Last night I saw a great show about a 911 conspiracy. There were great arguments to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the government planned the whole thing. All the evidence presented by one side made it crystal clear. As long as there was nobody there to discredit the findings, everyone is happy - right?

This morning I listened to a few people I work with who, unless challenged, can come up with some pretty interesting and profound statements. Kind of like the 911 conspiracy experts, they can justify about any opinion unless challenged by rational thought. Someone else has already probably coined this and own the copyright on it, but my title for these people are "Five Minute Experts".

A five minute expert is a person who really wants to sound smart so they listen to what alot of other really smart people tell them. They soak up really cool sounding facts, figures, catch phrases, buzzwords, in order to prepare. They prepare for the perfect moment when they have a really important group of people at hand ready soak up the really cool and profound knowledge that has been neatly prepared. The most important part of the preparation, however, is the exit plan. A five minute expert is not usually any good at backing up the really cool and profound information they share, so as a way to deal with any skeptics, they find cool and sometimes comical ways to deflect the counterpoints made by anyone who doesn't buy in.

One great way to do this is by using absolutes. Here is an example:

Guy One: "Students need to learn their lesson when it comes to behavior on my class so I kick anyone out who misbehaves."

Guy Two: "Wow. How do you handle that kid who is having a really bad day at home and happened to be in your class when they broke down?"

Guy One: (with some eye shifting and collar tugging) "Are you trying to tell me that every kid who acts like a jerk in my class just happened to walk into my class the very instant that they lost control over a bad family life. Really. Every kid. That doesn't make sense."

Guy One: "No. I am just saying that some kids have issues that might explain their behavior."

Guy Two: "Why do you hate expectations. I believe in America. What's wrong with liking America?"

Guy One: (thought but not spoken) "This guy has never developed a critical thought that didn't involve a professional sports team or an episode of American Idol."

I am not saying that I am the enlightened one. I agree that I have some pretty concrete opinions about life, school, politics, or what not that I won't waver from. A rational person has to concur, however, that to build an opinion, one must understand in one's own mind why such an opinion is made. There is no such thing as a black and white topic so some independent thought is important to decide which side of what arguments you want to be on. If you can't take a position, chew it up, spit it out, and make sense of it - you might be a "Five Minute Expert".

PS- I also hate cats. Challenge me on it and you'll see that at least on this one, I'm an "All Day Long Expert"!

Can you hear the sky is falling? If you listen close enough, you will.

I heard it yesterday as we were told of the latest and greatest new brainfart handed down by the education gods. Here's how it works:

1. A kid gets in trouble in school.

2. Administration hands down a punishment of suspension.

3. The kid goes home and hangs out for a couple of days to cool off and think about their actions.

4. The kid returns. (And is now able to go to their teachers to get all the missing work that they missed while away!)

Be it a test, quiz, project, whatever, the teacher now must allow two days for every day of the suspension for the points to be made up.

Lets play this out through an example or two, shall we?

Example A-

Billy gets into a fight with the local nerd and beats him to a bloody pulp. With no remorse, Billy is sent to the office and a punishment of three days from school is handed down. Upon Billy's return to school, teachers are now required to go back through their files to get Billy caught up. Just say that a major test was scheduled for the time when Billy was away. He now is allowed up to 6 extra days to work on his material to study for the test. Six days longer than those in the class who chose to follow the rules and not be suspended. I feel that there is NO punitive impact for his actions.

Example B -

Carl's dad dies. He is gone from school for three days to deal with family issues. Upon his return, he finds is work to be difficult as he can not focus on his classes. Even though he is suffering greatly, he comes to school with hopes that keeping busy will keep his mind off the stress of his life. He also is given six days to complete his work. Mentally gone but physically there. Seat time equals preparation time so ready or not, he must meet the same guidelines as Billy the Nerd Basher. Carl's crime - not keeping his dad here on Earth.

Both kids are to be treated in the same manner under our vail of equality. Even though I totally understand the the value of equality is an important part of our society's success, I think the value of justice should also be recognized. Maybe I am what people call "Old School", but I consider malicious acts to be grounds for punishment. I have this gut feeling that kids should understand that they are accountable for their actions. If they know that time off for bad behavior will result in loss of grade and they choose to do act inappropriately anyways, then light it up. Dish out the zeros and explain that the actions they chose led to reactions that were clearly explained ahead of time. It seems like a no-brainer .

Let's say Billy gets suspended 6 times in a quarter? Extra days every time. YEP! Luckily, Carl's dad can only die once!