February 2007 Archives

Hobbit Holes!!

Time for me to play the hypocrite. I have no problem with the research that says video games can be educational.

How do I square this with my loathing of Leapfrog and V-Tech? Easily:

My friends, this is a far cry from a giant frog screaming at my kid: "I Love You, SO Much!"

First of all, all the examples offered are for older children than the V-Tech target audience. That's important.

Second, it's not even "educational toys" per se that are thought to have educational value. The researchers in the article instead point to the benefits of certain video games that simulate real-world or historical situations. These are games that make you use reason and knowledge if you wish to be successful. I guess here is where I embarrassingly admit that I've learned more about medieval history and weaponry from playing "The Age of Empires" than I previously knew. Trebuchet? I had no clue until one was laying siege to my kingdom.

Still, there are a couple of important things the article left out. First, these educational benefits can often be missed if a child playing these games doesn't give a crap. A game that takes place in a specific historical context is great, but if that context is incidental to the game - if it serves as a background that doesn't really have to be engaged in order to be successful, then the educational value is diminished.

Second, and this seems to me the more dangerous problem, David Shaffer, quoted in the article as saying, "we spend most of the first six or seven years of math education teaching kids to do what a 99-cent calculator does," seems to be suggesting that technology can replace the need for basic literacy. Sure, computer games can be used as a supplement - a practical application of actual lessons that can help children master concepts - but computers cannot obviate the need for the three R's. Balance is needed. I don't care if a calculator can multiply, my kids are going to learn their tables. And I don't care if the whole world can be run off of machines, kids still need an education in what it means to be human, which means engaging with flesh and blood humans in person and through the ideas of literature and history.

In the end, it falls to parents and educators to integrate technology as a part - yes, an increasingly important part, but still only a part - of a child's human formation.

Blogwatchin':

• How to visit the dying - Found via Bill White who adds that a Catholic should bring along a rosary and a prayer book. You should probably bring a bunch of rosaries.
  
• Steve Sailer on Chicago's mayoral election

New stuff:

• "What if We Leave?" (Iraq, that is)

Old Stuff:

• The Human Difference - A lovely meditation by Eric Cohen on what separates us from the animals.
  
• A challenge to the stereotype of a cruel Old Testament God. From the Fall 2006 In Character which also included this interesting reading list of classics on justice.

This week - on retreat

E-co Lab building homes in Urbana.

Newer stuff:

• For First Things types: Papal Address on Natural Law
  
• The Stabat mater in, like, every language
  
• From the NAC homepage: Map of Lenten Station Chuches in Rome that links to info on each Church

Older stuff:

• Max Boot on modern military technology. Good stuff, just don't think about how much money we spend to be able to kill lots of people. UPDATE: Victor Davis Hanson reviews Boot's book on the subject here
  
• The sprituality of The Far Side
  
• "The Mislabeled Child" - On decreasing, rather than treating, behavioral problems
  
• "How the Schools Shortchange Boys" - just what the title says. An excellent article, except it's main vehicle of argument is defending a boy who acts like an ass. Not every rude jerk is a misunderstood hero. Sometimes, they're just rude jerks
  
• "Samantha Shrugged" - A teacher tries to get his students to put some thought into the abortion question

Ahem

Or not.

Building Greener

Holy Father's Message for Lent 2007

Bishop of Peoria, Daniel R. Jenky's Lenten Message

Yes, that's Jim Wallis of Sojourners writing in Time. Are we to find it indicative of some trend that Sojourners types don't like the religious right? I'm not necessarily disputing that the political movement known as the religious right is largely in decline, but let's recognize that the people cheering Wallis on aren't exactly objective observers.

His whole article is pretty silly. Of course, it's desirable that the truths of faith are best left separated from partisan politics. But, um, let's remember that Wallis has written a book called God's Politics and that he runs a lefty blog of the same name, and that his magazine invokes God's name to argue for the Democratic party line.

I repeat, it's not that I dispute in any way that the "religious right" is waning, and it's not that I categorically diagree with everything that the Sojourners crowd stands for. Indeed, especially compared to the wine and cheese leftism of the Commonweal crowd, I find Sojourners more honest and more often on the side of truth, but I also see them mirroring the worst of the religious right's crassness in explicitly aligning themselves with a particular political agenda. The answer to the usurpation of religion by politicians is not to become the Democrat's version of Jerry Falwell.

I've linked to Daniel Larison's blog Eunomia a few times from here. Larison is a grad student at the University of Chicago who, judging from the volume of his posts, does not sleep. Either that, or maybe U of C is not quite as rigorous as we've all been led to believe. How often does he post? Well, he's allegedly on hiatus for the month of February, but Bloglines tells me he has posted 88 times. To his credit, he didn't post until the 4th of the month.

Anyway, he's becoming one of my favorite bloggers, yet paradoxically the one I dread reading the most simply because he posts so much. But it's almost always worth it, as you can see here where he makes Rudy Giuliani look foolish (not that it's terribly hard) or here where he eviscerates Jody Bottum. If you have the endurance, check him out.

Around St. Blog's

• Amy's Theory of Everything
  
• 2007 Catholic Blog Awards winners
  
• That old-time American religion.

Once again, Peggy Noonan demonstrates her journalistic superiority.

Stanley Kurtz is making a very interesting argument in a series for NRO that the tradition of cousin marriage in Islamic culture renders those societies incompatible with modern life. This, he says, is the key to understanding the terror war.

I'm a bit torn on this. Kurtz generally does excellent work on marriage and family issues, but he often sounds insane and when talking about war and the middle east. My guess is he'll make a sensible and sobering analysis of Islamic marriage culture and then use it to demagogue on the need to fight more Middle Eastern wars. I'll be very interested to see how he develops the argument and what critics will say.

Here's the first two installments in the series: 1, 2.

This is a very busy and exciting weekend for us. Tonight we're heded out of town to stand up in a very special family wedding. And then on Sunday, we get to be the Godparents at Baby Michael's baptism.

It is certainly an honor in both instances, and we ask you to please join us in praying for the happy couple and for Michael and his proud parents.

Kerry Wood falls from hot-tub, bruises ribs.

Newer stuff:

• Florida's pro-choice license plate option shows a baby star floating upward (heavenward?) from inside a mother star. I can't decide if it's monstrously sick and twisted or refreshingly blunt and honest.
  
• Even Stanley Kurtz can't tolerate D'Souza's book.

Older stuff:

• 30 Days on St. Charles Borromeo.
  
• Review of Alisdair MacIntyre's biography of St. Edith Stein's early life.

Ross and Reihan at The American Scene have returned from hiatus and are blogging their brains out. Lots of good stuff over there to check out, including this post that stands what we think we know about Democratic primary politics on its head.

The Cub Reporter has an interesting meta-post up on the relationship between sports blogs and mainstream sports media.

This says it all:

Keeping up on this theme, Christine Rosen offers a slightly fleshed out version of this article I blogged last month. And by "fleshed out," I mean there's two extra paragraphs.

Excerpt:

Despite the potential hazards, why are so many children playing with electronic toys? "I think electronic toys are appealing to adults" says Linda Crowe, an associate professor in the School of Family Studies and Human Services at Kansas State University. "They think, 'Wow! These are really exciting toys; look at all of the wonderful things they can do!" But electronic toys remove social interaction and in many respects may inhibit creativity. The toy provides the fantasy and removes the opportunity for a child to mentally produce something hypothetical or imagined.” Crowe is also concerned about the effect of such toys on children’s brain development. "What's happening neurologically with these kids when they are watching flashing lights and electronic toys versus an old-fashioned play toy? Which areas of the brain are activated and what kinds of neurological connections are being established? I'm seeing outcomes in the form of shorter attention spans, but we don't know exactly what is happening in the brain."

Susan Swanson, who works for the Excelligence Learning Corporation and has been an arts educator in Monterey County, California schools, has similar concerns. "Electronic toys don't encourage dramatic play," she says. "And what is going to happen to these kids who are used to having a quick electronic fix and who think things happen at the push of a button?" she asks. Parents can go to the other extreme too, of course. "I live near Berkeley," Swanson says with a chuckle, "and you can find stores there where the only toys are those made entirely out of recycled tires or natural fibers."

Tech toys are here to stay, of course, in large part because anxious parents fear denying their children any novel advantage. "Parents believe that this is a way for their child to be ready for the academic setting," says Crowe, "and you can't fault parents for that." But she encourages parents to limit their children's use of such toys and to offer more traditional toys (such as building blocks, trains, and dolls) that encourage open-ended, creative play. Children also make their play preferences known, and they are often refreshingly low-tech. When asked by University of Stirling researchers what they most wanted to do during playtime, young children did not beg for quality time with T.M.X. Elmo. They wanted their parents to take them to the park. Sometimes, toddlers know best.

I'm a bit more cynical, so with regard to that first paragraph, I would posit that parents find additional appeal in that these gadgets keep kids out of their hair. Being the father of two toddlers, I can sympathize with folks who are tempted by toys that won't require any assistance beying swapping out double-As. But to tell me that a machine that screams the ABCs at my son is teaching him something at all - let alone in a way better than I could - falls somewhere on a continuum between condescending and insulting.

I herein inaugurate a new, periodic (adj. - whenever I get around to it) feature, where I provide links to interesting articles I've found on the web, handily divided into stuff that has just appeared and older stuff that I've juse come across.

Stuff from today:

• The introduction to Danielle Bean's next book, (along with a pre-order link)
• Papal Address on 11th World Day of Consecrated life.
• The Winter 2007 Issue of The New Atlantis is online. Check it out!

Older stuff:

• The War of the Imagination - A damning look at the initial phase of the Iraq war published in late November. Lengthy, but necessary.
• Plumbing the archives of the excellent journal Touchstone, I found two gems in the October 2004 issue. In "Swift Prophet", Anne Barbeau Gardiner looks at Gulliver's Tavels as a allegory of British Christianity. And in "The Lovely Dragon of Choice", Anthony Esolen slays said dragon - which is not simply the euphemistic "choice" of abortion, but a far more hideous and menacing beast:
  I am not merely saying that there is a freedom higher and more blissful than the freedom to choose how one spends one’s money or where one buys a house or whom one marries. I assert that even regarding questions of money or dwelling or spouse or any earthly thing, there is a freedom that slays the freedom to choose. Call it the wisdom of tossing the choice away. Call it the hope not in choosing but in being chosen.

ONE WEEK 'TIL PITCHERS AND CATCHERS!

Oh, and just 'cuz... here's the Cubs 2007 schedule.

The Daily Illini has an article about the destruction of beautiful old homes in Urbana to make way for cheap, hideous apartment buildings where the owners can pack more students in.

On the one hand, this is a shame. Instead of old, classy homes with lawns and porches, they're putting up the college equivalent of McMansions that crowd the sidewalk and never have enough parking spaces.

On the other hand, and here I'm putting on my completely selfish "it's all about me" hat, the more students we can pack into the 2 square miles of campustown, the less drunken loudmouths we'll have spilling into respectable neighborhoods. And if we're going to be replacing fine old houses with cheap construction apartments, better on campus than out in the neighborhoods where families live.

On years when there is not an international World Youth Day celebration (like Sidney 2008 or Toronto 2002), World Youth Day is celebrated at the diocesan level on Palm Sunday. Here is the Papal Message for the 22nd World Youth Day, to be celebrated April 1, 2007.

Colin Bower makes a heroic sacrifice to investigate the relationship of thruth, metaphor and language by swigging a Malbec.

And that's before he uncorks.

Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, Pennsylvania, who has drawn much ire around Catholic blogland for his criticisms of the new translation of the Mass, has an op-ed of sorts making his case in the UK Catholic paper The Tablet. Specifically, he pushes his argument against the "for many" translation of the latin phrase "pro multis" in the institution narrative of the Eucharistic Prayer.

This argument is much more credible than his last attempt at making this point ("it's too confusing!"). I, however, not knowing any Hebrew or Greek, find myself unable to evaluate the merit of the new piece. I'd be interested if anybody knows where I can find this treated more fully.

UPDATE: Father Z fisks brutally:

He also claims to have treated this in a four part series, though he doesn't say if that was on his blog or his in his Wanderer column.