The End Of Failure
When I talk at the school (via my program, WIT: What It Takes, to demystify "making it" for inner-city kids), I tell the kids about embracing failure. (About a number of my failures, specifically.) How sometimes going the wrong way is what it takes to know which way is the right way. How not being too afraid to fail helps you take on tasks that are just a little too big for you, and that's how you maybe rise to the occasion. (Or fall on your ass or your face and get up and try again.)
Michael Goodwin writes in the New York Post that losing the freedom to fail -- which we are -- sounds like a good thing, but it's anything but:
Misguided social perfectionists have given failure a bad rap, and too many of us have bought into their foolish view.The economic meltdown of 2008 and 2009 put on vivid display this clash of old versus new American values. Bankruptcy laws were written for this very kind of moment, but many who bet the farm and lost demanded exemptions as America's addiction to borrowing swiftly morphed into an expectation of bailouts.
Trillions of taxpayer dollars and guarantees were poured into the breach.
Letting someone fail when we have the power to prevent it seems so robber-baron-ish, so social Darwinist, especially when the shock waves could ripple across the country. This Gilded Age comes equipped with safety nets for those in danger of losing their gilt.
Wherever you look, failure is an endangered experience.
The social-promotion movement has turned much of our nation's educational system into a global joke. Instead of demanding that students meet academic requirements that will prepare them for college or the workforce, today's educrats find it easier just to pass little Johnny along, even when he is illiterate. When Johnny gets bigger and still can't read, they pass him along again, sending him out into the world, which usually finds it has no use for him.
All this is done, of course, in the name of compassion. Armies of psychologists and other captains of the self-esteem movement wail that holding Johnny back until he is actually ready for the next grade will destroy his psyche. In the real world, self-esteem comes from mastering new skills and achieving goals. But the anti-failure forces have turned the idea on its head: They think they can give Johnny self-esteem first, and only later ask him to earn it.
This disastrous egalitarianism is now so entrenched that many of Johnny's teachers are themselves products of the same social-promotion disaster. Naturally, flunking bad teachers -- and booting them out of the schools where they don't belong -- runs afoul of ironclad union protections. Better that all students should just be passed along so teachers can keep their jobs.
Maybe that's why one of the classes -- a regular eleventh-grade class, not a learning-disabled class -- was filled with kids reading at the first, second, and third grade levels. They wrote me really sweet letters about what they got out of my talk -- letters that were really sad in how little command of writing, spelling, and grammar that most of them have.
G.M. should have been allowed to fail and somebody should have cared enough to hold these kids back until they learned the stuff of first, second, and third grade.
Perhps if those kids had been held back just one year, they wouldnt have lost out on 5 to 10 yrs worth of education
lujlp at July 7, 2010 3:40 AM
I heard about The Tennessee Value-Added Assessment System (TVAAS) a few months back but hadn't done the research.
Basically an Ag professor came up with a system to measure the students against themselves, and their learning curve for any given year. It also, over time, trends the different teachers and school districts and shows who is effective and isn't.
If they implemented nationwide, you would see the teachers union scream.
Jim P. at July 7, 2010 5:05 AM
That is wonderful that you take the time to meet and teach inner city kids. It's such a broken part of our society that few pay attention to. It seems many want to throw money at the problem hoping it goes away, not spend time trying to make a difference. As you mention, an answer seems to be, stop rewarding failure. it is not fair to those that play by the rules, and not fair to the kid that is unprepared for a demanding world.
This weekend I had a chance to meet a Minneapolis inner city teacher. She is hitched to my cousin. I asked few details of her job, I knew it must be difficult, but in short she was telling me how she enjoys her work, does not feel threatened despite gangs in the area, but overall didn't give a hopeful assessment of inner city schooling.
Early in life, I used to drive to the south side, the ghetto, of Chicago for business. In our company, one early line of products we came out with was for race horses. It didn't do so well though. It was a failure. I'm glad we didn't stop inventing. We had a friend that was in the horse industry, and he asked us to create something that might be of help for horse joints. So we simply would fill bottles with fish oil. The filling machine was in Chicago. The fish oil would be fed to the horses, and reportedly worked well at joint health.
I never enjoyed those trips to the south side. It was like entering a war zone - not that I've been to a real war zone. it was never a good feeling when stopped at a light and someone yelling "honkie, honkie!" pointing at me. When I got to the building, the parking lot was surrounded by barbed wire. The workers would wave at me to run in from the door. To take matters worse, after a long day in the south side, I would be driving home with a van full of fish oil bottles, with some leaking. Nothing, but my cat, would want to be around me for a week after a trip to the south side.
My impressions of the inner city ghetto was how could anyone live in an environment like that.
Horse at July 7, 2010 6:38 AM
My impressions of the inner city ghetto was how could anyone live in an environment like that.
Apparently, the people who live there like it so well, they feel it is a great place to raise kids and therefore have lots of them.
Pirate Jo at July 7, 2010 7:14 AM
"Bankruptcy laws were written for this very kind of moment"
"G.M. should have been allowed to fail"
GM did enter bankruptcy and will suffer the consequences of that action (loss of control because the government now owns GM) for years to come.
What about the banks? They were given hundreds of billions with no strings attached. That's who should have been allowed to go out of business.
AllenS at July 7, 2010 8:05 AM
Perhaps if you respond to some of the letters you can express your condolences and correct the letters with red ink. Perhaps the children will get the message even though the "teachers" (sarcastic quote marks deliberate) are incapable.
Sabba Hillel at July 7, 2010 8:26 AM
Both of my boys are in public schools in what is supposed to be the best school district in our state. Har. The problems you speak of Amy, are all over, even in middle class suburbia. My oldest is in 3rd grade, and I've already encountered teachers who cannot spell, one who had no idea where Scotland was, and administrators who ask us parents to spend $200 each year buying our kids their own pencils, paper, and hand sanitizer because the schools are so strapped. These would be the same administrators that just built themselves a 2 billion (with a B) dollar office complex. Nice.
It isn't just the kids who are socially promoted that end up getting damaged in this process. My kids are both far above grade level for reading. The schools have very limited resources to offer them because they're too busy pouring money into ESL and remedial classes for the 5th and 6th grade kids who should have been held back. I know it may seem petty and elitist, but it's incredibly frustrating to see your child isn't getting the challenge and opportunities to really excel because Johnny over there is too stupid to keep up. Public schools refuse to teach to the advanced, or even the middle - they teach to the bottom either out of sheer laziness or with the knowledge that each special ed kid comes with an additional $10,000 (at least in our state) funding for the school while a gifted child gets them nothing.
Both my husband and I believe strongly in public schools, but we're at the point that we can see it's having a negative impact on our kids' ability to be their best. So next year, we most likely will be eating balogne and sending them to private school.
UW Girl at July 7, 2010 9:01 AM
What about the banks? They were given hundreds of billions with no strings attached. That's who should have been allowed to go out of business.
I just finished reading 'The Big Short' by Michael Lewis, and I couldn't agree with you more.
It was such a fascinating book - the 4th of July weekend was rainy here, so I started reading it, got sucked in, and couldn't put it down. The suspense mounts as Lewis shows the trainwreck unfolding from several points of view. Then, the last three pages, it was like, "And then everyone got a bailout, the end."
The taxpayers and investors both got screwed in grand style, two groups which mostly overlap.
Pirate Jo at July 7, 2010 9:06 AM
An elementary-school teacher was talking about the lack of enthusiasm for education in general at his school and specifically one of his students who technically failed grade 3 (last year) and grade 4 this year because he can’t read at all, nor has he mastered any other primary subject. The student was passed along with the rest of his class since, as he put it, “What good would it do to hold him back?” So I asked him, “What good does passing him do either?”
I told him about you and your experiences with these same sorts of kids, ten years later, who are now about to join a society they are grossly unprepared for because surprise!, they still don’t know how to read or write. I asked him if he realized the lesson he and the school (and society in general) were teaching these students was that the whole idea of “school” didn’t really matter one way or the other. If they were just going to be passed along anyway, why bother doing any work at all?
He didn’t have an answer for that.
In creating the idea of free education for all, we have taken away the appeal and value of an education. When parents treat the schools as day-care, and don’t instill in their children the importance of learning for learning’s sake you end up with children who think of school as a prison/playground. If an education was treated as a privilege rather than an entitlement maybe more people would be invested in the outcome (as University educations used to be). But we’ve come to the point where we see parents treating teachers as customer service people to be bitched out if little Johnny gets detention or fails a test or neglects to hand in an assignment. So again, these kids are learning lessons, just not the ones we’d wish.
K.T. Keene at July 7, 2010 10:27 AM
But if a bank fails, what will it do to it's self-esteeeeeemmmmm?
Pricklypear at July 7, 2010 10:45 AM
The incentives for principals and teachers are to avoid getting yelled at by the parents of this year's students. If they just pass the problem down the road, then by the time the student fails the number of "educators" involved in the failure will be so large that no one of them can be personally blamed.
The worst villains in all of this are the education schools in the universities, which should be providing moral and intellectual leadership but are instead mostly focused on the worst kind of fad-propagation.
david foster at July 7, 2010 11:16 AM
FWIW,
Back in the day ('70s) I always put myself in the advanced classes / tracks because I wanted to learn, liked the challenge, and was a (maybe more than a) bit arrogant. I remember being in 1st Grade and not being promoted to the next Reading level with my little friends. I was PISSED OFF and worked my ass off to ensure I wouldn't suffer that humiliation again.
I stayed in the advanced tracks until my Junior year in HS when I dropped down to the regular level for the non-sciency stuff because I didn't think I could handle a full load of AP classes. It was a bit jarring - the demands in English, Social Studies, etc. were such that I slid through with "A"s. When I saw my old posse in AP Calc and Physics, they asked me why I defected and I told 'em. I don't remember whether they thought I was clever or stupid. In retrospect, I should have challenged myself, but I was emotionally unfit to do it then.
I hope there's a lesson here somewhere.
DaveG at July 7, 2010 11:17 AM
UW Girlcheck out http://www.k12.com/
My mother was looking into it for my litle brother.
K.T. I agre that parents ususally refue to admit their kids could ever do anything wrong.
But as a small anecdote my little brothers freshman scince teacher handed out a list of class rules. Rule 1. If durring a lesson you have a question ask a student next to you before asking the teacher. Rule 2. No talking to other students durring class.
Another ime he was taking a medication the major side effect of which was diarreha. He asked for permision three times to use the rest room - the teacher refused, so he got up and went to the bathroom anyway, when he came back the teacher kicked him out and old him to ait by the door. While waiting in the hallway a different teacher cited him for not having a hall pass and sent him to the princables office.
My mother recived a call saying he was to be suspended, when she got to the school she was given these reasons.
First teachers complaint
1. Disrupting class by asking to use bathroom second time
2. Disrupting class by asking to use bahrom thrid time
3. Disrupting class by leaving for bathroom
4. Disobeying teacher by leaving for bathroom
5. Taking back to teacher for answering when asked where he was going
6. Being in hall without a pass
7. Disrupting clas by returning from bathrom
8. Talking back to teacher for asking "Why?" when told to wait outside class
9. Leaving spot in the hall he was told to wait in without permission
Second Teacher
1. Being in hall without a pass
2. Talking back to teacher who told him to report to the office.
2 being oin hall without autherazation - 1 being a emergency and one being on order from a teacher
2 ignoring a teachers instructions - 1 being an emergency and one being ollowing the insructions of another teacher
3 talking back to a teacher - 1 for answering a question, one for asking a question, ad one for tying to explain the sitution to someone who never should have asked for an explination if they didnt want to hear it
4 disruptions of class -all four blown out of proportion by a teacher pised off a student dared to act without his expressed blesing
The princable pushing the expulstion had no idea of the situation only the list of infractions by two teachers.
My brother was smart enough to refuse to say anyhing until my mother showed up, and after she was finished verbally castrating everyone involved the prinacble ofeder to let my brother off with a warning and 5 after school detentions beacuse "Disobeying a teache is inecusable no matter the circumstances"
My mother agreed and then turned to my brother and said the next time a teacher refuses to let you use the bathroom due to a medical condition justcrap your pants and then we'll sue everyone.
At that point the princaple decided that my brother hadnt really done anything wrong and said to forget the whole thing
Given the zero tolerance mentailty in schols these days I cant help but wonder how many parents are defending scociopaths and how many are defending their kids caught in the tap of brianless bueracracy
lujlp at July 7, 2010 11:46 AM
DaveG, your experience sounds like mine. I got behind in math at the level of Algebra II because I was being bullied in that class and so I stopped going. I started taking easy classes too, because my GPA seemed more important than which classes I actually took.
I wasn't intended to go to college. I was supposed to "preach the kingdom ministry full-time!" (Google Jehovah's Witnesses and higher education if you are interested.) When I did go to college, I picked a dull major that I thought would help me get a job and was a C student. I was really too immature to even be there.
Later, when I saw all the cool careers in computer science and engineering, it was disheartening to see how many years of math it would take me to catch up. I had absolutely no appreciation for this when I was 16.
Pirate Jo at July 7, 2010 12:00 PM
UW Girl, I had the same problem at my second grader's Title 1 school. Too much focus on the problems, not enough on the successes. So I started a book club that meets once a week before school (I'm a single working mom and if I can manage it anyone can). At first only maybe 4 girls signed up but now they're clamoring to get in. Come fall, I'll have a second group for boys, since no father volunteered as I had hoped and my knowledge of little boy literature is limited. But just watching the kids learn to think for themselves and then express their interpretations to the class has been more reward than I ever expected.
elementary at July 7, 2010 12:57 PM
It's not just the hand-holdy governmental policies that endanger the lessons learned by failure. Banks won't loan to someone whose business tanks, schools won't admit someone who had a rough time and consequently bad grades, and prospective mates look down on divorcees. We've stopped accepting failure as a natural part of life, and begun punishing people in perpetuity for one mistake. Maybe that's why "a failure" now often designates a person instead of an event.
Josh at July 7, 2010 1:36 PM
Re: David Foster's comment that the really villians are university education programs, I have to agree with you that they are a major player. I chair the Intitutional Review Board at my university that reviews all human subjects research on campus and the lame trendy drivel that comes from teachers getting their EDDs is horrendous. Not only is the research worthless...the applications are not properly filled out, full of spelling errors and incoherent writing. And their university faculty supervisors have to sign off on it before I read it. What a waste of time.
Catherine at July 7, 2010 2:28 PM
It's not just the hand-holdy governmental policies that endanger the lessons learned by failure. Banks won't loan to someone whose business tanks, schools won't admit someone who had a rough time and consequently bad grades, and prospective mates look down on divorcees. We've stopped accepting failure as a natural part of life, and begun punishing people in perpetuity for one mistake. Maybe that's why "a failure" now often designates a person instead of an event.
Posted by: Josh at July 7, 2010 1:36 PM
Well said. That would also explain why so many modern parents, especially mothers, act as though it's a lie or a personal attack when some adult comes to them complaining of something terrible their kid has done. I.e., "good parents never have bad children"!
Re the business of trying to challenge oneself in school: In the biography "Cheaper By the Dozen," Dad insisted on his kids working hard AND skipping grades whenever possible. IIRC, this was because he expected to die young and he wanted to see as many of his kids as possible graduate before then.
Why not make that a modern tradition? BUT, the modern reason for this would be to let one's kids know that dumbing-down the learning process is not acceptable in the family, even if it is in the school. Also, it would help kids avoid the
over-confidence and swelled head that one gets from always being the brightest kid in class. (This worked - and didn't work - for Charles
Schulz. That is, he skipped a grade, but he suffered terrible feelings of inadequacy as a result of always being the youngest in the class,
which, of course, became fodder for "Peanuts" later on.)
Also, from Dr. John Rosemond (I'm not fond of his religious tendencies, but otherwise, he makes plenty of sense):
Some well-meaning folks suggest that there are two types of high self-esteem: a "false" self-esteem that is a function of people patting you on the back and telling you how wonderful you are, and a "genuine" self-esteem that is the result of significant accomplishment. In the words of a colleague and good friend, "Genuine self-esteem comes from achievement, such as studying hard and making good grades, or practicing hard and excelling in a sport."
So where, I ask, does that leave the child who studies hard and still makes no better than C's? Or the child who is a klutz? Or the disabled child who has neither the mental nor physical ability to succeed at doing much more than everyday self-help tasks? No, accomplishment-based self-esteem is no better than affirmation-based self-esteem. The former is highly prejudicial, the latter is sinful-a form of self-idolatry. And make no mistake about, if you have high regard for yourself because of your accomplishments, then you are likely to have less than high regard for those who's accomplishments are not as "worthy" as your own. In which case we are again talking about self-idolatry......
......"So, John," the impatient reader asks. "Answer the question: (If 'self esteem' is bad) What's good?"
What's good is self-respect. Because it is not a function of significant accomplishment, anyone can acquire self-respect, even the C-student, the klutz, and the disabled child. Self-respect, furthermore, is not idolatrous. It is acquired not because parents praise you (although they should-conservatively), but because they love you unconditionally (as does the Lord), hold you completely responsible for your behavior (but forgive you your sinfulness), and insist that you obey (respect their authority) and mind your manners at all times (show respect for others). It is, in fact, axiomatic that self-respect cannot exist without respect for others......
........Are self-confidence and self-respect interchangeable terms? Again, no. Self-confidence is specific to certain situations. For example, I feel very confident speaking to large groups of people, but I feel a distinct loss of confidence when I'm in deep water with sharks (I know, because I've been there, done that!). In fact, having confidence in a situation where you should not, where you should be on guard and charged with adrenaline, is foolhardy. But where self-confidence has, and should have, its ups and downs, self-respect is a constant.
The self-respecting person, rather than being "high" on him/herself, is modest, humble, even self-effacing at times-to again cite the apostle, a person of "sober judgment."
(end)
lenona at July 7, 2010 2:33 PM
www.k12.com if fucking university of phoenix for pre college people. Waste of fucking time no decent university takes that seriously. To all those bitching about the horror of public school. Well yes dead on, and to all those parents out there, it's your fault. If the kids has special medical conditions then he should be separated.
Yeah teachers need to be held accountable for the situation. However because we are fucking sensitive to everyone needs they can't. The other reason teachers suck is that with few exceptions if you have ANY other skill you do that.
A free education is a right a good one is a privilege. As elementary pointed out when the parents get their shit together and try it works out. When it's treated as daycare not shit no one learns anything.
lujlp: For all your bitching an moaning about government freebies your scenes of entitlement on this incident is hypocrisy at it's finest. It's not the teachers fault that he's on meds and sure as shit not her responsibility. That would fall to your parents. He shits his pants you sue the school and I have to pay more fucking taxes in addition to saving for private school. Out fucking standing, if you are so against government freebies then don't fucking take them otherwise don't bitch.
vlad at July 7, 2010 2:34 PM
Well said Lenona.
K.T. Keene at July 7, 2010 4:05 PM
"...it may seem petty and elitist, but it's incredibly frustrating to see your child isn't getting the challenge and opportunities to really excel because Johnny over there is too stupid to keep up"
It's not petty at all. The average and below-average kids need education and training to hold down useful, productive jobs. This is important - these people keep today's society running.
The above-average kids are the ones who will be engineers, scientists, doctors, etc. Their education is more important and deserves more resources - not less - than the education of the other children. These kides are decisive for what tomorrow's society will be like.
Of course, this is not PC. Besides, we all live in Lake Wobegon, where everyone is above average.
bradley13 at July 7, 2010 11:45 PM
Really vlad, hypocracy?
My brother is supposed to miss 5 weeks of school due to a prescribed medication on the off chance one of his teachers is an overbearing jerk?
Or take a suspension for running to the bathroom to avoid shitting his pants?
Fuck you.
lujlp at July 8, 2010 3:12 AM
Government education is designed to produce obedient subjects, not educated citizens.
The lesson to be learned is that one must follow the rules. The ability to read could lead to trouble, so it need not be emphasized. Whatever you do, don't teach them to think for themselves.
MarkD at July 8, 2010 6:51 AM
Thanks, Bradley13. Nice to know that I'm not the only one who feels this way.
My husband and I spend a lot of time with our kids individually doing extra reading, math, and science work. We are also big museum people. Quite frankly, I do think we do as much at home as we reasonably can.
What frosts me is that my state gives "special needs" kids an extra $10,000 funding to give them more help. These kids are also entitled to special bus service, and many other extras. In the state of California, a kid that has been labeled special needs can even request to have a "personal assistant" to follow them around all day. My friend's younger brother got his teaching certification and did this last year. He got paid $45,000 by the state of California to take care of one 13 year old, who was high functioning autistic.
Meanwhile, the state is telling people like me that they don't have any funds for gifted programs, or advanced placement classes and that it's all my responsibility to make up for what they lack. Fine. I'm all for responsibility and in my house, we walk the walk. But if we continue to dump all the "extras" on only the one side of the bell curve, no one should act suprised when 95% of the physics majors at schools like UCLA are from China and Korea.
UW Girl at July 8, 2010 6:54 AM
UW Girl, I see this pattern repeated so many times, in so many areas. If you are responsible and only have as many kids as you can take care of, and then do an attentive job of raising those kids, well then you aren't one of the needy. You are on your own. If you are broke and dysfunctional but still churn out three or four kids you have no time or money for, then you dump them on the school and the taxpayers. It's not the kids' fault, so everyone is uncomfortable with just abandoning them to the negligence of their parents. But what do you do? Take the kids away from their parents? Forcibly sterilize their parents? No, and no. But on the other hand we hate that we keep, in essence, subsidizing (and therefore encouraging) the breeding of irresponsible people.
I believe the answer lies in social shaming. If you lack the resources to raise children in a competent way, your neighbors should shun you and make you an outcast and a pariah. Stop making it cool to pop out kids and then rely upon the state for their care and feeding. This will require a massive overhaul of people's current "politically correct" attitudes. For one, everyone has to stop looking at having kids as something you "just do." It has to be seen as a conscious choice, not a biologically-driven eventuality. Further, it has to be viewed by everyone as a BAD choice in the event that you have kids you can't properly take care of, one that is subject to public ridicule. No screaming about racism or elitism.
Pirate Jo at July 8, 2010 8:11 AM
But what do you do? Take the kids away from their parents? Forcibly sterilize their parents? No, and no
If it were up to me I'd answer both of those questions yes
lujlp at July 8, 2010 12:16 PM
Well, looj, I'd like to at least TRY the shaming idea first.
However, I also think government welfare programs should exist only at the state and local levels - for those states that even WANT government welfare programs, that is. And I see no problem whatsoever with making a welfare check contingent upon permanent birth control and/or sterilization of both parents.
Those who don't like those terms can turn to their friends, neighbors and families for handouts.
Pirate Jo at July 8, 2010 12:33 PM
Pirate Jo we did try shame, and it was considered harmful to self estem so we abandoned it.
Quite frankly if I were in charge of welfare any aplicatns how were pproved would have to move, itno a warehous with at least 10 other famillies.
All item in their posetion that could be sold such as tv's, dvd's, sports equipment, electronics and cars would be sold, the cash going not to the family it belonged to but the welfare fund.
Then each familly memeber whould have to work a set number of hours in the shelter and tryig to find work. As they have already proven poorly at handleing money all their purchases beyond sustanace and low end clothing would have to be approved. Once their account had enough funds for fist/last/deposit they'd be dropped from the system.
They would not recive money to spend on the food they wanted, their share of funds would go to the shelter they are assigned to.
Did you know pizza restuants and liquor stores(providing they sell staple foods) here in AZ accept the welfare debit cards?
lujlp at July 8, 2010 2:26 PM
i think the whole idea of shame is central to Amy's original posting here. Maybe a little shame and embarresement is just what we all need. Maybe some parent out mowing their lawn on a May afternoon needs to be shoved into telling his neighbor that yes, little Jimmy is going to have to repeat the fourth grade because I was a bad daddy and spent far more time chasing down the almightly dollar than finding out if my own son could actually read a sentance.
Shame is not such a bad thing. And personally, I think more of us should be flogged publically for screwing up at home and then expecting the state and Feds to fix it.
UG Girl at July 8, 2010 3:41 PM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2010/07/07/celebrating_bei.html#comment-1730813">comment from UG GirlShame is a hugely useful mechanism that works best within consistent groups where people know each other. As per my theory (per Dunbar's 150) that we're rude because we live in societies too big for our brains, we also live in societies that are too big for shame. We need to bring back shame. I was attacked by "progressives" when I said black leaders like Jesse Jackson need to stigmatize single motherhood in the black community (where 80 percent of children are born out of wedlock), but I do believe that needs to happen. It seems the black family broke down when welfare payments made it possible for a single woman to live and be paid for if she just had a bunch of children. This perpetuates poverty and the worst circumstances for children -- and not just black children, but such a huge number are born to single mothers, vis a vis other communities, this needs to be seen as a huge crisis and addressed. And throwing dollars at single mothers who have multiple children with multiple men and live off welfare is not the answer.
Amy Alkon at July 8, 2010 3:52 PM
Did you know pizza restuants and liquor stores(providing they sell staple foods) here in AZ accept the welfare debit cards?
I don't know about AZ. Today the guy in front at the grocery store had beer and some other things. He paid with a card, then seemed shocked and asked the lady why it said $1.00. She looked at the screen, the something-or-the-other sauce was $1 and that is the only item of these that the program will pay for. He looked annoyed and paid for the rest with cash. I thought good...the program is at least trying to get people to buy reasonable things...not beer. I assume the program was welfare but don't know as neither one said what the program was.
The Former Banker at July 8, 2010 4:20 PM
Later, when I saw all the cool careers in computer science and engineering, it was disheartening to see how many years of math it would take me to catch up.
Pirate Jo,
Very few of the people who I work with (or know) that do programming, or other computer/tech support actually have a comp-sci degree. They may have a degree in something else -- business, accounting, etc. One lady I know that has a comp-sci degree -- from a little liberal arts college -- has not been promoted from her Programming I level position for over 7 years.
Most of us have sat some classes -- either an M$ or similar tech classes (1-2 week concentrates), or a college semester or two that concentrates on an application, operating system, networking or programming language and build from there.
You also have to pay your dues doing crap jobs before moving on. Just saying you want to get into the computer tech area is like saying you want to get into home building. That can range the levels from architect, plumbing, electrical, HVAC, interior design, building, finish carpentry. And then you have subsets in that.
I've been a production DBA for over ten years with a side into programming, networking and server support. I enjoy my job, and my life. I make decent to real nice money. I have as yet to be really grilled over not having a college degree.
As an aside: Amy, you have my e-mail. If PJ, or others, would like some mentoring, guidance, advice, etc. you can pass it on to them.
Jim P. at July 8, 2010 7:21 PM
Jim P., I agree completely. My 4-yr degree is in accounting, but I have focused on financial analysis. I picked up an associates degree in MIS because I wanted to brush up on some technical skills. This required nine classes, two of which were SQL-related, one Microsoft Access, and three entry-level programming classes. None of these qualify me to be a database administrator or programmer, but I at least have some idea of what is going on.
I was hired by a company to be a business analyst. It was a job on a billing team, and because of my financial background, they thought I would be of some help to their customers - the people who used their software. It sounded like a dream job, one that would get me away from the debits and credits, and focus in improving their (the customers') processes and solving problems.
The problem was, they were way, WAY too premature in hiring that type of resource. When they converted their customers to the new product, it was so full of bugs (it had previously resided with a 3rd-party vendor, but was such a mess they took the code in-house), the customers were screaming about their bills not calculating correctly or printing. The conversion schedule ended up two years behind, and the team had a good three years of debugging ahead of them before any clients would want to focus on something like enhancements.
I tried desperately to hang on to my job, because the economy had tanked by then, and unemployment had skyrocketed to 10%. I did some prod support work, involving a lot of fixing messed-up XML files and running SQL statements to fix messed-up database records. I ran daily queries that looked for errors and created/closed a LOT of tickets. I also got stuck with the on-call phone, something that was not supposed to be part of my job when I was hired. I was game to give it a try anyway, but it was horrible - getting a call at 3:00 in the morning because the old COBOL-based system had a failed overnight job, desperately trying to reach team members who had the skills to diagnose the problem, and being unable to do so. I got yelled at big-time. It turned out the database had run out of space - there is no way, with my skills and background, that I would EVER have been able to determine something like that. I was so far in over my head, it wasn't even funny.
I was eventually asked to leave, because my boss wanted to hire a developer, which is really what he needed from the beginning. (All that code debugging.) After two months of not finding a job, because there were none, he really started putting the pressure on me to quit. Assigning me tasks way out of my league that I was doomed to fail, documenting my failures, and clearly trying to set up a case where I could be fired with just cause - inability to do the job. Since it wasn't the job I was hired for, I don't know whether they would have been able to build a case or not. It seems they can always find something if they try hard enough - I have no idea, since I had never been in a situation like that before.
I woke up each morning dreading the day ahead of me - was it my day of the week to get my ass chewed, or would that be tomorrow? My blood pressure skyrocketed, my hair was falling out, and I couldn't sleep more than three hours a night. My boss finally succeeded in bullying me into quitting. I had no hope of getting any severance, and by quitting couldn't get unemployment either. (Which was their plan, obviously.) Three months later I found a temp job, back in my old field of accounting, and I've been there ever since - at half the pay I was making a year ago, and less than I was even making ten years ago. However, it is a good place to work and at least I don't hate life anymore. I still make enough to pay the bills, which is better than a lot of people are doing.
So my foray into IT was a horrible nightmare, and I wish I'd never heard of that place. I guess this topic is about failure, and yes that whole experience certainly felt like an epic fail. Am I glad I at least gave it a try? Well, it's hard to say yes, because with what the economy is doing, my timing couldn't have been worse. Back when I took the job, I had recruiters calling me left and right, and if I could go back in time, I would certainly have done things differently.
My sweety is pursuing a computer science degree and has an internship as a programmer. He tells me I am qualified to do what he does and would have no trouble with it - go figure. Back at my old job, I asked for a workspace to give that debugging stuff a try, and received a firm 'no' in response. I was also forbidden to bother programmers with my questions, because they were an "expensive resource" and I wasn't supposed to waste their time. I am starting to think that maybe accounting and financial analysis don't suck as bad as I previously thought.
Pirate Jo at July 9, 2010 7:45 AM
He tells me I am qualified to do what he does and would have no trouble with it - go figure.
He's probably right. It sounds like you had the wrong company.
Back at my old job, I asked for a workspace to give that debugging stuff a try, and received a firm 'no' in response.
That is definitely when you should have polished up your resume. My last position we had to fight for years for decent test servers and workstations. The CIO would scream at us when an upgrade failed. We kept replying "We're upgrading production systems without testing in our environment." It took three years before he gave us a test environment. After that the number of times we had to back off an upgrade fell to about 3% percent -- and those were usually other causes. Once he realized that the extra $10K was well worth it -- we almost couldn't go straight to production with even minor stuff.
I was also forbidden to bother programmers with my questions, because they were an "expensive resource" and I wasn't supposed to waste their time.
My last position was the Beta for several different vendors. I got to know the support desk tech people that they gave me direct lines to them. They knew when I called, there was an issue.
Now that I'm the SW Vendor support -- In six months the developers know that when I call them -- this is to get that last piece. I've done 90% of the troubleshooting and need a hint. Or that I'm referring an honest bug to them for a fix.
The reason that I'm saying this is not to blow sunshine up your skirt. We need good people that know how to think in the tech fields.
I hate it everyday that I see good, productive, competent techs burn out and leave. The reason is that we are always so short-staffed we can't get a breather.
And having incompetents managing geeks doesn't help. Opinion: The unspoken truth about managing geeks.
That being said -- put on your resume "Reason for quitting: Company changed direction". Put your feelers out. Get involved in sites like experts-exchange.com, www.techguy.org, sqlservercentral.com, tek-tips.com and others depending on which way you are going.
Then build a portfolio of your skills, samples of your jobs and go for it.
One bad experience does not make a career.
I was let go from a job of ten years -- I went job hunting and had a new job in five weeks and a raise.
Jim P. at July 9, 2010 9:52 PM
Thanks for the perspective, Jim P. I'm not interested in finding a full-time position at the moment. Companies are really low-balling people for pay right now, and full-time jobs don't tend to offer much in the way of time off. With the job I'm in right now, I can take off pretty much whenever I want, and can look forward to a little break between jobs when the assignment is over.
The job I described above was the fourth "wrong company" I've worked for in eight years. I've come to the conclusion that I have not done good enough due diligence in choosing which companies to work for. I have taken positions at places where I didn't know anyone, had never worked there before, and relied strictly upon the interviewers and the recruiters to provide information, and quite frankly people don't always know what they're talking about. Twice now I've taken "senior financial analyst" positions that were neither senior-level nor analytical in nature. I'd get in there and it's strictly entry-level accounting, like I was doing when I was 25.
Or imagine how it feels to start a new job, and within two months have everyone you meet express sympathy for you, due to the manager you work for. Turns out they were right - the guy ended up being really mental, and turnover under him was notoriously high. I made it a year and nine months, which was about a year longer than most of his direct reports, but still a short enough time that I look like a job-hopper - like I'm the one with the problem. But I have to be honest and ask myself, if turnover under this particular manager was "notoriously" high, why did I not know this until it was too late, and I had already started working there?
That's the part that's on me. I have decided that I will never again take a full-time position until I've worked at the company as a contractor first. And that probably won't be for at least ten more years, because I have a lot of cycle touring I want to do, and I want to do that now, while I'm in my 40s, instead of waiting until I'm 60 and the discs in my lower back are totally shot. I can take a full-time job and spend more time sitting at a desk later in life.
I kind of wish I had adopted this filtering technique sooner, but being a temp/contractor when you are single and have a mortgage can be tricky. The pay fluctuates anywhere from $15 to $50 an hour, and you never know how much time off you're going to have between work - it could be two days or three months, and the assignment can last anywhere from six weeks to two years. I'm just able to deal with the cash flow issues now because I gutted my retirement accounts and paid off the mortgage.
I am enjoying the place where I work now, even though the pay is low - but the pay is going to be low anywhere, with unemployment remaining so persistently high. But eventually, when I get to the point where I need to start saving money and there is actual interest to be earned by doing so, I'll be ready to take a full-time position again, and this contracting stuff will be a good way to find one.
I do enjoy talking shop, though! Working in an IT shop was very different from working in an accounting/finance department - better, in some ways. I did work with some great people at that job, especially the engineer I sat across from. My sweety and I still go out with him and his wife for dinner and drunkenness sometimes. And I love listening to my sweety talk about the software development and testing he does. I actually know what he's talking about and find it interesting.
Pirate Jo at July 10, 2010 6:54 AM
Its hard to keep all of Amy's blog fans, and their backgrounds, straight. ;-) I know you've commented on where you are before.
I'm gad that you can avoid the corporate slog. If you ever need help or guidance, just reach out.
Jim P. at July 10, 2010 11:44 AM
Leave a comment