• Home
  • Blog
  • Media
  • Contact Me
  • Newsletter
  • Bowlings Abroad
  • Nerd Farmer Podcast
  • Teaching Civil Liberties
  • Supporting Undocumented Students
Menu

Nate Bowling: American Teacher Abroad

Street Address
City, State, Zip
Phone Number

Your Custom Text Here

Nate Bowling: American Teacher Abroad

  • Home
  • Blog
  • Media
  • Contact Me
  • Newsletter
  • Bowlings Abroad
  • Nerd Farmer Podcast
  • Teaching Civil Liberties
  • Supporting Undocumented Students

Fighting the Klan in the Ozarks and Teacher Bias in Grading

May 14, 2023 Nathan Bowling

I spent some of my favorite summers as a kid here in Camden, Arkansas

I go through seasons where I get deeply fixated on topics. If you’ve followed me online, you likely know this. In quick succession, during the worst parts of Covid, I went in hard on fantasy and sci-fi books. I read A Song of Ice and Fire (the Thrones books) and Dune (well, the first three—Herbert really lost me at God Emperor of Dune). I also read N.K. Jemisen’s Inheritance Trilogy, and the Foundation books (again, up until they became incoherent). 

As I’ve mentioned on the blog before, I’ve spent much of the last year or so pouring through crime and noir novels. The most recent one I got my hands on is Ozark Boys by Eli Cranor. I’ve talked about Cranor here before. He was a guest on the podcast and is genuinely a chill dude. He cut his teeth reading Elmore Leonard novels and teaches English to incarcerated youth in Arkansas.  I like his vibe and his choice of setting for his novels. I am notably not Southern but I have an affinity for Arkansas. I spent several summers as a kid on a farm in Camden living with my aunts & uncles. They were the siblings of my grandmother who had remained in the state when my mom’s side of the family made their way to Washington. They were all born around the turn of the century: Uncle Walter & Aunt Sal and Uncle Peach & Aunt Willamay. I’m sure I was more of a nuisance than a help but they tolerated me. I helped Uncle Walter pick melons and  load them in the truck to take them to market. I fed hogs and picked & cleaned collards. On Sundays,  I helped make scratch biscuits.  I once snuck a pinch of Aunt Sal’s chewing tobacco and regretted it immediately. I really don’t think anyone knew what to make of me when we went into town and to church. I spoke (still do) at a rapid clip and was verbose in a place where kids were supposed to be in the background. But I remember summers on the farm as clearly as anything from my childhood. I realized recently what a stroke of genius this was by mom—a plane ticket was cheaper than summer camp—and shipping me off allowed her to work more overtime (or turn-up, who knows?) without worrying about my giant headed self getting into trouble.

Eli Cranor's new novel "Ozark Boys" is a banger

Cranor’s first book played in a pretty safe sandbox. It was equal parts Romeo & Juliet and Friday Night Lights, set as a Southern Noir. Ozark Dogs is in the same universe but it feels more ambitious and expansive. In this second novel, the setting moves from the fictitious town of Denton in Eastern Arkansas (closer to Memphis) to the Ozarks. The shift in setting creates a change in character vernacular that highlights the regional diversity of the state.  

Within the first few dozen pages, stark moral lines are drawn between the warring factions—the ordinary toughs who were meant to empathize with, the Fitzjurls, and the meth dealing-Klan-fascists, the Ledfords. Something that’s important to me in a book like this is that when we meet a neo-Confederate or Klansman, they can't be a sympathetic character. IDGAF—that's non-negotiable for me. Cranor passes this test and I am going to try to stretch this one out until SA Cosby’s All Sinners Bleed comes out next month. If I’ve piqued your interest in Ozark Dogs, pick up a copy and share your thoughts as you read it.

Let’s Wax Pedagogic and Get Wonky About Grades - We’re nearing the end of the school year and many of the conversations at school are turning toward next year. It will be my fifth year here in the Gulf. As a school community, we’re moving to a new campus next year. This brings in other changes. They’re building a new daily schedule better suited to the larger campus and UAE’s recently implemented four and a half day work week. We’re also transitioning to a new tool for managing our grades. Each of these: the move, the reworked schedule, and the new grading system, represent an opportunity to rethink the way we do things but education is a profession that is uniquely averse to change. 

The whole point of this week’s newsletter is that I am prone to fixating and as of late I find myself particularly unsatisfied with my grading practices and all the noise and variability inherent to the process. What does an “A”  mean to parents? What minimum skills should a student demonstrate in order to earn a “B” in a given course? What are you communicating when you give a student a “B-” rather than a “C+”? You’ll get as many answers as people you ask. All this ambiguity is compounded by other factors including teacher bias. It doesn’t matter how justice-oriented you are, we all have our internalized prejudices and preferences. Anyone saying otherwise is lying. This video and the study that inspired it made the rounds in the past but they’re worth revisiting. If you accept that bias is real and there’s ample research telling us it is, it’s worth considering how we can remove bias as much as possible from our assessment practices. 

Yesterday afternoon, I recorded a winding interview with Arthur Chiaravalli from Teachers Going Gradeless that I will link to when it comes out. A point I tried to make repeatedly in that conversation is that we should try to control for our personal and cognitive biases as much as possible and we should also lean into professional practices that remove or limit subjectivity in grading. I think we pay lip service to this in the profession but many of us, if asked to defend a given grade, would find ourselves at a loss. There’s a move against calculated grades in the profession that I think is well-intended but takes us further into the subjective and thus introduces more opportunities for bias.

Look, I’m a Greener—the ideal is to nuke grades and move to wholistic narrative evaluations (written by teachers in cooperation with students)—but until that day comes, we should be wary about how we allow bias, prejudice, and the application of selective benefit of the doubt to creep further into assessment.  

I have more to say here but I want to put a pin in this for now. I have a piece coming out on this topic later this month and I will share that and the podcast interview when they come out.

As always, thanks for reading the newsletter. If you'd like to opine just hit reply on the  email. I welcome your feedback (especially if you think I am wrong about something) and if you like the newsletter, share it with somebody you love. 

See you next week!

In Education, Society Tags Southern Noir, Arkansas, grading
Comment

Why the Left Can’t Win

April 30, 2023 Nathan Bowling

Next year, both the US and Mexico will hold presidential elections. My students wanted to understand why someone like Mexico's AMLO can't win in the US, and I had a helluva time explaining why.

My students are taking their AP Comparative Government & Politics exam on Wednesday. In the course, we examine the systems of government in six states: the UK, Russia, China, Iran, Mexico, and Nigeria. We spent this week reviewing material and concepts from the year. My feelings about the exam and the College Board in general are mixed, at best, and I recently detailed them on the TG2 Blog. But despite my personal reservations about the org, I’m a professional and make sure students are prepared for their exams. They’re reviewing the major and some more niche concepts from the course,  from how Nigerians elect their legislature to how the Chinese Communist Party limits the independence of the judiciary. 

On Thursday, we discussed the term-limit system in Mexico. To prevent the entrenchment of figures like Robert Byrd (he represented West Virginia in the US Senate from 1959-2010, a gobsmacking 51 years), Mexican politicians are denied the right to serve consecutive terms. Notably, the Mexican president is elected to a single six-year term with no chance for reelection. The current Mexican President, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, will leave office in 2024 and Mexico will elect a new leader (along with the US—the cycles sync every twelve years). AMLO is a singular figure in Mexican politics. He served as the former mayor of Mexico City in the 2000s. He ran for president unsuccessfully in 2006 and 2012 before winning the office in 2018 with 54% of the vote. He is a left-wing populist figure and leader of the MORENA Party. 

AMLO’s populism became a topic of a rabbit hole conversation in class. My students couldn’t seem to get their heads around the inability of left populists, like AMLO, to get a foothold in the US and throughout the Anglosphere: Canada, UK, Australia, and NZ. I was unable to help them and I have been thinking about it for the last few days. I realize the answer I gave them Thursday is “man, it’s really complicated” is both a copout and correct.

In contrast to the US, left-populists have found electoral success to our south. In addition to AMLO, there are figures like Evo Morales who was elected as the President of Bolivia in 2005 and led the country until 2019. He was a former farmer and labor leader who campaigned on a platform of economic justice, indigenous rights, and anti-imperialism. There was also Rafael Correa. He served as president of Ecuador for twelve years. He was an economist who advocated for socialist policies and investments in education, healthcare, and infrastructure. Even Lula in Brazil, who resumed office in 2023, is considered a populist. 

No such equivalent figures have risen in the US (or elsewhere in the Anglosphere for that matter). The easy answer is to blame corporate media coverage or capitalism, but while each of those play a role, they absolve people on the left of their culpability and unforced errors.

I have my thoughts, but they’re largely grounded in Chomsky’s Manufacturing Consent, but I am curious about yours. 

Take your best shot at answering my students’ question: Why are left-populists more successful in Latin America? Why do you think left-populism is so unsuccessful in modern US politics? Why is it that populist figures like Trump and Johnson (in the UK) were able to win power but similarly populist left figures can’t seem to get traction? I’d love to hear your thoughts* hit my inbox or leave a comment and I’ll share some responses next week.

*One caveat: I may catch hell for this but the “Bernie got screwed by the DNC” meme isn’t real. Bernie was my preferred candidate in 2016 but the reality is he garnered fewer votes (13,210,550 to 16,917,853) and delegates (1865 to 2842) than Clinton. He didn’t get screwed—he lost and lost again in 2020.

In Politics, Society Tags COGO, AMLO, Bernie, 2024

Being Choosy About Online Spaces

April 17, 2023 Nathan Bowling

The speech crisis in the US is as real as the Easter Bunny and the world needs another poorly moderated online platform like Substack Notes like I need a hole in the head

Over the last few years I have grappled with the size and scope of my digital footprint. I had more than a few “Nate, you’re better than this” moments while reading two books in particular. No Filter by Bloomberg writer Sarah Frier, got me off of Instagram and now I avoid the entire Facebook Suite of apps. Although, leaving WhatsApp while living overseas is nearly impossible because of how integrated it is into commerce here and because family back home seem disinclined to learn how to navigate Signal.

Frier came on the podcast and I found the truthpaste she squeezed undeniable. Her book and our conversation came down to three key points: 

  • Algorithmic social media gives us each our own version of “the truth”, feeding our egos, biases, and prejudices;

  • This is contributing to political polarization and escalating political violence, undermining our democracy and fraying the fabric of our society; 

  • We have no idea what the long-term implications of any of this are—it is unprecedented in human history—but all seems quite bad.

A fourth point that I walked away from our conversation realizing is that our continued use of these platforms makes us complicit in the societal havoc they wreak.

A little later, I read The Age of Surveillance Capitalism by Shoshana Zuboff. She built on Frier’s ideas as part of a larger critique of post-industrial, late-stage capitalism. While Frier’s book was largely about the societal harm that algorithmic social media heaps upon us, Zuboff leaned into privacy violations and how our data is sold by and to some of the worst among us. I was struck repeatedly by the idea there’s a whole segment of bad actors who produce nothing, but make billions serving up data on our private comms, movements, and purchases to the highest bidder.

It was after finishing Zuboff’s book that I left Twitter for the first time. It was after Elon Musk’s purchase of the platform that I left for good and started writing this newsletter. 

Defenders of Musk say he’s a champion of free speech but that claim doesn’t stand up under scruitiny. Musk’s vision of free speech is a limited one. He doesn’t mean the freedom to criticize him—that can get you banned or your verification revoked. He doesn’t mean the freedom to build competing platforms—that can get your API access revoked. He doesn’t mean the ability to organize online anti-fascist networks—that can get you exiled to Mastodon. He, like many on the online right, see free speech as a one way street—a guarantee they and people they like can say whatever troll-y nonsense they want no matter how racist, vile, or bigoted it is.

It’s these issues of free speech and platform choice that I want to center today. 

I chose to write on Substack because I didn’t want to be on a platform that I felt was a Nazi Bar. I wouldn't go to a bar that knowingly served Nazis. I wouldn’t go to a church that knowingly welcomed Nazis. I wouldn’t work at a school that knowingly hired Nazis. This made the decision to leave Twitter and write here an easy one.

But this week Substack introduced their Notes feature and… oh, boy.

Substack pre-Notes was a business product. They, the service provider, distribute the newsletter. I, the writer, am responsible for the content. If you, the customer, find my takes unacceptable, you can unsub.

But Notes is different; it is a Twitter clone, another network with an algorithmic timeline. With that comes the need for robust content moderation. I get this. You probably get this but somehow the folks at Substack don’t. 

This week in an interview with the Verge, Substack co-founder & CEO Chris Best fell all over himself trying to answer very basic questions about what kind of content they’d allow on Notes. 

The question “hypothetically, can someone promote genocide on your platform?” shouldn’t be a hard one, but for Best (and too many tech bros) it is. 

I found this really disappointing. This week, a handful of subscribers asked if I will be using Notes. My answer is “nope.” I am not excited about the Notes product. Most of you read the newsletter in your email inbox, the old fashioned way (I get great data on this). You all don’t generally use the Substack app and I don’t plan on using Notes until they can prove it won’t be a Nazi Bar.

One way of reading all of this is that “Nate’s just fragile” and is seeking or creating bubbles or safe spaces. That framing is juvenile AF. It’s not about fragility, it is about being discerning with the company you keep and places you give your time and business.  

In Personal, Society Tags Substack Notes, Twitter, Elon Musk, Free Speech
← Newer Posts Older Posts →

POWERED BY SQUARESPACE