it wrong. Period. And, by wrongfully dismissing disciplines, a person, i.e. professors, wall themselves off from the potential benefits to themselves and to their students, and no one benefits from such myopia.

Learning must occur in an open, free, and safe environment, and be encourage by those unafraid to say, “I don’t know but let’s find out.” Worshipping our own hubris is essentially a means of becoming not only stagnant but is a path to becoming irrelevant. Higher education must work on preserving primary mission; to share, encourage, and promote learning across disciplines and certainly across personalities.

Low-Cost Higher Education Should Be A Federal Government Priority

Some general musings about college and university costs and financial aid concerns.

President Obama is issued comments on June 9th regarding the cost of Higher Education, and since my following and readership is almost equal to his, I determined I should also release my own statements. {humor}

The costs of Higher Education have risen to public scrutiny not because the actual costs have increased drastically, but because state and federal government financial support, in essence the subsidy to higher education, has been dramatically reduced. In Kentucky, for example, higher education funding has been cut about 25% since 2008 (kypolicy.org.) The reduced funding, the reduction in higher education subsidy, requires public universities to engage in essentially two activities: cutting budgets and increasing tuition and fees.

Budget cuts reduce the ability to repair, replace, or enhance laboratory equipment, computers, and other essential components required by programs. Budget cuts reduce or eliminate maintenance of buildings and necessary infrastructure, such as improving energy savings by replacing worn windows, replacing power grids, and networking infrastructure. Budget cuts limit cost-of-living increases, merit pay, and limit the health care subsidy colleges and universities provide to employees which buffers the impact of rising health care costs. Budget cuts effectively reduce the overall competitiveness of programs, departments, colleges, and universities in hiring desired new faculty, and reduce the attractiveness of work environments to current faculty and staff. If spending is cut “all the way to the bone,” how does the university grow and adapt to rapidly changing technologies and modes of learning?

President Obama would like to offer ways to tie payback of student loans to earnings. For instance, reports indicate student loan payments should be no higher than 10% of income. Some reports suggest that this might become a de facto forgiveness of student loans. After 20 years, the student loan is forgiven under the current Obama plan. If the former student works in public service or for a non-profit, the forgiveness occurs at 10 years. (nprEd)

I would really like the citizens of the United States to consider either free or high-subsidized higher education. Much of the developed world, much of Europe, Japan, and Korea, subsidize the education of their citizens. Many countries, like Germany, France, and the United Kingdom consider education to be a basic human right, and those sentiments extend into higher education.

For some reason, the United States supports Defense and Homeland Security far more than Education. Outside of September 11th, which was a terrorist attack, the United States hasn’t suffered any foreign military attack on its soil since … ever. Even the War with Mexico took place in Mexico. Some might suggest, “Well, the Battle of the Alamo,” was on U.S. soil. Actually, no it wasn’t. The Battle of the Alamo was part of the Texan Revolution, when colonists were rebelling against the Mexican government, their actual government. The Texas War of Independence resulted in the Republic of Texas, a wholly separate North American political entity, not part of the United States. (Mexican-American War; History.com)

The United States, at the federal level, supports Defense 10:1 over Education. Another way of thinking about this is for every dollar given to Defense, the federal government provides a dime to Education. Honestly, this ratio seems disturbing to me.

The concerns over student loan debt and repayment are legitimate concerns, but unfortunate concerns due to our American society entrenched in the misbegotten belief higher education results in the idealization of socialism, communism, or at best, liberalism. Furthermore, the notion “I don’t want my taxes to go to support a factory which does nothing but create Godless Liberals,” is a false analysis of higher education and yet remains a fairly common trope among the rural and unsophisticated  populace.

Specifically, my concerns relate to a number of issues. First, I’m bothered by for-profit universities being the primary destination of education grants, and the primary source of student loan defaults. For-profit universities lead the pack of student loan default rates. The two-year default rate was 13.6%, the three-year default rate was 21.8% for for-profit universities compared to 9.6% and 13% for public schools. (2013; ed.gov) For-profit universities also led the way with Federal Pell Grants awarded. Seven of the top ten Pell Grant colleges and universities are for-profit schools, with University of Phoenix leading this pack. Other members of this collection of schools include Ashford University, Kaplan University, DeVry University, and Everest University.

The University of Phoenix leads all universities with 259,998 Pell Grant recipients, amounting to about $945 million dollars in federal government financial aid given to a for-profit university. Now, I did a little figuring, downloading data provided by Ed.Gov. (Distribution of Federal Pell Grant by Institution, 2011-2012) I simply sorted the data from high to low based on number of recipients. I then summed the amount of federal Pell Grant dollars awarded. The seven for-profit universities received almost $2 billion dollars ($1.909B) in Pell Grant assistance.

$2 billion dollars of federal aid for education given to for-profit colleges. Wow.

Then, couple this with the other fact that for-profit universities are responsible for about 31% of student loan originators, and almost 50% of student loan defaults, and the data seems to indicate for-profit universities have gained access to and misused tax dollars really meant for public institutions. The HomeRoom blog of Ed.gov details how people need to do a better job of protecting themselves from the predatory practices of some for-profit colleges and universities. (“Protecting Americans from Predatory and Poor-Performing Career Training Programs,” HomeRoom; Ed.gov)

$2 billion dollars does not sound like much. However, when some states, like Kentucky, have experienced significant cuts in higher education over the last 7-8 years, those dollars might have been better spent in public education (they way they were meant to be spent) and not used for supporting for-profit colleges and universities.

In other words, why should taxpayer dollars be awarded to for-profit universities to the detriment of public colleges and universities, especially in light of the poor performance of student loans provided to students attending for-profit universities?

A few thoughts.

First, federal tax dollars should not be used to subsidize education at for-profit universities. If people want to attend a for-profit university, then use some other means. Private colleges and universities should also not be major beneficiaries of public dollars. Again, these are my thoughts, and given a good argument, I might be swayed. Public dollars should stay with public institutions.

Second, and really the entire premise of this post, is I truly believe higher education in the United States should be highly subsidized for people wanting to attend college, or free, in the case of First-time graduates who have no immediate family members with a college education, and free for those truly economically disadvantaged.

The general U.S. population needs to re-evaluate their attitudes towards education. Education is the cornerstone of society. Education is fundamental to employment; business and industry is completely reliant upon an educated workforce. Our society, overall, has reached its current level of achievements on the backs of engineers, chemists, physicists, and educated others, especially teachers. Specifically, our form of government, from local towns and cities, to our Congress, needs to support an educated electorate. The United States cannot afford thinking we can have white-collar wages with blue-collar effort. That sort of myopic focus will doom us to regressive economics, place us in direct competition with growing economies like India, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Brazil, and we cannot afford to match ourselves against those economies, as a country. Some areas of the country may be able to compete, such as Eastern Kentucky and Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, but the United States must have a vision similar to that of Japan or Germany. The United States cannot be a world economic leader by competing against low-wage labor countries.

The United States could afford to double spending on education, from about $60 billion to $120 billion per year. Simply take funding from the Department of Defense and Homeland Security. The 2015 Defense budget request for the United States was $495 billion, not including allotments for Iraq and Afghanistan. Overseas operations in Iraq and Afghanistan adds $89 billion.

Put another way, doubling federal spending on education reduces our spending on defense by about 10%.

Am I the only one bothered by this?

I cannot help but think that regardless of how Congress talks about supporting education, few, if any Congresspeople, have actually made their votes and bills congruent with their speech. If the globe were invaded by Alien Accountants, I cannot help but think these aliens would automatically consider the United States an aggressor and war-like state based solely on the unbalance ratio of education spending versus military spending.

The cost of higher education is not escalating simply because the costs of education are escalating. No; the costs of higher education are escalating because state governments and Congress simply cut education and revealed the levels at which education has been subsidized. State and Federal legislators have simply reduced the subsidy and pushed the burden of the costs onto families and students. Legislators have also been manipulated to allow for-profit universities to use and misuse our tax dollars, allowing yet another financial fraud to be perpetrated upon decent people looking to make their lives better, and in doing so, make our society better.

What say you?


Building Consensus for an Idea Lab

I spend a considerable amount of class time each semester advocating “geography is a holistic discipline, infused in all things and in almost every action or choice made, and not merely by people but by all organisms. Geography is inescapable.”

The problem with my perspective is many other disciplines could be argued to have the degree of infusion, mathematics, chemistry, and physics, for example. I retort, “geography is the first science, being people were first interested in their surroundings. Quantification and analysis of environments would come a little later.” Knowledge of geography most likely preceded language. Etching maps in the earth with a stick can accomplish much were no common language exists.

Being a geographer, I am exposed to numerous other fields, biology, physics, chemistry, engineering, graphics arts and design, economics, history, and political science, to name only a few. Being exposed to numerous fields and disciplines does not make me an expert in those area, but it does afford me some common ground when I need to interact with others in those fields. It’s nice being able to talk to a biologists about their spatial problem in their language and help them think about the spatial components of their research.

And therein lies the premise of my efforts to establish a campus Idea Lab. I’m not calling effort, “Idea Lab,” though. I prefer, “RacerWerks,” or “RacerWorxs” or something to that effect. In my in years of working and collaborating and being exposed to a bunch of other educated people, working in various disciplines, I am frequently struck with one persistent thought: How can <discipline_group_1> be unaware of the research and project of <discipline_group_2>? For example, “Why don’t the biologist know that the engineering students are building sensors systems for monitoring water characteristics?”

Sometimes, this is simply, in the words of Led Zeppelin, a “communication break-down.” Departments within the same college, unless individuals make an effort to explore what others are doing, remain uninformed about projects and research. In my opinion, this is really bad for a variety of reasons.

Geography is inescapable.

The fundamental mission of every college and university is the education of young adults. Colleges and universities promote their unique schools and colleges and departments, selling students on the idea they will be instructed how to be critical thinkers, how they will engage in “multidisciplinary research and education,” and how they will learn and grow. Yet, students then told to “choose a major” and are then boxed into a specific field. “Here are your classes you need to take. If you are persistent and motivated, you might get done in 3-1/2 years.”

In a way, the act of choosing a major field breaks the fundamental principle of every college and university. By being boxed-in, students are almost guaranteed to develop a myopic focus related to their chosen field. Then, as they progress through their education career and into a professional career, attitudes about their field becoming calcified, ossified, resistant to new, different, and potentially better ways of doing things. And this is what Education, in general, has to fight against.

To engage and encourage students to learn outside-the-box, we have to show them what out-of-the-box is.

Touring campus for many years, introducing myself as the ESRI Campus Site License Administrator, promoting the GIS software, talking to people how the software can benefit them, and their students, has brought me vis-a-vis with many bright, interesting, cool, and energetic people. But, they all seem to share the common trait of not even seeing how geography applies in their field. “You are a geographer. You know that, right?” And, they look back at me as if I’ve just said, “You are a Smurf. You know that, right?” Then, I have to explain to them how they are demonstrating to their students the importance of understanding spatial relationships, and maps are important tools in building that knowledge. Then, depending on the person, I either get (A) “Wow, I never thought of that before. Maybe I need you to talk to my class. Would you be willing to do that? Or, (B) their face goes blank to dark to glowering, a look much like what those in the Roman Catholic church may have exhibited when Copernicus mentioned, “Hey, the Earth travels around the Sun, not the other way around!” and, then the meeting ends. Then, they avoid even looking at me at campus events, the cafeteria, as if I now have intimate knowledge of a profound secret they’ve been holding onto. Don’t worry, I won’t out you as a “closet geographer.” Yeesh.

Those invested in Education must fight to prevent their students from developing myopic attitudes which might result in later resistance in finding betters way outside their field of solving problems.

So, I guess I want to out everyone as a “geographer” and help people get over themselves, and their allegiances to whatever they feel like they must have an allegiance to, education-wise. To learn, a person has to be willing to explore outside their comfort zone. A biologist needs to know something about GPS, needs to know environmental geography, perhaps geology. A biologist needs to know something about databases, about SQL, and maybe something about programming. And, all of this is tied into geography and can be mapped.

To prevent students from developing entrenched biases – perhaps a better way to phrase this would be to say, “To encourage students to draw experience and knowledge from other fields” – we have to show them how it this is done. The “Major/Minor” model is a dated model. Perhaps I’ll leave that for another topic. To engage and encourage students to learn outside-the-box, we have to show them what out-of-the-box is.

And this is what my idea of RacerWerks will try to address.

Below, is a draft agenda for an upcoming meeting. I have invited numerous people from across campus to join me at a local cafe/deli to layout the idea, determine interest, develop some consensus and support. Then, I’ll continue the effort at various levels throughout my university.

I invite any helpful comments, insights, suggestions, or recommendations.


(*tentative title)

A STEM-based collaborative community of educators and students to promote science, technology, engineering, and mathematics at the University, the local community, and the service region.



Purpose of “RacerWerks”(in no particular order)

  1. to promote education and research of current and emerging technologies, such as Arduino, RaspberryPi, GPS/GIS, Python, MakerBot, Linux, drones and other unmanned sensor systems (USS);
  2. to engage current of future students interested in developing experience in 21st century STEM technologies;
  3. to offer local K-20 educators opportunities to leverage current or develop new skills to implement Common Core Science Standards (CCSS);
  4. to identify a cohort of interested parties and leverage the current knowledge base with the purpose of pursuing grants, contracts, and other funding sources;
  5. to improve and expand the current knowledge base of University with regards to emerging technologies;
  6. to remain competitive among our benchmark universities, some of whom have already implemented or are in the process of developing “MakerLab”-style campus resources;
  7. to engage faculty & staff and encourage a multidisciplinary environment representing many fields, disciplines, and experiences for mentoring, supervising, reviewing, consulting, and analysing projects;
  8. to provide non-science students an opportunity to expand skill sets in emerging technologies;
  9. to collaborate with local business and industries;
  10. to foster local innovation opportunities;
  11. to augment skills and experience of current and future students;
  12. to develop and maintain a pool of skilled local talent to assist with grants and contracts requiring experience in new emerging technologies;
  13. to ensure and foster communication of research interests, current or potential projects;
  14. to anticipate, identify, and address emerging technologies as they become economically feasible;
  15. to assist the University in solving in-house technology concerns, rather than having to contract with non-local 3rd-party entities;
  16. Monies leave the University.
  17. Quality dubious
  18. Faculty, staff, and student removed from using current knowledge, experience; students removed from developing necessary employment skills.


  1. Emerging technologies are rapidly gaining ground within many communities.
  2. Georgia Tech recently created a student-run “MakerLab,” open 24hrs during the week;
  3. University of Louisville recently received a sizeable NSF grant for creating a local “MakerLab;”
  4. Many DIY-ers (do-it-yourself) are developing “gadgets” w/real & tangible benefits;
  5. Emerging technologies are very low-cost ($35-$100 for RPi & Arduino, >$1200 for a 3D printer);
  6. Emerging technologies are useful in real applications, drones, unmanned sensor systems (unmanned aerial systems, unmanned ground/terrestrial systems, unmanned aquatic systems);
  7. Emerging technologies are being employed in non-STEM disciplines, i.e. graphic arts/design, political science;
  8. Many towns and cities have their own “MakerLabs,” or “CreationStudios,” allowing people of all skills to come, learn, explore, and enhance skills;
  9. to coordinate / communicate university-wide STEM efforts;
  10. to identify needs related to training, education, skill sets and knowledge, or interest;
  11. to create a comprehensive STEM-based planned to improve knowledge base
  12. To create and maintain collaborative efforts across disciplines
  13. improve communication among different areas on campus, to plan or address emerging technologies. In other words, does anyone outside Telecommunications Systems Management know what TSM is doing? Or, Graphic Arts/Design? Or, IET?
  14. to engage other disciplines outside traditional science
  15. to encourage collaboration among university units to share knowledge, experience;
  16. Purpose of this Meeting
  17. To identify interested faculty & staff (later, students);
  18. To identify concerns or other related issues associated with this proposal;
  19. What areas, ideas, or issues has the agenda missed?

Comments / Feedback

Book Review: Without Their Permission, by Alexis Ohanian

Without Their Permission: How the 21st Century Will Be Made, Not Managed, by Alexis Ohanian. Hatchette Books. Hardback. (c)2013. $27.

For those in the “know,” Alexis Ohanian needs no introduction. Alexis, together with Steve Huffman, built reddit, the “front page of the Internet.” Sitting in their living room, using nothing but laptops, two fellows, undergraduates at the University of Virginia, created one of the world’s most popular Internet destinations.

For those unfamiliar with reddit and Alexis Ohanian and Steve Huffman, spend some time with reddit. Myself, I created a reddit account long ago, yet recently never put much thought into using reddit. Used wisely, like Twitter, reddit is a valuable resource for learning and networking with other creative and thoughtful people. reddit is a good resource for sharing and learning more details about current events, current trends in technology, software, apps, science, all sorts of interesting topics. reddit is not simply for discovering the newest Grumpy Cat meme. If you have a question about drones, about Ruby, about programming, about Arduino or RaspberryPi, about 3D printing or scanning, get on reddit and add to the conversation.

Alexis overcame his “Sue”-like name, (Johnny Cash reference) to become one of the most vocal advocates for Internet freedom, innovation, and entrepreneurialism in the United States. Recently, Alexis was in the news supporting Net Neutrality and encouraging people to pay more attention to proposed rules changes by the FCC. (TechCrunch, April 2014) What most people don’t seem to get is with every conglomerate merger, with every FCC rules change, the Internet becomes narrower and narrower. Picture a canal with ships and boats moving through, first come, first serve, small commercial ships, pleasure craft, all the way up to the huge cargo ships. Now, the owners of the supercargo ships don’t feel like they should have to share the canal with everyone else and would like to control, i.e. prioritize, the movement of ships through the canal. Big ships will always take precedence over small ships, to the point small ships, and small boat owners may never see the other side, may never reach their market.

OK, I agree my analogy is an oversimplification, but in a nutshell, the imagery isn’t too bad, really. Think of Net Neutrality as rich guys trying to buy their way to the water fountain. Then, they get to control who gets to drink.

See, at no time in human history have so many people had access to so much for so little to do so much with. A person in Afghanistan can sell rugs using a cellphone to a person wanting Afghan rugs in Germany. A kid sitting in a dorm room can build a website to connect his college friends, two guys can program a search engine in their apartment and change the way the world looks at information, and two guys can build the “front page to the Internet,” using two laptops, beer, and pizza.

The Internet does allow an individual to make a difference

Anyone today, with enough drive, desire, determination, can create something and go from unknown to known in a matter of months. One of my new favorite podcasts, The New Disruptors, is all about creative, innovative people doing things they love. In Episode 68, “See You in the Funny Webpages with Dave Kellett and Fred Schroeder,” listeners are treated to anecdotes about young people doing something they like, creating cartoons and comic strips, and leveraging the power of the Internet to build their audience.

All of the episodes I’ve listened to are insightful, thought-provoking, and driven by details, humor, and a meaningful candor any person wishing to branch out on their own should take to heart. But, this episode was especially interesting, as comic strips, and the history of comic strips was the topic. Besides a new documentary revealing the backgrounds of many of the most famous comic strips, “Stripped,” (website), the hosts and guests discuss several people who advanced their drawing pastime into a lucrative ventures.

All of this is part of the message of Ohanian’s book, Without Their Permission. You don’t need anyone’s permissions to be successful, to strike out on your own and do something worthwhile. Whether a person is interested in developing a charity to support a cause, such as providing assistance to the people of Joplin, Missouri in the aftermath of a deadly tornado, to crowd-funding classroom projects in under-funded school districts using DonorsChoose.org, anyone has the power to build, create, develop on the Internet.

The world is not “flat” as Thomas Friedman has sometimes advocated. Not really. The Internet is not exactly flat, either; not with countries like China censoring much of the world’s Internet traffic for local consumption while building their own competing Chinese internet, including social networking platforms and Amazon competitor. Russia avoids the flat internet by attempting to do the same thing, shutting down journalism, speech, Internet access and essentially commerce in what they claim is American hegemony of the Internet. While Russian claims of U.S. hegemony of the Internet may be true, the world is much better off with more internet freedom than less, as both China and Russia advocate.

The Internet does allow an individual to make a difference and that scares the bejeezus out of multinational corporations, like Time-Warner, ATT, DirecTV, and Oracle.

Alexis’ states, “Ideas are worthless.” (91) I don’t disagree with his sentiment, I would only add my own amendment: “without execution.” Having an idea is worthless if the idea dies, if it evaporates, if the idea is never executed. Everything we have today has roots in an idea, but our stuff exists today because someone or some group took the idea and transitioned the idea into something.

Alexis’ book should be read by anyone thinking about venturing out on their own. Readers will be treated to many inspiring stories and personal anecdotes related to his and Steve’s first forays into the internet and application development business. While not a step-by-step guide on getting your idea started, Alexis’ offers many tips and personal observations on how to focus your energy. Ignore the competition, pay attention to people, the users, and don’t hate the haters. My favorite bit of advice is one I tell anyone who will listen, though.

Surround yourself with people who give a damn about what they do. A corollary to this rule is to surround yourself with thoughtful, creative people who have a desire to do more, to achieve something. In other words, surrounds yourself with people who have goals, dreams, visions, and couple those attributes with good, solid skills. Having a party to celebrate something good is fine, but being indulgent in drugs, drama, and the nonsense of sordid pursuits is nothing but draining and does not move society forward.

Surround yourself with people who give a damn about what they do

I loaded a question for Alexis Ohanian, who stopped by the university I work for, being the invited keynote speaker for a regional high school competition, The Next Big Thing. I asked Alexis what he thought about the rising tide of anti-intellectualism coming from one political party. As a follow-up, I asked if he could speak about the value of his own college experience. Part of the anti-intellectualism movement uses the false notion a college degree is not necessary to be successful, citing Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, among others as evidence. Thankfully, Alexis indulged me and my concern, clearly pointing out two important facts. First, both he and Steve Huffman graduated from the University of Virginia. Secondly, and what I argue is most important, the higher education experience brought Alexis and Steve together, a happenstance, no doubt, yet building a team resulting in their mutual success within 9 months of graduating (both became multimillionaires within a year of graduation). United States colleges and universities are breeding grounds for innovation and entrepreneurialism unlike any other in the world.

I bought two copies of Alexis’ book, Without Their Permission. One signed copy I kept for myself; I need motivation, on occasion. One signed copy I gave away to a student in my department in hopes she will find inspiration to do something with her ideas.

I recommend Alexis Ohanian’s book, Without Their Permission (#WTPBook) to anyone needing a push to get started, to any young person wanting a revealing look inside how a couple people take an idea from concept to realized endeavor. A high school kid will get as much from this book as any retired person, bored from a daily routine and looking to reach out and engage with the world.

Did I find the book personally inspiring? Sure. For a couple years, my director and I have been attempting to push our university to become more innovative, more receptive to new ideas, technologies, modes of learning, and encouraging a greater sense of holistic learning. All learning is holistic in nature, really; good faculty and staff illuminate through what I refer to as “good coaching” the interconnections of our environment. One of higher educations greatest weaknesses is college and departmental stove-piping, stake-claiming, and territory-grabbing of topics, fields, disciplines, and information. While students experience great depth of learning, the breadth of learning is constricted when students are not exposed to the economics, history, geography, or mathematics involved in a subject.

Recently, we initiated a venture, “RacerWerx,” an attempt to bring together people of varied skills on our campus to create a holistic STEM learning environment. Faculty from education, biology, engineering, graphic arts and design, and computer programming, for instance, have signed on to support this effort. But, as with any project, I still must push, to reach out, to educate, to promote this idea, as many people, despite being in higher education, are simply sclerotic in thinking. And learning, like business, must be adaptive.

So, give a damn and go do something Without Their Permission!

Promote Innovation in Higher Education Using a StudentStore

Alexis Ohanian, co-founder of reddit, states in his new book, Without Their Permission: The 21st Century Will Be Made, Not Managed, an idea “is worthless.” I agree, sort of, but in my book review I amend his statement. To me, an idea is worthless if the idea is never executed. So, let’s see if someone will execute my worthless idea.

Honestly, my idea isn’t entirely unique. In fact, I’m sure my idea has been executed at some university and I’m just ignorant of the fact. But, let me give you some background details first.

Part of my job is to promote GIS, mapping, and spatial learning on my campus. GIS, GISc, and geospatial technology are fields and disciplines recognized by the U.S. Department of Commerce as being some of the fastest growing employment areas in the United States. I get out once in while and walk about campus and try to get people interested in mapping, GIS, GPS, mobile mapping and technology.

In my role of advocating GIS and mapping science across my campus, I’ve come in contact with a wide variety of interesting people who are engaged in some really interesting stuff. Developing iOS programming apps, building sensors with Arduino, constructing animated art using RaspberryPi boards and researching swarm algorithms for use in small robots to name a few projects. In talking with faculty and staff across campus, I soon realized in spite of our cozy campus faculty and staff were not really aware of what each other were doing across campus. Computer science might not know Graphic Arts & Design was using RaspberryPi and teaching programming. Graphic Arts & Design might have no idea Engineering Physics had a 3D printer and was teaching design and programming. Within a single large department like Biology, faculty might not realize both Computer Science students and Engineering Physics students are helping develop apps for tracking water quality or building mechanisms for trapping insects.

When I realized how much stuff was going on yet how little people realized what was occurring on campus, I decided to do something about the lack of communication. I put some thought into what I wanted, did some googling of “idea labs” and “fabrication labs” and “idea sparks” and such to get a sense of what direction I might head. I settled on “RacerWerx,” a combination of our school’s mascot, plus a phonetic modification of “works,” based on some sites themed upon the notion of foundries and ironworks and making things from scratch. And, “werx” seemed to be “hip,” and “now,” and “cool” at the time.

RacerWerx is simply a blog I created to help educate people on my campus about STEM-based activities which for one reason or another never seem to have found a unified outlet for promotion. To borrow from the blog:

“RacerWerx represents like-minded faculty, staff, and students, drawn from a multitude of disciplines, working together to explore new technologies and address real-world problems. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts, as Aristotle is quoted as saying, and RacerWerx represents the knowledge and experience of many, brought together to explore, use, and educate others in the use of 21st century technologies, like Arduino, 3D printers, 3D scanner, mobile application development, RaspberryPi, and innovative systems.”

I don’t want you to steal my blog, RacerWerx, though. Do so would be boring and not get you anywhere. I want you to steal the idea of RacerWerx and then execute, i.e. put into action, this idea.

See, I feel some parts of our educational system need to be … disrupted; disrupted in the sense walls, obstacles, and entrenched thinking need to be torn down, the inner workings laid bare, to discriminate between what is really important and needs to be kept and what is simply “turf,” the inner politics which develop inside any system to protect positions, authority, bureaucracy, and perhaps egos. These elements among others, do a disservice to the primary goal of Education, to promote a better society through education by providing those needing knowledge and skills a means to challenge and enhance their intellect. Whether “turf” or “stove-piping” is the preferred term, the behavior is really contrary to the holistic nature of learning, fundamentally.

All learning should be holistic. A person cannot learn economics without learning geography. A person cannot learn history without learning geography. Geography is elementary to chemistry and biology. Notice a theme? I’m a professional geographer so I see everything through a geographic lens. And Mathematics underpins all. Even a geographer must admit Mathematics lies at the root of All :)

I believe colleges and universities should strive to make all disciplines interdisciplinary. Economics involves math, statistics, geography, history and any faculty economics instructor worth their salt should impress upon students these relationships. Same in biology, history, engineering. No one can say with 100% certainty they will not be impressed or influenced by something they learn in a course outside of their major or minor area of study. As educators, we are charged not with protecting our field or discipline but by illuminating to all how our field or discipline affects and is affected by all others.

With RacerWerx, the idea is breakdown barriers between fields and disciplines, colleges and departments, and advocate for more open and broader educational learning opportunities – and then see what happens, see where students take what they learn.

Specifically, I want this:

I want a single point-of-contact with faculty, staff, and students, and open laboratory 2,000-5,000 square feet. Part of the facility would include an array of computers used for faculty-run workshops. These workshops would train people on 3D printing, 3D scanning, or perhaps mobile application development. I would like an array of 3D printers and 3D scanners with suitable design software. I would like desks for students to use to collaborate on projects and research.

Furthermore, I want students to manage the facility. I want the facility operated and managed by students, students from any college or department. Assuming business students should be groomed for operating the facility is wrong, honestly. A student in design or engineering might have aspirations of running their own business. Thus, any interested student should be allowed to participate in this student-operated venture.

Additionally, I want students to make good stuff, applications, art, designs, products, and I want them to have the opportunity to sell their work. Colleges and universities are looking for ways to enhance revenue, and student are looking for way to obtain real-world experience. Open a student-operated and student-supplied “Student Store.” In the Student Store, allow the students to sell the fruits of their labors. The university keeps a fraction, say 40%, students keep 60%. Students run the store, from keeping it staffed and stocked, charting sales, promotion and marketing, the whole shebang. Faculty acts as mentors and advisers.

The store should be in a prominent location, as we all know from geography, location is everything. The student union would be a good place, or a dining hall, or a residence hall. Imagine this: parents arrive for orientation and are shown the Student Store. They learn the store is run by students representing many different fields. Parents learn the items for sale are produce on-campus, by students in Graphic Arts & Design, Engineering, Computer Science, maybe even Nursing or Agriculture. Who knows? And, why limit? When parents see students engaged in real-world activities, managing a business, managing labor, marketing, promotion – the entire ecosystem of industry – what parent in their right mind would walk their student off that campus?

In all fairness, the last bit is not entirely my idea. I spoke with a person at Makerbot, Wallace Patterson, the Makerbot Education Account Manager. We chatted on the phone about what it would take to get a Makerbot Innovation Center (MIC) at my university. As we tossed ideas around, our conversation coalesced around the idea of a student run gift shop featuring items produced directly or indirectly from the MIC as a means of cost recovery. Everything within universities today always involves a conversation about “How do we justify the cost?” or “How do we recover the cost, plus make this effort self-sustaining?” We then hit upon the notion of creating a student gift shop which might help defray some of the costs of a MIC.

My success in promoting all of the above can’t be measured at this point, unfortunately. Some faculty read the blog, on occasion. But I have to say the idea really hasn’t caught on as I hoped.

However, the idea might catch on at another college or university.

So, steal my idea!! Please!!

Then, email me and tell me about your success. Or, email me, anyway, if you already have experience with any of the above and let me know how things are working for you.




Marvel’s New Muslim Superhero

Comic books and the related publishing industry have been a serious form of cultural expression since before the days of Clark Kent and Superman. Superman, created by Jerry Siegal and Joe Shuster in 1933, was sold to the publisher who would later evolve into DC Comics. Superman became an iconic part of America culture in spite of both creators being Jewish. Prior to World War II, Jews were reviled throughout the world, even in the United States. Late in 1880′s, the Russian Jewish ghettos were frequently targeted by Russian Christians; Jews persecuted, harassed, and subjected to many forms of humiliation. Even in the United States, despite what many might say, Jews were not welcomed with open arms. In most urban areas, from New York to Chicago, Jews were similarly harassed.

Captain_America_Vol_1_201Comic books themselves have frequently sought to present societal issues to readers. Early in Captain America’s career, his adventures pit him against the Nazis. Interviews with Joe Simon and Jack Kirby reveal Captain America was created specifically to counter what they saw as the horrific actions of the German Wehrmacht.  My favorite comics are those from the 1970s and 1980s partnering Captain America with the Falcon. Together, Steve Rogers and Sam Wilson team-up to take on the Red Skull, cultists, and drug dealers in Harlem. But, even the title itself seems evidence of racism, as Falcon would be dropped from a few of the titles in the series. In the 1990s and 2000s, Captain America would take on White Supremacists, terrorists, and ultra-conservative “super-patriots.” Many authors and researchers have done some nice work detailing the contribution of comics in mirroring societal issues.

Many recent books have taken up a variety of societal issues. Marvel’s Civil War story arc parallel the real-life effort to generate “watch lists,” the promotion of people to spy on their neighbors, and the formation of militia groups along the U.S.-Mexico border. Muslim-Americans were singled-out, as well as anyone who might be suspected of being Muslim, such as Sikhs, light-skinned Black people, and darker-skinned Hispanics.

Both Marvel and DC have promoted LGBT characters. Marvel’s Northstar, part of Alpha Flight, was openly gay and promoted greater AIDS awareness. Most recently, DC’s Batwoman was revealed to be gay. Other characters from both publishers are homosexual, as well, though not as well-known. From Top Cow, the Witchblade’s current wielder, Danielle Baptiste is also gay. These titles tend to explore the effects on life and family of discrimination experienced by these characters, but, honestly, I’m not sure the writers are really doing much, other than saying, “OK, Kate Kane is Batwoman and she is gay. Now, we’re going to kick some evil butt.” I haven’t been impressed much by the strength of conviction for the writers to really address some of the animosity in today’s so-called “free” society. Not in the same sense writers in the ’70s and ’80s took on racism and drugs, for example.


February 2014, witnessed the arrival of a new Marvel book representing a new, and perhaps bold, direction for Marvel. “Ms. Marvel” represents the most recent incarnation of the Ms. Marvel character. Originally appearing in 1968, Carol Danvers gave up the title in 2012 and assumed a new role as Captain Marvel. In 1985, Sharon Ventura became Ms. Marvel after being coaxed to take part in the Power Broker’s experiment. The former villain, Moonstone (Karla Sofen), assumed the name in 2009 for a brief run. Now, we have Kamala Khan, a 16-year old Pakistani-American residing in Jersey City, New Jersey.

I really like this book for a number of reasons. Not having any experience in reading Ms. Marvel, for new readers, writers and editors should have made determining Kamala’s ancestry a little easier. Embedding geography in comics is not unheard of; in fact, many comics use geographic details frequently (Daredevil, Moon Knight #1, Winter Soldier). Editors and writers merely need to spend a few minutes to get the details correct, embed a few clues, embed a few details, and a good story becomes a learning lesson. Having Kamala’s father threaten her brother with going to live with his uncle in Karachi if he doesn’t find employment was all the clue necessary.

This is a great book to share with your kids, especially if you have a 10+ daughter. Written for Teen+, when I read through the book, had I a 10+ year old daughter I would have allowed her to read and collect this title. Too many books these days, labeled as “Teen+” overly sexualize the title character, and women, in general. For some asinine reason, artists equivocate large breasts with power and physical prowess. Another good title for girls is the newest “Wonder Woman,” written by Brian Azzarello and drawn by Cliff Chiang. One of the best books, overall, in the last two years and a great book for young women to collect.


Writers don’t seem to be too much into humanizing their characters, showing weakness and frailties readers can relate to, but Ms. Marvel’s writers, Sana Amanat, G. Willow Wilson, and Adrian Alphona deserve a lot of credit for making Kamala relatable to readers. Kamala visits her neighborhood bodega and literally lusts after a BBQ pork sandwich. A good talking point for beginning a conversation: “Why would Kamala say something like, “delicious infidel meat…?”” For Muslims, like Jews, pork is off-limits due to its cloven hoof. (Leviticus 11:7-8; Deuteronomy 14:8)


Kamala has a friend she pals around with. In the panel (left) we see Kamala use the name “Kiki” in reference to her friend. Kiki takes an exception to being called, “Kiki,” asking not to be called, “…Kiki, anymore.”

Kamala apologizes, saying with some sarcasm, “Proud Turkish Nakia doesn’t need “Amreeki” nickname. I get it.” We learn Nakia is not Pakistani, but Turkish, and later we learn some other similarities. We also see a reference to “Amreeki,” a colloquialism used for “America.” Many people, when relocating to the United States, will adopt an American-style name. International students on college campuses will assume names like, “Roger,” or “Alex,” or “Alexis,” simply because Americans have trouble pronouncing foreign names. As a sidenote, the world is full of challenging pronunciations. Perhaps, it is the United States that is different, not the majority of the world.


While passing time in the bodega, some high school kids show up. White, perhaps upper-middle class, and certainly representative of many high school kids in today’s rural high schools, the conversation begins innocent enough. “Your headscarf is so pretty.” Notice Kamala is not wearing a headscarf, the hijab, some Muslim women wear. A sign of modesty, women in many countries wear head scarves. Today, people associate the hijab with Muslim women. The reality is the hijab pre-dates Islam, and Christianity, for that matter. Headscarves adorned the heads of Greek, and later Roman, women, who represented nobility, or the upper class of society. The headscarf was a way women would segregate themselves from common women and prostitutes. Nakia is wearing a hijab, though, and this grabs the attention of who can only be described as an uppity white girl.


In the full panel, we see the full expression of the girl’s concern. “I mean, nobody pressured you to start wearing it, right? Your father or somebody? Nobody’s going to, like, honor kill you?”

When I read this the first time, I thought, Wow, the writers really jumped right into the fray, didn’t they?” Honor killings is a big jump from snarky comments about a headscarf.

Honor killings epitomize atrocities against women, but what is an “honor killing?” Some cultures around the world persist in dictating to daughters whom they should marry. A daughter who follows her parents decision honors her family, and life goes on. As we move deeper into the 21st century, technology is exposing very traditional culture values to other values. We see the clash of Culture A versus Culture B splash across media weekly, almost. Honor killings are not religious based. Honor killings pre-date Islam, Christianity, and probably Judaism. In other words, honor killings are not part of Islam, nor Hinduism, nor Christianity, nor a part of any religion. The way honor killings are portrayed in the media one would have no choice but to assume they are part of Islam. They aren’t, but there are those in the right-wing media who would like no more than to make up the dots to connect honor killings to Islam.

Patriarchal societies, male-based, promote control over women’s access to marriage, education, employment, and general life activities. Mothers, sisters, and aunts are also complicit in dictating behavior of younger women in order to maintain the culture. For literally thousands of years, girls have been used to seal alliances between families to end conflict, to prevent conflict, to encourage cooperation in economics or warfare. Young girls were the only bargaining chip, at times, to bring closure to some concern. A girl who refused to accept marriage was seen to threaten a family’s livelihood, discredits a family, dishonors a family among tribes of families – a loss of “face” or respect. The only way to recover respect was the death of the daughter at the hands of the parents or some appointed family member.

We see the same behavior in Asian societies, even today. The loss of face, of honor, for a family member can permeate an entire family. In China, 2008, the manager of the factory responsible for poisoning milk, mouthwash, and toothpaste, committed suicide. Why would he commit suicide? In part, perhaps to avoid an ugly trial in China, culminating in lifelong imprisonment. A larger component would be to prevent his family from suffering. His children may never be allowed to enter college, or be relegated to menial jobs because of the actions of their father. The actions of a family member can stain the entire family for generations in some cultures.

We see news of honor killings come from rural India. We read news accounts of honor killings in Pakistan. Reading of honor killings in Eastern Europe is not uncommon. When people immigrate to the United States, they bring their culture with them, and we have had some cases of honor killings among immigrants. Without a doubt, though, news of honor killings from Afghanistan is the most prominent. True, the practitioners of honor killings in Afghanistan are Muslim, but are not mainstream Muslims. And, as I stated earlier, honor killings in Afghanistan pre-date Islam, and are tied to archaic tribal rules, and have no basis in Islam. Our blonde-haired “friend” of Nakia doesn’t seem to be aware of any of these details.


Kamala’s high school friends are gearing for a weekend party. This will present a problem for a number of reasons for Kamala. First, alcohol will be present. “Alcohol” is an Arabic word derived from al-kohl, meaning “purified.” Kamala is not Arab, she is Pakistani, and probably speaks Urdu, not Arabic. Urdu is a member of the Indo-Aryan language family and not related to Arabic, which is Judeo-Arabic, and closer to Hebrew.

Alcohol is forbidden in Islam; alcohol is also forbidden in some Christian denominations, such as the Southern Baptists and Mormonism. For a Muslim, being around alcohol is fine, as long as one does not partake.

Perhaps a more serious issue for Kamala is the presence of boys her age. We aren’t led to believe this – yet – but fraternizing with the opposite sex is forbidden in most Islamic societies. There is a considerable range in the oversight of these relations, though. Turkey, for example, is perhaps the most liberal Islamic country. Women can hold most any job in the private sector and any job in the public sector. Men and women are allowed to mingle. On the other side of the spectrum, Saudi Arabia and Iran represent more traditional systems. Women are not allowed into some activities, like sports, government, and have limited employment opportunities, like nursing and teaching. Single men are not allowed to mingle freely with single women. Shopping centers and malls have areas set aside exclusively for women and families, while single men must sit elsewhere. Iran has experienced some controversy in sports. Mamood Amadinejad allowed women to attend soccer matches only to be overruled by the Supreme Islamic Council. Several years ago, a ski resort in northern Iran got into trouble with the religious police for allowing men and women to share the same ski slopes.

None of this explains why, though. The Qur’an (and the Christian Bible, too) states people should dress modestly, should not expose too much skin. Men should not cut their hair or beards, and women should veil their faces, and not wear clothing revealing the curves of their body. Good luck with that, super-heroines.

People are too susceptible to sin, especially men. Thus, because men are either unable or unwilling to suppress their sexual urges, women must hide themselves. Furthermore, because men have fragile egos and cannot handle a woman who can surpass them in skill, wisdom, and knowledge, men prevent women from engaging in many activities, like sports, politics, religion, and industry. But, we cannot blame any of this on Islam, as we encounter discrimination wherever men and women are found. But, some cultures make Islam responsible, point to the Qur’an was the governing document preventing women from many activities, because “God said so.”


When Kamala returns home, she finds dinner nearly ready, her father reading a local paper, and her brother saying his prayers. We see a broad range of religion expressed here, from her brother, Jamir, who seems to be a devote Muslim, to her father who seems more secular, even chastising his son for praying too much.


Jamir evidently spends more time in mosque than looking for employment. In other words, like some of today’s directionless youth, continue to live at home, idle, and live off Mom and Dad. “Allah” is simply the Arabic word for “God” and is the same God worshiped by Jews and Christians. Islamic beliefs are based on Judaism and Christianity. Islam recognizes the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Old Testament, the Torah, the Christian Bible, and all of the principle people mentioned in the books. Islam adds the Qur’an to round out a trilogy of religious books. People don’t agree with me; the problem is not with me. People who don’t agree with these details refuse to acknowledge how Islam sees itself.

“Abu” translates as “father”  Most Westerners don’t understand naming conventions used by people around the world. Thailand, for instance, requires everyone has a unique family name. Thus, if you run across two people with the same surname, they are related. English names are no where near as organized. Arab names, for example, the very long name chain we often see in the news, represent consider information. We can tell from an Arab name chain lineage, the grandfather, the father, the person’s given name, the person’s chosen name, tribal affiliation, and perhaps even geographic home or hometown. A friend of mine, Hamid, suddenly became “Abu Rakin” one day. Always trying to pronounce and learn names, I asked him if I had been saying his name wrong. No, he said, my wife had our first son overnight. His name is Rakin, so I have a new name, now, “Abu Rakin” but you can still call me Hamid. The spelling in the panel seems more consistent with Arabic, though, not Urdu.


Islam has some very strict rules governing the handling of money. For instance, interest cannot be charged. No interest. Not only can interest not be charged, interest cannot be earned by Muslims. The Islamic banking system has some attractive qualities to some non-Muslims, as a result. So, you might ask, “How do they make money?” Typically, a loan comes at a price. The loanee pays a fixed amount of money for a loan. For a $10,000 loan, a person may pay $500 dollars or some fraction of the loan amount. When Jamir suggests his father is guilty of the sin of usury and that his father’s choice of employment is worthless, his father takes offense. Jusuf, Kamala’s father, reminds his son (“beta”) his job affords Jamir the luxury of sitting at home doing nothing.


Finally, I found the details of Jusuf’s paper interesting. Sometimes, I think artists get lazy, simply scribbling lines to look like text but on scrutiny resolves to gibberish. Not the case with Jusuf’s paper.

“Akbar” translates as “greatest,” so he is reading Jersey’s greatest newspaper.

The most popular sport in Pakistan is probably soccer. The second most popular sport in Pakistan, though, is cricket. And, like cycling and baseball in the United States, Pakistan has a problem with doping within the sport of cricket. Cricket was introduced by the British, when the Empire of Great Britain ran the entire landscape from Pakistan to Bangladesh for almost one hundred years, from 1847 or so to 1947.

The United States has no idea about cricket, except for some isolated club teams here-and-there. Listen to cricket coverage on NPR sometime. Bizarre, and amusing.

This is a great book with so much potential, potential in a number of ways. Teachers I know are always looking for ways to introduce ideas and concepts to students. What better way than to bring a comic to class, oriented to females, nicely drawn, covering so many societal and geographic issues? Educators representing many disciplines can draw from this single book.

  1. Explore the history of Pakistan and the influence of Great Britain;
  2. Explore the geography of South Asia (Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nepal, and Bhutan);
  3. Explore the geography of language families;
  4. Explore the geography of cricket;
  5. Examine the issues of religion, similarities and differences between Judaism, Christianity, and Islam; identify the Five Pillars of Islam;
  6. Examine the geography of Islam, the holy sites of Mecca and Madinah; use Google Earth to find locations using Longitude-Latitude coordinates;
  7. Examine the etymology of Arabic words, like alcohol, algebra, banana, kebab, couscous, and hummus;
  8. Explore the issues associated with migrating to new areas with a different culture;
  9. Examine the comic book layout, design, and composition;
  10. Examine use of color;
  11. Examine techniques for communicating action.
  12. Engage in open-ended discussion of how comic books / graphic novels could succeed in communicating issues over other media.

Comic books and graphic novels are entertaining, but their use need not stop there. Used with some imagination and thought, comic books and graphic novels can be important sources of learning and engagement.

Seeing where the Ms. Marvel creative team takes Kamala will be very interesting. She/Ms. Marvel has already been placed among important influences on 21st century global culture and human rights, along side Malala Yousafzai, the young girl shot October 9th, 2012, by the Taliban for attending school.

Of all the new books released in February & March, make sure Ms. Marvel is in your pull-list.

Book Review: The Ragged Edge of the World, by Eugene Linden

The Ragged Edge of the World, by Eugene Linden. Plume paperback. Penguin Books. © 2011. $16.

An interesting travelogue by a frequent contributor to Time, Newsweek, National Geographic, and a few other magazines and publishers, Linden’s book seems dated. Most the experiences he relates are from two to three decades ago, some going back to the early 1970s. In Chapter 4, for instance, Eugene relates a 1990 adventure from New Guinea, when he returned to the island to work on a story for Time magazine. He then returned for a third time in 2004. Chapter 5 relates a series of experiences the author had in Polynesia, first in 1971, then in 1976, then most recently, in 1995. For a book published in 2011, I expect more recent travel experiences.

I enjoy reading travelers tales. Read some Tim Cahill (Outside Magazine) sometime. His books have great names, like “A Wolverine is Eating My Leg,” “Jaguars Ripped My Flesh,” and “Pecked to Death by Ducks” and he can weave a story like few others, really. He exhibits a great combination of wit, sarcasm, irony with a generous side of near-death experiences. I’ve read only one Paul Theroux travelogue, “Ghost Train to the Eastern Star: On the Tracks of the Great Railway Bazaar,” and found Theroux’s writing to be witty, thought-provoking, though at times he can leave one wondering why he bothers traveling at all. I’ve also read a hodge-podge of  essays by a few other writers. Eugene Linden does a write a compelling story – my only complaint is the timeliness of his material.

If Eugene Linden were only writing a travelogue, I would say “pass.” Linden has a more focused theme. While some writers travel and journal their experiences to share, Eugene has an agenda and goals to accomplish. I mention the dates of the material in the book only to prepare the reader for dated experiences, not to undermine the experiences themselves. I thought I was going to sit down to read a book of essays based on experiences less than 5 years old, certainly no older than a decade. Not the case, however. The truest measure of a writer’s writing, though, is this: Would you read another book written by the author? Absolutely; I would certainly read another of Eugene’s books simply because of the richness and variety of his travels and encounters.

The Chapter 4 tale I note above concerns Linden’s travel to New Guinea for a story about the loss of indigenous knowledge. Remote areas are becoming less remote as populations grow, as industries locate to avail themselves to natural resources, and as government allow commercial enterprises into remote areas to harvest trees or mine minerals. As the indigenous people are exposed to modernizing influences, some people are coaxed into adapting to modernity, others retreat into the remaining wilderness, and some exist on the fringe, like deer or coyote living near people but remaining wild. Linden provides several anecdotal tales, ranging from Polynesian “cargo cults,” to indigenous people who were given tours of manufacturing facilities for common products, only to synthesize a new creation tale upon returning home, incorporating their experience as if the result of an elaborate dream-state induced by the gods.

The “modernizing” influences are technically modernizing, though in mostly negative ways. These people represent corporate interests, hired or contracted by corporations, to extract whatever the resource is, gold, timber, copper, and really represent the most callous of people, mercenaries, thieves, and misfits. Other modernizing influences include tourists, who visit Southeast Asia and Oceania to see “traditional ways of life,” and examine people as if they are museum pieces. And, then, last but not least, are academics who insert themselves into environments, typically for good reasons, yet can also have deleterious effect on local populations. Eugene tells of researchers who seem to treat their local environment with little more regard than those who seek to exploit the natural resources. Biologist, ecologists, and botanists may have no compassion or interest in learning about or respecting local people, they are simply present to gather data for gibbons / clownfish / chimpanzees not realizing the impact their expedition has on the local economy of culture.

Linden relates a story of some enterprising villagers. Tourists like to hire boats to take them upriver to visit the wilderness, maybe catch sight of wildlife or indigenous people eking out a life from fishing. On occasion, these tour boats swamp canoes and villager have drown. The families then sue the boat companies, or their government. Few episodes of drowned family members or lost equipment had to occur before the opportunistic locals picked up on the notion of simply positioning themselves in their canoes, wait for the tour boats to cruise by, swamp their boats, and sue.

The effects of modernity on indigenous people is the crux of Eugene’s writing, and he does put together some interesting episodes detailing the clash between simple, unsophisticated cultures, and us – people with simple and unsophisticated cultures but with the technology and prowess to take advantage of these indigenous people who live in remote areas and subsist mostly by their own wiles. Coverage of topics do move back and forth in time; he has extensive travel experience going back decades. He uses these older travels as reflections upon his more recent visits, noting changes, both positive and negative.

Humans have a disproportionate ability to affect changes in the global environment above and beyond the capability of all other animals, combined.

I fully support the reintroduction of wolves into the West, Yellowstone, Montana, and elsewhere, in full disclosure. The elements of Linden’s book covering the Yellowstone wolves controversy I found interesting and troubling. People often make decisions based on irrational fears and incomplete knowledge resulting in tragic consequences. The killing of wolves, for instance, increases deer, rabbit, and coyote populations, resulting in other management issues for ranchers, mainly. Exploding deer populations brings exploding deer tick populations, and with deer ticks comes Lyme disease, which is easily transmissible to people.

I’m not a big fan of protests like “the natural balance is upset when people are involved,” simply because people are part of the global ecosystem. The problem really being protested should be more accurately described as, “Humans have a disproportionate ability to affect changes in the global environment above and beyond the capability of all other animals, combined.” Because Humankind has this unique ability, we must recognize we have some responsibility to be ecologically sound in our decision-making. The chapter, “Wolves on the Brink,” certainly addresses the elementary battle of Man versus Nature, as ranchers vehemently protest the introduction of wolves despite the rare case of wolves killing cattle.

Chapters 7 through 9 are plenty riveting. Chapter 7 finds the author visiting Central African Republic (CAR) and central Africa, in general. His visits are assignment-based, to provide media coverage for interesting topics ranging from returning a chimp back into the wild, the poaching of elephants, and the study of the lowland gorilla. No coverage of humanitarian or scientific endeavors in central Africa would be complete without detailing of the travails of traveling in Africa. Even today, travel is rife with corruption, graft, with regional or local “bosses” requiring special permission, i.e. a bribe, in order to progress further towards one’s destination. The recognition of a centralized federal government authority is non-existent once one leaves the city and one must be prepared for unscrupulous people, banditry, graft, and corruption, plus horrible roads. In Zaire, Linden recounts standing in a sweltering office of a pissant bureaucrat awaiting the final negotiations of travel details. The office was also that of the local law enforcement, the walls of which were decorated with hand-painted murals of women being beaten with clubs.

However, if Linden’s experiences were limited to mere humans availing themselves to other humans, his tales would simply be further evidence of human corruption which occurs pretty much everywhere. Humankind’s moral turpitude extends to nearly every species. Chimps are found missing hands and limbs after losing them in snare traps. Chimps and gorillas are essentially murdered for food. Political party members of the Central African Republic and of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and already been caught over 10 times contributing to poaching of chimps, gorillas, and elephants. People who think humans are born “moral” are biased by religious influences. People are born “programmable;” meaning our culture and environment contributes enormously to who we are. We might think there are “absolutes,” as in “everyone knows rape is wrong,” and “everyone knows killing a child is wrong.” Nope. There are people and cultures today who rationalize killing of people and living creatures towards their whim.

“Travels with Jane,” Goodall was another favorite chapter. Eugene revisits his time spent with Jane Goodall, witnessing her interactions with gorillas. The weight of evidence and research supports the idea gorillas and chimpanzees are quite capable of thought, language or some form of communication, feelings and emotions, plus tool use. Any person suggesting otherwise is simply delusional. I cannot find the mark I made in my book, perhaps because my book is heavily marked at this point, but an interesting notion was communicated in Linden’s writings.

I can only imagine St. Peter greeting  people at the Gates of Heaven: “You killed all the elephants and gorillas? Dude, God is going to be so pissed-off when he finds out. He told you precisely, “Take care of the Earth!” Show me the place in the Old, New, or the Qur’an where He says, “Grind rhino testicles into a paste and spread on your sandwich for virility?!”

Humans protest vehemently about abortion, infanticide, and go to extreme measures to support the Pro-Life movement. Speciesism, the assignment of different values based on an individuals species (wikipedia), with humans being the ultimate arbiter in deciding behaviors appropriate and inappropriate. Some people believe speciesism is a form of bigotry, as speciesism can easily roll-over into cultural bigotry and prejudice. To the point, people will generate legislation to govern pregnancies of humans, yet have no problem killing animals whose intelligence is equal to or greater than any human toddler or preschooler. Elephants, porpoises, whales, chimpanzees, orangutans, gorillas, perhaps even the octopus, have well-documented intelligence. Somehow, people find the protection of non-human lifeforms unimportant, in what I can only assume is some ill-conceived Biblical ideology. I can only imagine St. Peter greeting  people at the Gates of Heaven: “You killed all the elephants and gorillas? Dude, God is going to be so pissed-off when he finds out. He told you precisely, “Take care of the Earth!” Show me the place in the Old, New, or the Qur’an where he says, “Grind rhino testicles into a paste and spread on your sandwich for virility?!””

The Noauabale-Ndoki National Park, Congo.

Don’t get too upset over the latency in Linden’s writing. Eugene’s writing is captivating, his stories interesting, and his message troubling. People seem to reach for the lowest common denominator in his accounts. The reality is, this is not the complete picture of the Human Race, merely one facet. Losing site of the goodness, like the recognition of Jane Goodall by the chimps she studies is easily lost in the stories of misbegotten people, agencies, and politics. Many African countries have thousands of square miles of protected wilderness, though this positive effort also has the effect of concentrating highly prized animals for poachers and providing hiding places for rebel militias. The influence of outsiders provides access to drugs and alcohol; Pygmies who would rather smoke pot than work. Or, corporate investment in exotic places providing extra local income also is responsible for the deforestation of Sumatra and Madagascar, and the overall loss of knowledge contained within ever-shrinking populations of indigenous people around the world.

Other similar books by Eugene Linden include:

Book Review: Knocking on Heaven’s Door, by Lisa Randall

Knocking on Heaven’s Door, by Lisa Randall. Vintage Books. Paperback. © 2012. $20.

The idea behind my book reviews is to focus on the geographical themes present in the books I review. This book experienced quite a journey before I was able to even begin reading.  I ordered the book used from one of the Amazon resellers on December 10th, 2013, planning on some reading over the Christmas break. The book didn’t arrive until January 6th, 2014, so reading over the holidays was no longer an option, and I was pretty hot about not having my book. My emails with the reseller were not helpful, as they had guaranteed delivery by January 3rd, 2014. When the book eventually arrived, I noticed the book had been pulled from a bookstore in Sussex, England, and then shipped via Malmö, Sweden. My book had traveled more in a month to arrive at my house in Kentucky than I have traveled in a decade.

Knocking on Heaven’s Door (KOHD) has been on my to-read list since I first watched Lisa Randall on Book TV (C-SPAN). I’m mesmerized by cosmology, astronomy, and astrophysics. My grandparents took my sister and I to the Hutchinson Planetarium for shows each summer we visited them. Today, the Kansas Cosmosphere and Space Center (link) is a great experience for any person interested in cosmology or astronomy. To my grandmother’s credit, she realized how fascinated I was by the universe, yet did not find her deep-seated religious ideology challenged or impaired by sitting in the planetarium and listening to the programs. If she did, anyway, she did not let her personal difference impair my enjoyment of the planetarium.

When I saw Dr. Randall on Book TV, two thoughts occurred to me, nearly simultaneously: Who is this attractive woman and how does she seem to know so much about cosmology and astrophysics? Knocking on Heaven’s Door is written by a physicists who happens to be a woman. And, an attractive woman. I think this is great. The United States, and the world, needs to see more women and people of color (I do not want to say “minorities,” as globally, the people we think of as minorities tend not to be) in science.

We need to see and hear women being involved in science. The sciences have been dominated by men since the dawn of Time. Simply look at the Nobel Prize winners by gender. Only about 5% of winners IN ALL CATEGORIES COMBINED have been women. When we examine only science, the proportion is even smaller. This is fundamentally ignorant of our society to behave in this way, to exclude women, or, as some currently societies still insist, women are not capable or should not be allowed to have a science education. Or, education, in general. Yes, I am calling out the Taliban and their retarded, misogynistic culture. At least Hamid Karzai had the backbone to veto the recent legislation which would have banned family members from testifying against other family members accused of rape or incest. Seriously – the Taliban and anyone who supports them are morally bankrupt.

At first, I thought the woman speaking was a journalist who had merely shadowed some physicists around for a while and put some interesting thought on paper. My impression changed quickly as she seemed too knowledgeable, too able to shift and adapt and handle the questions from the audience. She was not a journalist writing a book about CERN, but an in-the-trenches, get-your-hands-dirty theoretical physicist equal in caliber to any other physicist/author I’ve read: Brian Greene, Leonard Susskind, Alan Muth, Lawrence Krauss, and Kip Thorne, to name most of my reading list.

A woman and a physicist who knows her stuff and is a great communicator; I must read this book.

Let’s say you’ve read cosmology books, and books by Dr. Greene, Dr. Susskind, and Dr. Krauss, and Dr. Muth; you still need to read Dr. Randall’s book. None of the books – and maybe I should provide a reading list – go into the details of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) as well as Dr. Randall does. No book I have read to date explains the engineering, the planning, the financing, or any of the problems or concerns associated with the LHC as well as Dr. Randall has done in KOHD. But, detailing the history of the LHC is not really Dr. Randall’s purpose with the latest book.

In order to understand where we are in terms of our understanding of the universe today, we have to know something about the Large Hadron Collider. The LHC is the largest measurement device, perhaps the most complicated device, ever devised and built by Mankind. The LHC is the largest device built to measure the smallest of distances, the distances inside an atom. Not just the distances inside an atom, but the distances inside the particles that comprise the protons which comprise the atoms. Electrons are fundamental particles; break an electron down and, well, there is nothing but an electron. Protons are different, as are neutrons.

Physicists have known for a while protons are composed of different stuff, and neutrons, too. Many countries have built accelerators to discover traits associated with these particles. The United States build the first linear accelerator in way back in the 1930′s. The University of California – Berkeley built the first “cyclotron” in 1931. These early particle accelerators were instrumental in discovery the properties of uranium, and led to eventual development of the atomic bomb, atomic energy, and nuclear energy. More accelerators were built, which led to further advances in science, including current medical devices. Anyone who says this technology has “no real world implications” is speaking from a position of ignorance. But, ignorance is not a terminal illness; it can be ameliorated by reading Dr. Randall’s book, at least in part. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (link), in Tennessee, has a few particle accelerators.

The Tevatron, 45 miles west of Chicago, was completed in 1983, and is operated by Fermilab (link).

The United States had a chance in the 1990s to be the home of home of the world’s largest super-conducting super-collider, the Large Hadron Collider. The LHC would have been constructed in Texas and would have made the United States the world leader in particle physics research. Instead, the United States Congress dropped the ball, made the decision high-energy physics was not a priority – dumb, in my opinion – and the European Union then became the global leader in high-energy particle physics research.

CERN (European Center of Nuclear Research; this is the English translation from the original French, which is why the letters of the acronym don’t appear to match), the home of the Large Hadron Collider, is found in both France and Switzerland. Yes, that’s right; the world’s largest measurement device crosses an international political boundary. In the Google image I’ve provide, one might be tempted to think the little concrete circle is the LHC. No, the LHC is huge, and underground, with little above-ground evidence of its dimensions. The circle drive is part of the CERN complex, however; just don’t be misled by the circular appearance. The real LHC is about 17 miles in diameter.

CERN also has a GIS-based facilities management division (link). Some very nice online maps and GIS information is available from the CERN website.

But, why should we still need to read Dr. Randall’s book? None of the books I’ve read so far provide the necessary background to explain why the LHC is important. The CERN/LHC is referenced by all, in comments like, “We hope to learn more about why mass has mass,” and “We really hope to find out if the Higgs Boson exists,” and even “We would really like to know more about the Higgs Energy Field.” None of the books really engages the reader as to how this information will be derived from LHC results. The authors discuss their ideas, insert the ideas in the LHC “black box” and then the LHC “black box” spits out theoretical results. We never get to really see what happens inside the box.

Knocking on Heaven’s Door opens the lid on the LHC and let’s everyone inside. Dr. Randall explains the history of the LHC, the predecessors, why the predecessors are inadequate and why the LHC is necessary. She provides detailed descriptions of the LHC components, why they are important, how sophisticated they are, and the role they play. In other words, KOHD is an anatomy lesson of the LHC. She explains many of the different components and breaks the down for the reader to understand. A really fascinating read.

Knocking on Heaven’s Door is not merely a dissection of the Large Hadron Collider. No; Dr. Randall is simply setting the stage for her later discussions of the particles we know exists and those which she (and others) hope to find, and the roles those particles might play in developing a Grand Unified Theory (GUT) of physics. She does a marvelous job of discussing scale. To a geographer, scale is right in our wheelhouse.

Revell plastic model from my childhood

Revell plastic model from my childhood

In teaching mapping, geographers must cover scale. Scale is the ratio of our model to the real world object our model represents. For instance, as a boy I loved assembling plastic models. I didn’t care for model cars like many of my friends, I assembled battleships, aircraft carriers, and aircraft. See, we assemble models, like the battleship U.S.S. Missouri (1:535 scale) because a single individual cannot build a life-sized version in their bedroom over a weekend. Scale, in my example here, translates like this: “1 inch of our model represents 535 inches on our actual battleship.” Thus, my 20-inch model, when complete, represents the 10,700 inch length (890ft) of our real-life battleship.

Geographers use analysis of scale really to help address two questions: “Where is it?” And, “Why is it there?” These two questions are also framed as problems of “site” and “situation.” In a sense (a reference frame I prefer) cosmology is geography at vast scales, and particle physics is geography at extremely tiny scales. Perhaps you think I exaggerate based on my own professional bias, but I submit National Geographic’s own “The Milky Way Map” as exhibit A. If the Milky Way Map is not evidence enough, then I submit the 2MASS Redshift Survey (below). The description of the project alone is enough to support my contention: “to map the distribution of galaxies and dark matter in the local universe.”

2MASS Redshift Survey

In particle physics, physicists do not stop at the atomic level, with protons, neutrons, and electrons. There are particles smaller than a proton and a neutron. Some of these particles, like quarks (and their various flavors) have well-established properties. Other particles are mysterious, like gluinos. Particle physics researchers examine very high energies and very small scales, like 10-27 or so. The mapped universe exists at a scale of 1026 or so. By the way, you are 101, if you were wondering.

Where are we? Cosmologists, astronomers, astrophysicists, and others examine our place in the universe. Scientists chase that question; where are we in our solar system? Where are we in March versus May? Where are we in relation to the Sun, or Mars, or Halley’s Comet? To understand our place in our solar system we have to understand the underlying geography simply to put the Mars Curiosity Rover on its eponymous planet.

Why are we here? Honestly, no one may ever be able to answer this question, not completely. Not without delving into the realms of metaphysics, philosophy, and religion, and those offer no solutions, either, not without resorting to accepting faith as the bottom-line solution. Not to say we can’t answer some components of the question, however. Where did our (our any) mass come from? Where did the elements of our planet originate? Why is 93 million miles from the Sun optimum? If we circled a different class of star, at what distance could the Earth still revolve the Sun and still support life? Why do some places of the universe feature galactic clusters and others don’t? You get the idea.

By reframing cosmology as a field of geographical research, I feel much more connected to a science which could seem (and in some ways still is, sadly) very esoteric and unapproachable.

And, more importantly, no one knows why objects have mass.

Some people might say, “Well, why does this matter? Stuff has mass, we aren’t prevented from doing things because we can use Standard Model Physics to understand mass. Who cares.”

Dr. Randall does address these questions in later chapters, though not specifically these questions. These questions are mine, which I pose to highlight her prose.

“Science epitomizes the extra richness  that can enhance creative endeavors that take place in constrained settings … math and technology were themselves discovered and formulated by people who were thinking creatively about how to synthesize ideas – and by those who accidentally came upon an interesting results and had the creative alertness to recognize its value.

Medical technology has been a direct beneficiary of particle physics research. If you, or anyone you know, has had an MRI, then you (or your friend) has directly experienced the technology derived from particle physics research.

If you have used the Internet and exchanged files with family or friends, then you have been the beneficiary of particle physics research. Particle physics research was fundamental in atomic and nuclear research, which a few governments fund via Departments of Defense. DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, helped create the initial Internet backbone in order to support the communication of data resulting from particle physics research. No one can argue today that government and academic efforts have had little to no impact on the economic viability of the United States, or any other highly developed country, for that matter. Any politician or businessperson who claims the U.S. government or higher education do not create sustainable economic efforts – only “the free market and the free enterprise system can create jobs and innovate” – are simply ignorant.

Yes, the very same Internet used to watch Grumpy Cat videos and stream House of Cards today, was built specifically for the communication of data associated with high energy physics.

Everyone should care about the LHS because of what the human race has the potential to learn from any and all discoveries directly or indirectly related to the LHC. Everyone should care about the LHC, not simply because of the unfortunately nicknamed “God particle,” the Higgs Boson, but because of the ramifications of the discovery of the fundamental particles of our lives and how the knowledge of our environment, our planet, our energies, our place in space, will transform as a direct result of our pursuit of the fundamental basis of who we are.

KOHD is a well-planned and logically organized science book. Dr. Randall opens with numerous essays detailing the importance of being inquisitive, of questioning our knowledge, and the unfortunate complacence of some religious people who rely merely on faith or the unseen actions of Providence as a sufficient substitute for science. Evidently, the same science which powers our smartphones is not suitable for exploring the universe nor our own genome.

Initial chapters provide a history of former particle science research. Some particle accelerators are linear, while others are circular. Linear particle accelerators are good for some research but cannot reach energies in the realm of those energies present when our universe was less than 400,000 years old or so. CERN, when fully operational, will bring research into that domain. Really fascinating details she provides, the scale of the magnets necessary, getting equipment aligned, budget problems – the minutiae of Mankind’s greatest machine.

Middle chapters are heavy on particle physics. No math is involved, but the mathematical relationships between mass, energy, and charge are fairly robust. Chapter 14 covers the details of real particles, virtual particles, and particles which may or may not exist. Honestly, I wish I could converse in this topic better. Of all the topics of quantum mechanics and phyics, the nature of decay, energy, spin, charge, and the technicolor nature of quarks bogs my brain. I have some books on the way to help improve my knowledge. At some point, I may have to dip into some math.

The last few chapters bring together CERN experiments, like ATLAS, our knowledge of particles, and speculates on the near and distal future of physics. Finally, Dr. Randall brings us back to the underlying necessity for being open to ideas. She implores us not to shun other disciplines but encourage cooperation and dialogue. Not only might we learn something, but we also need to foster and mentor those will will rise to assume our leadership roles in science.

Every book you’ll see on the shelf these days about physics and science are predominantly written by males. All of my physics books have male authors. I see this as a problem. Dr. Randall isn’t male. If you were to  open her book to any random page, the gender of the author would never be apparent. The book stands on its own merits.  Whether Dr. Randall welcomes this or not, she is a science role model for all people, and especially any young woman contemplating a degree in science. Read this book, and then give the book to your daughter, or niece, and then be open to discussing the topics and themes in the book. Then, go the next step and support and encourage her in her efforts, and discourage any males who might suggest females can’t do hard science.

Finally, there are numerous female scientists active on Twitter, who provide excellent commentaries and information pertaining to their respective disciplines. Please follow them. PAX

@elakdawalla @lirarandall @starstryder @AstroKatie @upulie @Nebula63 @DNLee5 @etreas @taphovenatrix @JenEDavison @janerrigby @drkiki @DrBondar @DrAliceRoberts @ifmoonwascookie @DrEmmaLJohnston @Doctor_Astro @cyberlyra @NoisyAstronomer @CatherineQ @PlanetDr

I provide Twitter accounts only as a service to help readers find good Twitter accounts to follow. The presence of this Twitter account list on my blog in no way indicates the support or endorsement by the account holders of me, my words, or my blog. I will remove in account name upon request, or add accounts by request. All errors are mine.

Here’s Your Box: The Dismal Nature of Higher Education

How often have we begged, pleaded, or cajoled our students, “You have to think OUTSIDE the BOX!”

I know I have. But, a couple of years ago, I got tired of using this aphorism (link: “Destroy the Box”). More contemplation led me to believe this is really a weak proposition. Last week, I came to the conclusion I was correct, and The System is not helping, not really evening paying attention to endemic and entrenched inefficiencies which continue to impose “In the Box” thinking upon our student populations. I have two somewhat related examples to support my contention.

A week ago, I gathered some interested faculty and staff at a local cafe and deli. I invited 16 folks from across campus to meet and discuss the interest in developing some MakerLab-type sites on campus. Eight were in attendance, and others gave their RSVP. I knew from many conversations over the last two years several faculty were doing things with RaspberryPi and Arduino, were building little educational robots, programming them to carry out simply tasks, engaging some students, writing mobile apps for Android and iOS, and such. I recognized there was a lack of communication on campus about these projects, that some of the faculty I spoke with had no idea what was going on outside their college, unless they actively went out and explored. A few did, actually, and had initiated some relationships, but there was no real concerted effort to discover what was going on across campus in terms of STEM-based projects, research or activities.

Knowing STEM is a “hot” topic now, and education is trying to push STEM education into the student populations, to entice females and minorities into STEM fields, I elected to try to improve the communication of STEM activities on my campus. Personally, I feel compelled to help people make a better life for themselves, their families, with the idea this will improve our neighborhoods, personal relationships, race relationships, and create a better and more educated electorate, resulting in better state and national leadership. Yep, I’m both idealistic and naive. I’ve heard that my entire life. And?

(Source: ShapingYouth.org)

(Source: ShapingYouth.org)

OK, I’m working from another idealistic philosophy students need exposure to a wide variety of topics, information, field, disciplines, and experiences. Furthermore, I don’t think they should have to wait until after graduation to begin gaining a diverse experience. Students will be much more valuable and employable by gaining early exposure to working with wildlife biologists, chemists, physicists, computer programmers, designers, graphic artists, engineers, and geographers.

To be able to gain this experience, students need to be put in contact with experience people in representing these fields and disciplines.

But, here is how Higher Education works. A person applies to college, is accepted, is enrolled, registers for classes. Then, after a year or two, the student has to “pick a major and minor, or area of study.” I pointed this out at our deli meeting. “Universities want to push this notion of developing critical thinkers; then we tell students to “pick your box,” and then they live in that box the rest of their college career, unless they double-major, or change major a lot.” This elicited a few chuckles.

Here’s your box.

Colleges and universities require students to pick a major and minor, or area of study, at a certain point in order to graduate. So, let’s think about this:

After a semester, or two, (or, in my case, five) a student has to make a plan, pick a field or discipline, and officially declare, “Hear ye! Hear ye! This is my chosen box!” The student holds the box high and the audience nods wisely, and we move on. Next month, the student changes her major and who cares?

The current protocol of Higher Education is at odds with itself. On the one hand, we want students, i.e. people, to develop awesome critical thinking skills by exposing them to a variety of stuff. Then, we force them to “please check the box of your intended box, er.. major.”

Then, we get them in the classroom and chastise them for not thinking “outside the box.” I think we need to destroy the idea of “the box.”

Maybe we need to tell them to “take a hike on the Trail of Ideas,” or “jump into the Pool of Serendipity,” or something. I’m not sure.

On to my second example.

Recently, a colleague of mine forwarded to me a NSF “Dear Colleague Letter.” I’m honestly not familiar with these, had never heard of a “Dear Colleague Letter” prior to the one which appeared in my email inbox. Don’t be surprised; I’m not in a lot of loops.

This “Dear Colleague Letter” (DLC) was especially of interest to my colleague and I. We had just pulled together a meeting of interested folks from across campus to discuss improving communication, developing stronger relationships, all with the underlying premise to enhance student experience in cool STEM-related work and fast-growing 21st century technologies. This NSF letter directly reflected our desires.

The purpose of the letter was to invite interested people to apply for the opportunity to travel to a week-long meeting, “aimed at incubating innovative approaches for advancing undergraduate STEM education in three disciplines (biology, engineering, and the geosciences)” and “bring together relevant disciplinary and education research expertise to produce research agendas that address discipline-specific workforce development needs.”

(Source: Ed.gov)

(Source: Ed.gov)

Part of me is confounded by the limited scope of disciplines, biology, engineering, and geosciences. Being in geosciences myself, I do feel somewhat prideful my discipline (though I really have allegiance to geography) was identified as a focus discipline. My experience in sciences makes me suspicious by the exclusion of other disciplines and the corresponding experiences those disciplines offer. I wonder if anthropology is included in geosciences, for example. Or, archaeology. Some colleges include each in Humanities or Social Sciences. My university, fortunately and rightly so, I think, houses these disciplines in the College of Science. Part of me responds, “Well, this is just more box-think, with the goal of identifying more boxes, and resulting in a different set of boxes becoming available to students. The end result hasn’t changed: “Please choose your box. Please step to the end of the table and collect your box. Here’s your box.”

That is the nihilist, fatalist, pessimistic me, thinking. When I realize I am being that way, I have to counter with a more rational thinking. And, there is possibility I am wrong.

“While it would be beneficial for applicants to have some prior knowledge of the challenges associated with undergraduate STEM education and workforce development for biology, engineering, or the geosciences, it is more important that applicants demonstrate an enthusiasm for cross-disciplinary research, as the future of this research area will require input from many disciplines.

The phrase, “more important that applicants demonstrate an enthusiasm for cross-disciplinary research,” I do find somewhat soothing, tempering my frustration some. Perhaps, we really are moving to a new paradigm of pedagogy (oh, shit, did I really use those two words in the same sentence?!?), of realizing the analysis and interpretation of our Earth’s issues cannot fall completely within the domain of any single discipline.

Or, no; that isn’t it, I don’t think. Let me rephrase.

“…of realizing the methods, analysis, and interpretation used to frame our Earth’s concerns must be addressed by people whose experience has been drawn from the domains of different disciplines.”

Meh. I’m honestly not sure that is any better, and I’m fairly convinced only a few people could ever achieve such experience, anyway. What makes me think this? We would have to “destroy the box” which our educational culture adores, first of all. We would have to rethink how our system of majors and minors work. Currently, partially because of budget cuts and people whining about how long Higher Education takes, how expensive an education is, and so on, colleges and universities across the United States are reducing the number of hours required for graduation. Brilliant. Education and economic growth pundits promote “critical thinking” and preparing young adults for critical economies of the 21st century. Meanwhile, the same groups (maybe not the same people) reduce the requirements for graduation. Eventually, a university education will require only slightly more time than a degree from a community college as the demands of a university education collapse toward the middle. The other end is a high school diploma.

I’m not sure how we (a) create a multidisciplinary experience for students, and (b) reduce the number of hours required for graduation, hoping to (c) develop critical thinkers, while (d) still insisting student choose a box, and expect (e) a technologically adept 21st century workforce, especially since (f) Ken Ham (CEO of the Kentucky Creation Museum) insists more Creationists need to be teaching the youth of today the insane notion the Earth is no more than 6,000 years old, plus some change, and if no one was around to witness something, then there is no way it could have happened.

I don’t have any solutions, no answers. I have questions and concerns, and some motivation to see what solutions might be appropriate at my scale. I do enjoy engaging with like-minded people to challenge my biases, and to challenge biases when confronted by them. I become completely baffled when I encounter circumstances which do not make sense to me, though. I discovered today students at my uni cannot use their student ID card to purchase items at the bookstore. A completely separate bookstore card is required for that. The bookstore, at some point in the past, opted to install a POS (“point of sale,” not “piece of shit”) completely incompatible with the POS system used by every other place on campus. Bonkers, if you ask me. Utterly bonkers.

Perhaps “dismal” is too pessimistic to use in my title. Corporations have to shake themselves up once in while to make sure they stay innovative, productive, to stay exciting, fresh and new. Corporations are responsible, at least in part, for driving economic progress and cultivating economic well-being, for themselves, and by association, the well-being of their stockholders and employees. To not shake up corporate structures, to not innovate, research, and design, essentially leads to stagnation and eventual corporate death.

Universities, on the other hand, with some exceptions, have been living by the same rules, the same governing structures and protocols for at least a century. Corporate-think is creeping into university administrations, slinking into oversight boards. I’m not sure how I think about that.

(Source: unknown)

(Source: unknown)

In some regards, corporate attitudes might do universities some good. Universities need to examine budgets, return on investments, they need to develop relationships with potential students, maintain relationships with current and former students, and garner support among the community. Like corporations, universities need to consider employees, working environments, and foster good working conditions. Universities need to provide opportunities for both individual and groups to excel, to augment skills, and to explore and support innovative ventures. Universities need to examine complementary activities, the real corporations and businesses which hire their graduates. Universities also need to scrutinize and learn from their competition, the local community colleges and regional universities. From the bottom-up to the top-down, universities need to constantly self-evaluate to ensure both administrative and academic efforts are effective and efficient.

We may be approaching an age when we really need to contemplate fundamental changes to The Box Engine, our public university system. The United States has produced hundreds of thousands of educated people, smart, productive, and energetic, and then shoved them back to their country of residence (much to the delight of some). As this strategy continues, one outcome is almost certain.

Somebody will build a better Box Engine and it won’t be the United States.

Thanks for reading.


Climate Change Duh-niers

OK, a play on words, I couldn’t resist. My apologies.

The recent spate of winter weather, especially in the American South, might lead many to doubt scientists claims of climate change. Even many of those who support climate change science but lack the technical expertise and who rely on true experts may find themselves doubting. To those folks, I say, “You are fine. These “Polar Vortices” the media are making famous may seem inconsistent with climate science, but, never fear, they are totally congruent with climate change science.”

But, me telling you “supporting climate change is fine” needs some supporting evidence from me. Saying, “Never fear” is not enough, in my book, to help educate the, …uhm, “under-scienced.” I include myself in the under-scienced, as I personally don’t feel I know enough, and as a statement of fact, I don’t know enough. In spite of my lack of knowledge, I do know some things. Like, some climate change deniers need to be brought back to Earth in their denial of climate science, though.

First, we cannot forget climate change is really “global climate change,” making deniers, “global climate change deniers.” The other term, “global warming” is not synonymous with “global climate change.” The descriptions are not equivalent. The preferred term is “global climate change.”

Another failure of denier logic is attributing global effects to local areas. I should have saved the tweet which provided the impetus for this post. The tweeter said something to the effect, “It’s snowing in Atlanta! See, global warming is a leftist myth!” Instead, I’ll have to offer some surrogates:

Left lying about climate change to consolidate power like they r lying about MASS CARE so u’ll accept #obamacare!

It’s cute watching leftists who believe in “Climate Change” (based on a couple hundred years of data) mock the #creationdebate.

I’m not going to pick these apart; that is not my goal. These tweets are merely representative of some wrong-headed thinking. Having said that, let me take issue with a couple statements.

Politics can lie, for sure. Science, good science, real science, is not about lying. Science is about presenting evidence, data, and research which can be consistently reproduced. Reproducing experiments is, in fact, encouraged. Facts, by definition, cannot lie, nor are they opinions. People can, and do, lie. The underlying science does not lie. Opponents of global climate change might as well claim, “the value of Pi is a lie,” or, “the speed of light is a lie,” or “gravity is a lie.”

As for climate data, accurate historical climate records can be extracted in a variety of ways going back thousands of years, hundreds of thousands of years, even millions of years – not “a couple years.” The science of dendrochronology incorporates climate in dating tree species. Dendrochronology can give us accurate records going back almost 11,000 years. A friend of mine is a dendrochronologist. Please tell her to her face she can’t determine  climate from her trees. I dare you.

(Source: ISGS)

(Source: ISGS)

We can also tease climate details from pollen in buried soil samples. Look around your environment. Now, imagine your environment 8,000 years ago. Think it was same as today? Maybe. It is possible. Though, if you are a current resident of Sahara, 8,000 years ago would have seemed like a paradise compared to the desert we see today. We know from radar imaging, satellite imaging, and boots-on-the-ground research the Sahara of today was a grassland/savanna several thousand years ago, with several large lakes. We can examine lake sediments. We can examine sea floor sediments. We can examine the stratified layers of Greenland and Antarctic ice sheets. These data sources will take us back hundreds of thousands of years. Ignore Ken Ham. He has no idea what he is talking about. In 2007, a Pennsylvania age Mire Forest was discovered in a coal seam in southern Illinois (SMNH/ISGS). Dated to 300 million years ago, we can see for ourselves how the climate must have been, given vegetation as evidence.

Even climate change advocates miss the bus, though, unfortunately. We cannot argue a snow storm in Atlanta is “evidence of climate change” any more than deniers can state “climate change is based on a couple hundred years of evidence.” Neither is correct.

Climate is the long-term, typically 30 years or longer, cumulative evidence of atmospheric phenomenon. “Phenomena” means statistics, and may be distilled down to two basic attributes, temperature and precipitation. Climatologist examine yearly average temperatures and precipitation types and amounts. A single snow storm event in Atlanta, Georgia is evidence of nothing. Even two or three events is possibly meaningless. This would be like me proclaiming, “Wow, the United States must be doing a great job educating students!” based on using 2 or 3 SAT scores acquired from a few people who took the SAT one Saturday morning.

The snows in Atlanta 2014 can become a talking point for global climate change, though, and lead to some real scientific explanations.

  • What conditions might lead to a consistent, yearly winter snowfall in the American South?

The explanation is actually fairly straight-forward. The ability of a cold air mass to maintain water vapor is pretty low. Why? The answer lies in heat. What is heat but energy of molecular motion, right? Less motion implies less heat, and objects with a low molecular energy feel cooler or cold to us. Cold air contains air molecules with low energy and air molecules are more likely to form bonds with other slow (cooler) air molecules. Warmer air contains air molecules with higher energy, the higher energy makes forming bonds between water molecules challenging and water is more likely to exist as water vapor. Think of kids on a playground playing tag. Think of the “tag” as forming a bond. Faster kids are harder to tag (bond to) than slower kids.

To us, the difference of a few degrees might not seem like much, 20°F or 27°F is still pretty freaking cold. But, +7F° means more energy, and more energy means the potential for more water vapor is greater. Perhaps, our air temperature is 37°F; even more potential for more water vapor. Still seems cold to us, but the potential difference in water vapor available for condensation is huge.

Now, as long as air temperatures in the atmosphere remain fairly stable, we have nothing to worry about. No one would know about the water vapor composition of the atmosphere around Atlanta except for a few meteorologists and climatologists. Unless, of course, the circulation of global air masses result in a cold, dense air mass intruding into the lighter, moister air mass around Atlanta.

Energy (heat) always move from most the most energetic source to the lesser energetic substance. In the case above, heat is exchanged between the warmer air mass and the cold air mass. The water vapor molecules, once flying around in the warm air,  give up their energy to the colder air molecules and become more susceptible to becoming bound to other molecules and condensing. And, they will condense, fast and furious, especially if the temperature gradient is large (the difference in temperature between the two air masses). The greater the gradient, the faster the condensation will occur. The January 2014 Polar Vortex represented a very large difference in temperature characteristics compared to the warmer, more moist air from the Gulf of Mexico.

I don’t recommend trying the following, but you can. Boil some water. When the water is at very low boil, just when the water at the bottom of pan begins to vaporize and very small bubbles form, you can still safely dip a finger in the water at the surface. Not too long, and it may be uncomfortable, but it can be done. The water in the pan is not a uniform temperature. As the water in the pan heats, the very warm water at the bottom will circulate to the top. The water molecules are less densely packed because they are closer to the heat source, and enervated with this new energy, and try to find new and open territory, like people who begin shoving in a crowd of people. Sort of like what happens when your dog gets out. Inside the house, the dog sort of walks around at a low energy state. But, open the door (our “heat”) and she runs out and flies around the neighborhood.  Back to my example: the water is not only  rising under its own, enhanced with this new energy state, but also the water is being displaced, pushed up by cooler water descending from the surface to the bottom of the pan and displacing the warmer water up.

If you’d rather not use your finger, try your spouse’s :-) If that doesn’t work, either, then you could be a little more scientific. Use a meat thermometer. Those usually have a temperature range which more than adequately covers the temperature realm of water. Place the tip of the thermometer about 1/2″ under the surface and take a reading. Probe a little deeper and take another reading. Keeping going until you are just about the bottom of the pan. The gauge will respond immediately to the movement of the probe through the vertical water column. Depending on the size of pan and the amount of water you added for this experiment, you could see 30F° difference between the surface and the bottom.

Our atmosphere is like this, a fluid, heated at the surface and displaced upwards as cooler air above descends and moves under the lighter, less dense air. Add in the Coriolis Effect, local and regional pressure differences, plus surface friction (and a few other contributors), we have weather. Sounds simple – hopefully; but, weather is anything but.

(Source: KDVR/Atlanta)

(Source: KDVR/Atlanta)

And, boom, Atlanta gets some snow.

When global temperatures rise, no, scientists cannot predict the effect of a global effect on a local area, no more than I can predict national SAT scores from a small sample of scores. More accurately, I can predict national SAT scores, I just should not expect a high degree of confidence in my predictions with such a low pool of samples.

Climate science does not use a mere hand-full of data points for performing any modeling. Climate science does not simply use data points collected over a couple years, or even 200 hundred years. Climate science uses a wide variety of data points spanning hundreds of thousands of years from many different sources.

Meteorologists are getting better at forecasting weather as their tools for doing so improve. Satellites, aircraft, drones, radiosondes and rawinsondes, and NEXRAD systems provide amounts of data without equal in human history. Even with our sophisticated instrumentation, scientists cannot precisely predict how air masses will mingle nor accurately forecast the effects the that mingling. Not yet, anyway. But, is that really necessary?

Let’s think about our pot of water. You could dye the water to see how mixing occurs. Or, paying attention to your boiling water next time you make spaghetti. I add a little olive oil to my water. What how the oil and water mix (or don’t). Watch the eddies and currents develop as the addition of heat changes the dynamics of the fluid. Now, let me ask you this: Is it really important to know precisely how each eddy and current affect the entire pot of water? Probably not. What you are concerned with is not the changes in the circulation pattern of your fluid, you simply need the fluid to boil and become hot enough to cook your spaghetti. But, you added heat, and that changed the overall (the mean, average) temperature of the water in the pot. In fact, the mean temperature of the water in the pot increased, more than doubled, likely. As we heated the water, some water heated fast, rose, and the void was replaced by cooler water, cooler water surrounded by water at a higher temp, probably. This is a very dynamic environment, our pot, so noting these changes in temp would take a complex array of sensors in the water.

The pot is our Earth’s atmosphere. As Humankind changes, alters the atmospheric chemistry, adding more gases which encourage heating, or the storage of heat, even small increments in atmospheric temperature will increase two important variables. First, the amount of water vapor which could potentially be available will increase. Second, the amount of evaporation will increase. Added heat will make room in the atmosphere for more water vapor, and also add more water vapor through evaporation. As these air masses with enhanced proportions of water vapor circulate, eventually they will bump against a cold front, resulting in unprecedented rainfall, snowfall, or perhaps unusual amounts of hail.

The bottom line is this: snow in the American South, increased rainfall in some areas, drought in other areas, is completely consistent with what one should anticipate with a changing climate.

The more data collected, the better and more granular data gathered today is and into the future, the better our climatological models will become. The United States could afford to improve the density of atmospheric sensor systems around the world and greatly improve the quality and quantity of atmospheric data. The result would vastly improve the knowledge of our own atmosphere and provide us with enough information to really understand the complexity of our planet’s atmospheric physics and chemistry.

Thanks for reading.


The Upturned Microscope

Musings of a biologian

The Finch and Pea

The Public House for Science...


Sober Science.


FiveThirtyEight, Nate Silver’s newly launched website at ESPN, uses statistical analysis — hard numbers — to tell compelling stories about politics, science, economics, lifestyle, and sports.

Bloggers For Peace

People Engaged Aligned Committed Evolving

The RIEGL USA Newsroom

Your Source for Everything RIEGL


A great WordPress.com site

Constant Geography

To expose the presence of geography in our everyday lives

Small Pond Science

Research in a teaching institution

Renea Mason

Visit http://reneamason.com for the latest info on Renea Mason


peace and conflict analysis


Marilyn Armstrong - Seeking Intelligent Life on Earth

The Blog of Litwits

We read. We blog.

Thailand Footprint: Impressions left by the books, people, places and music of Thailand and South East Asia

Thailand Footprint: People, Things, Literature, Music and Henry Miller too. Forget Yourself Here


A collaborative blog about SF/F fandom: the music, the costumes, but mostly the books.


DIY projects, how-tos, and inspiration from geeks, makers, and hackers


Real science, from real scientists, science communicators, writers, artists, clinicians.


Startup and Technology News


Fun Learning Resouces for Kids


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,177 other followers

%d bloggers like this: