About the Blog

I will post a new entry every few weeks. Some will be new writing and some will be past work that has relevance today. The writing will deal in some way with the themes that have been part of my teaching and writing life for decades:

•teaching and learning;
•educational opportunity;
•the importance of public education in a democracy;
•definitions of intelligence and the many manifestations of intelligence in school, work, and everyday life; and
•the creation of a robust and humane philosophy of education.

If I had to sum up the philosophical thread that runs through my work, it would be this: A deep belief in the ability of the common person, a commitment to educational, occupational, and cultural opportunity to develop that ability, and an affirmation of public institutions and the public sphere as vehicles for nurturing and expressing that ability.

My hope is that this blog will foster an online community that brings people together to continue the discussion.


Google Groups
Email Me Blog Updates
Visit this group

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

The Art of Interviewing

National Public Radio’s Series on Studs Terkel’s Archived Audio Tapes for Working.

If you are of a certain age, you’re probably familiar with the late Studs Terkel, particularly with his 1974 bestselling book Working: People Talk About What They Do All Day and How They Feel About What They Do. Terkel, who died in 2008 at the age of 96, was a journalist, radio host (his interview show on Chicago’s WFMT lasted over four decades), cultural critic, and oral historian par excellence. In addition to Working, he published collections of interviews with mostly common folk about the Great Depression, World War II, race in America, and a lot else. Studs Terkel was an American original and treasure. During the last week of September and first few days of October 2016, NPR played a series of short clips from the original recordings Terkel made for Working. http://www.npr.org/series/495535719/working-then-and-now The tapes were stored in his office and recently reviewed and edited by Radio Diaries and Project&. Thanks to them, we get to hear a telephone operator, a gravedigger, a female advertising executive, a Black Chicago policeman, a parking lot attendant, and more. A wonderful bonus is that the producers were able to track down several of the surviving people Terkel spoke with and have them reflect back on their earlier interviews. The segment with the Black Chicago cop, Renault Robinson, is powerfully timely.


For readers of this blog who are interested in interviewing, these little clips provide an abbreviated master class in the art of talking with people in order to learn about their lives. (One reason Working was such a hit was the depth of reflection and sheer humanity of the interviews.) Terkel will start with a question (for example, “Can you describe your day?”) then back off, but not too far, interjecting an affirmation, or a complementary laugh, or a reiteration of a key phrase the person said. He’ll gently request elaboration (“Can you say more?”) or ask a new question that shows how carefully he’s been listening to what’s already been said.

The NPR hosts’ commentary about the recordings as well as little moments in the recordings themselves provide some wonderful details about the settings of the interviews. Terkel conducted them in the early 1970’s—just over 130 interviews in all—and used a reel-to-reel tape recorder, a fact that is sobering to those of us using our four-ounce voice recorders or our cell phones. From the clips on NPR it sounds like he interviewed people at their job sites, when he could. So we get Studs at a cemetery talking to a gravedigger. Studs on the piano bench with a pianist in a hotel bar. And, my favorite, Studs in the front seat  of an automobile with the parking lot attendant “One-Swing Al” (named for his finesse in getting a car into a slot), both men smoking cigars and talking, the bulky recorder probably whirring between them.


I discovered Working soon after it was published and used some of the interviews from it in the college writing classes I was teaching. The book became a touchstone for me in many ways and was one of the early influences on the thinking and writing that would eventually become The Mind at Work. And as luck would have it, I got to meet Studs Terkel and be interviewed by him on his WFMT radio show. I cherish the memory; if you’ll indulge me, I would like to tell you about the interview.

I was on tour for the release of the paperback of Possible Lives, a book that chronicles my journey across the United States visiting good public school classrooms. Chicago was one of the cities on the tour, and the person hired by the press to accompany me to my interviews told me on the way to WFMT that the last time she took a guest to the show, Studs Terkel wasn’t doing so well and was scheduled for open-heart surgery. She hadn’t seen him since and wanted to warn me that he might not be up to par. After all, he’s 84 with coronary disease. So we’re sitting in the waiting area outside the recording studio, kind of expecting the worst. Five minutes. Ten. Then suddenly from around the corner of the studio, this short man in a bright red sweater under a suit jacket comes walking toward us at a brisk pace, waving a copy of Possible Lives over his head, greeting us in a strong, gravelly voice. It was Studs Terkel. The doctors clearly got his blood pulsing.

What also struck me once he and I were sitting close to each other in the recording studio was that he had actually read the book—at least some of it—and had sections marked and dog-eared. Pieces of paper stuck out from the pages. I can’t tell you how unusual this is. A small percentage of the interviewers you hear on radio or television talking with authors have spent any time with their books. The interviewers’ questions come from their producers’ notes, which typically originate with the book publishers’ publicity departments. During our interview, Studs would even refer to page numbers as he flipped through Possible Lives, finding this event… then this event that he wanted to discuss. And he wanted to discuss everything, quick comments and associations as he moved from one of the book’s classrooms to another. His style in his radio interviews—and, Good Lord, he’s interviewed everyone—is much different from his approach on the tapes for Working. http://studsterkel.wfmt.com/ Different styles for different purposes. The radio interviews are more rapidly interactive, almost associative at times, like talking with someone you know well over a few drinks, a mix of the casual and the intense, curious, sympathetically probing, locked into good talk. The interview is twenty years old now and of its time, but if you want to hear it, it’s on my website. http://mikerosebooks.com/Video___Audio.html

Listening to the NPR clips from the early-70s’ tapes that resulted in Working and thinking back to my fortunate interview with the man, I’m struck and moved by Studs Terkel’s commitment over a very long haul to serious, engaged talk, to learning about other people, to exploring with humane curiosity the nooks and crannies of the American social landscape. As I inch closer to Terkel’s age when he interviewed me, I’m also thinking about the importance of talk across generations, the power and pleasure of it and, sadly, how rare it is. For that fact, how rare authentic, sustained talk is, period. How seldom it is that we talk to each other with a true interest in where we came from and who we are. There’s so much that sits within Terkel’s opening question: “Tell me about your day,” and especially in the follow-up: “Can you say more?”

You can share this blog post on Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader through the "share" function located at the top left-hand corner of the blog.

Monday, September 26, 2016

Tips on Thinking and Writing

Seven pieces of advice for students entering graduate (or undergraduate) study in education—and a lot of other disciplines too.

Last week I had the honor of addressing the students entering several of UCLA’s graduate programs in education. I offered them seven thinking and writing tips that I believe will be helpful as they pursue their studies. These tips are also relevant to a number of other areas of study, and could prove useful to undergraduate students as well. With that, let’s enter the speech right after I made my introductory remarks.


You can call these tips habits of mind, or intellectual strategies, or principles of inquiry, or simply tricks of the trade that I’ve picked up over the years and am passing along to you to use in your thinking and your writing as you pursue your studies.

1) Pay attention to your writing. Many of us in education come out of the psychological or social sciences and never had the opportunity to focus on our writing and to get detailed feedback on it. But writing is an exceptionally potent tool for you regardless of the program you’re in. It will be invaluable in your classwork, and also professionally as you see things that trouble you and you want to give voice to or—something we don’t do enough—when you see things that need to be celebrated. Writing will be part of your intellectual and professional toolbox for the rest of your careers.
Take advantage of resources. There are undergraduate and graduate-level writing courses on campus. There’s a Writing Center. And when you form study groups—and I hope you do—make them writing and study groups.
Trust me on this. Regardless of the type of work you do and your future goals, the more effectively you can consider your audience, craft your argument, turn a phrase, the more likely you’ll achieve those goals.

2) Make your criticisms as even-handed as you can. You will be called upon while you’re here—and in many cases after you graduate—to critique a reading, or a policy, or an educational practice. Don't just be a flamethrower. Before launching into your critique do your best to present that reading, policy, or practice as fairly as you can, even if it irritates you to do so. Then develop your critique. Your critique will be all the more effective if your reader sees you being even-handed. Which doesn’t mean you’re being wishy washy or can’t take a strong point of view. You can. In fact, I think the strongest critiques are ones that fairly present elements of the argument, policy, or practice that you’re questioning—and then systematically, point-by-point deconstruct them or demonstrate their inadequacy.

3) Related to #2. Investigate the things that trouble you. Most of you as part of your program will visit schools or classrooms or tutoring or counseling sessions or some kind of community meeting or event. Sometimes you’ll be really impressed by what you see. And sometimes you’ll have questions. And sometimes what you see and hear seems wrongheaded, even harmful. Try your best to find out the rationale behind what you saw. Talk to people. Don't assume, explore. I’m embarrassed to tell you how often in my life I’ve made a quick judgment about something a teacher or principal or social worker did only to be humbled later when I learned the full background for their actions. But, let’s say that what you find out confirms your negative judgment. That will also happen. Well, then you will have a better understanding of what you saw, a deeper grasp of the dynamics and background factors of what troubled you—which puts you in a better position to critique what you saw in a substantial and principled way.

4) Types of evidence. In a lot of my work I rely on stories, vignettes, interviews, scenes from classrooms—qualitative data. But I also draw on numbers, statistical data on frequencies, percentages, ratios. And there are quotations from authoritative sources, from scholarly studies, policy reports, historical accounts, and the like. Unfortunately, some people think that numbers come out of the devil’s workshop or that stories are enjoyable but unsubstantial. Nothing could be further from the truth. As a general rule, the more kinds of evidence you have to support a claim or an argument, the stronger your claim or argument is. A story or a clip of an interview can be powerful and moving, but it becomes more convincing, I think, at least in some contexts, if it is paired with a statistic that demonstrates the story or interview is representative of a trend, is not an isolated occurrence. Likewise, statistics can be forceful, but they can gain additional strength to move people to action when they’re combined with a story that touches the heart. This combination of kinds of evidence, of statistic and story is often what we see in the successful passage of public policy.

5) Always remember, human behavior is complex, and certainly education is complex. There is rarely, if ever, a single explanation for anything. Think about your own behaviors. Can you explain why you’re here? Why you care for the people you care for? Your relationship with your parents? Even your sleeping and eating patterns? Can you explain any of it with one motive or cause? Probably not.
Because of this rich complexity, be cautious about attributing a single cause to any educational phenomenon or explaining it with a single perspective. This is the power, I think, of what feminist scholars and critical theorists refer to as “intersectionality.” That is, that social characteristics—race, class, gender, sexual orientation—intersect and interact. To best understand one, you need to look at all in context and interaction.
Now, of course, there are times when you do want to focus on a single phenomenon, a single possible cause because it has been under-acknowledged or ignored. We might want to shine a light on race or sexual orientation or, more specifically, we might want to focus on a single variable in, let’s say, academic achievement, or college-going orientation, or in the acquisition of language. Fine and good. There’s analytical reasons for doing this. But remember that the highlighted phenomenon or variable still plays out in everyday reality in concert with all the other bits and pieces of our complex lives.

6) Whatever it is you’re interested in or become interested in as you study here, learn its history.
You may be interested in teaching math in the primary grades or in diversifying and enriching the literature read in high school.
Or college affordability might be your thing.
Or maybe feminist standpoint theory.
Or you’re taken with a particular approach to student advising.
Or how about advanced statistical methods like Structural Equation Modeling or Item Response Theory. Maybe these are what you curl up with at night over a soothing cup of tea… or something stronger.
All of these have an origin. People have been working on them for a while, in some cases, a long while. Learning how something came into being and how it developed can be so useful in the present, affecting your understanding of it, its mistakes and blind alleys as well as the missed opportunities that remain to be seized—things you can work on. Knowing the past makes you a better practitioner in the present.

7) I just asked you to go deep in the past. Now I’m going to ask you to try to gain a wide, broad view of the present. It is the nature of graduate study that we specialize, we are trying to get very good at something that is pretty specific: in your case, in college advising, or in an area of teaching, or in a research topic. This is what we do. Every once in a while, though, look up from your specialization and survey the broad landscape of education and note where your specialization fits in. In the vast system that extends from pre-school to graduate school and includes adult school and occupational training, and much more, where does my contribution belong?  How does what occurs in the rest of the system affect my sphere of work? How does my work affect the rest of the system? Every so often, you want to ask yourself those questions.

So those are my seven tips. I hope you find them useful.

In wrapping up I’d like to offer this suggestion. A little while ago, I recommended that you always keep in mind the rich complexity of human life and educational practice and to not limit your vision to a single way of seeing. Well, speaking of different ways of seeing, you have here in your entering class a remarkable range of life experience, and educational and professional experience, and knowledge of disciplines and educational practices. What a reservoir of resources!  Graduate school is immensely stimulating but also taxing, growth-fostering but difficult. You’ll need good people around you to help you process it all. Get to know each other, form meaningful relationships, making sure that some of your new acquaintances have different backgrounds and interests from yours. You will benefit greatly from this diversity of background, interest, and knowledge. 

You can share this blog post on Facebook, Twitter, or Google Reader through the "share" function located at the top left-hand corner of the blog.