Amanda Ripley Author of The Unthinkable

The Unthinkable is the thinking person's manual for getting out alive.
NPR, National Public Radio


“Engrossing and lucid … An absorbing study of the psychology and physiology of panic, heroism, and trauma … Facing the truth about the human capacity for risk and disaster turns out to be a lot less scary than staying in the dark.”

O, THE OPRAH MAGAZINE
 

Amanda’s Blog subscribe

Event Date: Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Talking About Teachers

Today at noon on the Leonard Lopate Show on WNYC.

For the past couple weeks, I’ve been wondering: Is this all just manufactured hysteria? Are Americans as freaked out by the failed bomb plot as much as the people on their TV screens?

CNN has a new poll out today that suggests regular people are not the ones with the problem (full results in a PDF here). Americans, it seems, don’t scare nearly as easily as their leaders and their reporters.

* Percent of Americans who say they are very or somewhat worried that they or someone in their family will become a victim of a terrorist attack:

--Three months ago: 36%
--Now: 34%

*Percent of Americans who say terrorists will always find a way to launch major attacks, no matter what the US government does:

--60% (same as during Bush administration)

*Percent of Americans who approve of how Obama responded to the incident:

--57%

So it seems Dick Cheney is wrong again:

“President Obama is trying to pretend we are not at war. He seems to think if he has a low-key response to an attempt to blow up an airliner and kill hundreds of people, we won’t be at war.”

And so is Maureen Dowd.

“[Obama is] so sure of himself and his actions that he fails to see that he misses the moment to be president — to be the strong father who protects the home from invaders, who reassures and instructs the public at traumatic moments.”

Thanks, Big Daddy. But you can put away the baseball bat. We’re just fine here.

OK, as I sit here waiting for Pres. Obama to speak (again!) on the attempted airplane bombing, I find myself perplexed by a very basic question. Perhaps I am missing something. But the indictment of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab alleges that he carried a device containing PETN and TATP, among other ingredients, onto Flight 253 in Amsterdam.

The indictment doesn’t say how much explosive material he was allegedly carrying, but news reports consistently cite 80 grams of PETN--which is just under 3 oz. (Not clear how much TATP he is charged with having carried.) In any case, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has ordered 150 backscatter scanners, full-body imaging machines, to help prevent another similar attempt. Over the next 12 months, TSA plans to order another 300 such scanners.

But wait... All passengers are allowed to bring 3 oz bottles of liquid onto the plane in their carry-on baggage--where it would not be noticed by a whole-body scanner, which scans the body, not the bag. And it would not be noticed at all period because it is legal.

Now, granted, it might be easier to have a bomb already assembled (more or less) and attached to one’s person. But it’s hard to know without knowing more about this device. It’s possible that a terrorist could just put these explosives in their plastic baggy and breeze through the scanner. And, in any case, these much-discussed whole-body scanners may not even notice this kind of device if it is in one’s underwear and not in the carry-on bag.

I dwell on these tedious details to make a point: This whole shared delusion about the need for more and more invasive screening is very curious. Bruce Schneier described the strangeness today in his CNN essay, “Stop the Panic on Air Security”:

We’re doing these things even though security worked. The security checkpoints, even at their pre-9/11 levels, forced whoever made the bomb to construct a much worse bomb than he would have otherwise. Instead of using a timer or a plunger or another reliable detonation mechanism, as would any commercial user of PETN, he had to resort to an ad hoc homebrew—and a much more inefficient one, involving a syringe, and 20 minutes in the lavatory, and we don’t know exactly what else—that didn’t explode....

We’re doing these things even though airplane terrorism is incredibly rare, the risk is no greater today than it was in previous decades, the taxi to the airport is still more dangerous than the flight, and ten times as many Americans are killed by lightning as by terrorists.

Now back to waiting for Obama and more rhetoric about zero tolerance for something 100% guaranteed to happen again.... Is it too early for a drink?

OK, I make my living off words. But there are some things that words can never really capture. To accompany my story on What Makes a Great Teacher, the Atlantic has posted three videos of highly effective teachers, courtesy of Teach For America. These are teachers who are moving low-income American kids forward at breakneck speeds--something many of us have quietly concluded can’t be done.

Each of the three teachers has a different style, but they all are good at the six things that Teach for America has found make all the difference in the classroom. The story explains what those six things are. But the video brings it all to life.

My personal favorite is Justin Meli of Texas, above. I love this video, man. I mean, I made my husband watch this video late on a Friday night when I had no business making him think about education reform. But I just couldn’t help it. Check it out. 

What Makes a Teacher Great?

I occasionally take a break from writing about risk and human behavior to write about education--a kind of slow-motion disaster. This fall, I spent months obsessing over an old puzzle, using very cool new tools. The question was, What makes some teachers truly exceptional--and others, well, unremarkable? The story, which appears in this month’s Atlantic magazine, is my attempt to solve the mystery.

I had a lot of help. I got access to a treasure trove of data from Teach for America, which has been studying this mystery longer and more rigorously than any other outfit. Then I spent days sitting in classrooms in DC public schools--classrooms that ran like powerhouses and classrooms where time just oozed by, with nothing much happening. I am grateful to all the teachers, principals and students who so graciously allowed me to observe and who talked to me about the realities of their classrooms.

Eventually, I learned that the way to spot a great teacher is not to watch the teacher. The secret is to watch the kids. In great classrooms, the students were in a hurry, and not just some of them. Their eyes tracked the teacher as he or she moved across the room. When the kids got an answer right, they whisper-shouted, “Yes!” and pumped their fists.

In other classrooms in the very same school, I saw the very same students stare off into space. They took extraordinary amounts of time to staple their homework or sharpen their pencils. They danced silent steps in their sneakers on the linoleum floors under their desks. They smiled at me and waved. When I sneezed, they offered me tissues. They were the same kids, but the adult standing in front of them was not.

This all matters because, as Kevin Huffman put it in a Washington Post column the other day:

[T]oo often when we look at the sorry state of public education (on the most recent international benchmark exam conducted by the Program for International Student Assessment, U.S. high schoolers ranked 25th out of 30 industrialized nations in math and 24th in science) we believe the results are driven by factors beyond our control, such as funding and families. This leads to lethargy, which leads to inaction, which perpetuates a broken system that contributes to our economic decline.

By now, the research is clear: the one factor that matters most in a child’s education is the child’s teacher. As kids, we knew this. There were great teachers--the kind who made you believe anything was possible. But we always chalked it up to some kind of magical power that few teachers could be expected to possess. Turns out we were wrong.

Finally, we can identify extraordinary teachers—with data, not hearsay—and investigate what they are doing differently. We can even make more of them. The question is, Will we?

About Amanda Ripley

Author of
The Unthinkable
& contributor to Time.

Amanda Ripley, a longtime TIME Magazine contributor, has traveled the world studying disasters, natural and manmade. Her book, The Unthinkable: Who Survives When Disaster Strikes — and Why, is the first major book to explain how the brain works in disasters — and how we can learn to do better. It is being published in 15 countries.

Continue Reading »

Recent Articles


    follow me on Twitter