Kids these Days: Part 1 of 3

One of my guilty pleasures is the web site tmuscle.com. It's a body building site that focuses primarily on getting big. For some context, the more senior members of the connected forum are under six feet and over 300 pounds. I'm not prepared to go that far myself, but there are tremendously good (and free) bits of advice floating around all over the site--especially the forums.

The most guilty part of my enjoyment comes from from the fact that the whole site exudes locker room--criticism is harsh and sometimes unwarranted, insults turn into inside jokes, which turn into memes that border on pure genius, back slapping is at a minimum, but for the most part they recognize excellence.

However, something I've seen more and more in the relatively short time I've lurked on the site are a certain kind of post like one that recently appeared in the beginners forum. The appropriately christened "wannagetripped" started an equally well-named thread, "Need Help Getting Ripped" with this message:

I am sure there are posts like this one. I don't have a lot of time to sift through posts to find what I am looking for so I hope someone can help me. I just currently joined a gym and I am looking to get as close to the attached photo as possible. You can see my current photo on my homepage. I know it will obviously take a long time. Any nutrition and exercise tips and pointers will be greatly appreciated! Feel free to PM me also! Thanks in advance!!

When other members scolded "wannagetripped" for not using the search function to find answers to his question that are compiled throughout the site, he responeded:

I love people who sit in chat rooms and on forums and talk shit on people. Those people have no lives. And most of those guys are over weight losers with no g/f's, wives or friends to hang out with. I used to be cut to hell when I played football and didnt have a family to support, but with working, and keeping, 4 jobs the past 5 years it kinda takes a toll on your body when you dont have time for exercise. But now I am trying to make time. And maybe im crazy but i thought me posting on here was doing research? I figured a quick easy way to get info is to just make a post. I was just looking for info like ACTrain sent me. Which was very helpful and what I was looking for. I did go through the forums and did learn alot. I also figured I would post and see what other info people might give me looking specifically at my body and the body I want. Guess not. So I know now it was pointless.

The pattern here is so familiar it's painful. Notice the track the reaction post follows. A-he attacks the people who rightfully point out his laziness (on a workout site no less). B-He catalogs his heroic work ethic (which apparently doesn't extend to looking up the information he wants). C-He argues that what he did *was* the work those other people claimed he didn't do. D-He challenges the significance of the whole endeavor.

This, my friends, is the litany of the cheater. Every, and I mean *every* student I've ever caught copying on a paper has followed some version of this same pattern.

A typical exchange might sound like this:

Me: This section of your four page paper that extends from page two to page four is word-for-word from this website that I've called up on my computer.

Student: You've hated me from the beginning of the semester and this is just your way of getting me in trouble.

Me: No, *you* included all this outside work and failed to quote or cite it. I didn't have anything to do with that.

Student: I have two jobs and a daughter. I can't write all that stuff myself.

Me: Unfortunately school is time consuming and I'm afraid the rules are very clear on this.

Student: But you said I had to do research, now you're saying I shouldn't. You keep changing the rules.

Me: But you have to actually write your own paper. You use the outside sources to support what *you* argue.

Student: Fine, fail me. I don't even want to be in college.

Ultimately, the seeming universality of this approach to learning much be significant of some sort of Generation Z quirk that we X and Ys need to better understand. More in the second and third parts of this series . . .

Back in the Saddle

It's official--I'm confirmed for my next race--a 5K on 2/6/10. The plan for now is to run one 5K in February and another toward the end of April. I started a seven week training plan today and am aiming for a 22:00 in February. I'll adjust my expectations for April according to how I do in February.

I'd did 6X880 intervals today and came in between 3:24 and 3:32 on all of them. I know, not a spectacular showing, but these were my first intervals since my last race and I didn't want anything to fall off.

On a similar note, I'm going to try very hard over the next couple month to really focusing on getting a good stretch after running. I know the NY Times is saying not to bother, but I'm having enough low-level problems (especially on my left side) that I figure it's worth a shot.

Teaching Woes

Plagiarism:

I'm not really that concerned with intellectual property or even worried about the long-term educational value of the essays my students write for their freshman English classes. I think what gets me ultimately about cases of plagiarism is how they almost always start with students who believe they are simply too important to actually do their work.

Case in point: this is from an email a student wrote to me about a reading journal entry that was largely copied from a Publishers Weekly review, " I realize that I used the same "ugly, unwashed murdering rapist" but either way I would have had to put murdering rapist in the entry." Interestingly, the story the student was supposed to be writing about didn't include such a figure. She had copied from a review about an entirely different text (this one did have an ugly, unwashed murdering rapist) that the author published nearly a decade after the one she was assigned. That this student's defense revolves around the idea that the phrase "ugly, unwashed murdering rapist" is unavoidable because it so perfectly captures the spirit of the text, only reinforces my sense that she never read the assigned text in the first place.

The student ends her argument with, "and I really would hate to have to retake this whole course and possibly lose my scholarship for a misunderstanding on my part." Invoking the scholarship shows a good instinct and the final bit about "the misunderstanding" might have be a canny way to accept responsibility without necessarily admitting guilt, except that her earlier argument reveals too much. She seems to be asking me to agree to see her transgression as an honest failure to meet standards rather than a dishonest attempt to pass off someone else's work as her own. However, exposing that she hasn't even read the text while arguing a point of analysis reveals a strategy that wholly revolves around getting credit for work she did not do. This isn't a mistake or a misunderstanding, it is a conscious attempt to undermine the fundamental purpose of the class.

The sin here is not that she copied, it's that she acted in bad faith. She's cheating the people of the state, accepting the opportunity that their taxes provide, but squandering it in an arrogant attempt to avoid learning anything at all.


For an even better cheater story click here: Laura K. Krishna is a Plagiarist.

1:52:57

2009 Half Marathon Experience--

Lessons learned:

• Following a plan is good. It keeps me honest about how much I am and am not doing and it gets me to vary my workout.
• Arriving late is bad, especially when you're talking about a race with close to ten thousand runners. I was there an hour before the gun, which was enough time to get my number and find the start, but not enough to warm up.
• Good position in the beginning is even more important in big races (see arriving late above).

Overall I have no complaints. I missed my goal by eight minutes, but on a course that was much hillier than my usual runs. My ten-week plan was a success. I feel faster and leaner than I have in years. I have a 5k coming up in February and another in April. Running will continue to be part of the weekly rotation, but I really want to get back to my bike more this coming year—there may even be a mountaintop century in the works.

T-Zero

The race I've been working out for over the last ten weeks starts this morning at 7:50. The forecast calls for dry, but sub freezing weather the whole time I expect to be on the course. Overall, I don't feel especially optimistic. I imagine it will be fine, but I always sort of miss the low-pressure training routine when it comes time to strap on a chip and put my legs where my mouth is (or something like that).

Anyway, I'll report back in a few hours.

P.S to Libgyrl: a couple posts back something you wrote made me think of this:

Troubles in Philly

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/01/troubles-in-philly-lessons-for-new-york/

BSNYC has already covered this, but I'm more interested in the familiar argument that a few readers' comments present, which, were it an Aristotelian syllogism, would run like this:

Major Premise: Things that are injurious or lethal should be banned.

Minor Premise: Many bicyclists in urban environments fail to obey the rules of traffic and this leads to injury and, in extreme cases, death.

Conclusion: Bicycles should be banned.

Granted, this is a bit on an oversimplification, but I see versions of this argument time and time again. Most often, because people know I ride a bike on the road, the version I hear is that I shouldn't be allowed to ride in traffic for my own protection. In fact, I wish I had Campagnolo Retro Wool Cycling Jersey for every time someone had shaken a head and said to me with husky-voiced concern "People are just crazy out there on the road." While I appreciate this often earnest concern for my safety, this attitude also brings me to my point. If the—sometimes very large—portion of urban cyclists who break the rules (whether through arrogance or a mistaken sense that it's "safer") are dangerous, what does that make the population of drivers who do the same in vehicles that weigh 2000 pounds and are capable of speeds five times that of the ordinary cyclist?

I would never argue that riding against traffic, or skipping red lights, or any of the other bad behaviors some cyclists practice on a regular basis is justifiable. I actually try to correct riders who seem to be doing these things out of ignorance (as opposed to arrogance) when I see them on the street. But if breaking the laws of traffic and being generally irresponsible are grounds for being removed from the streets, it seems clear to me that we would be obliged to ban most vehicles—especially cars—from our roads. Car crashes account for about 40,000 deaths in the US alone, which is about 2.5 times the number of deaths we can pin on drug abuse. Where is the outrage? Hell, cars kill almost twice as many people every year in the country as guns. Where's the outcry for better car control?

Ultimately irresponsible behavior leads to preventable accidents. It doesn't matter if the jerk is on a bike or in a car: people get hurt. Since the problem is behavioral, the solution must address the loose nut behind the steering wheel or handle bars. As long as cities continue to write off bikes as something other than vehicles with less than full rights on the road, a portion of cyclists will respond by continuing to ignore the rules of traffic. At the same time, the longer we’re distracted by the various car v. bike arguments that dominate the discourse surrounding this issue, the longer we'll take to reach a sensible solution that address the real problems with how we move from A to B in much of this country.