Goes

First off, let me commend you on yet another masterpiece! I read Not a Day Goes By cover to cover within a day, just as my roommate did. It was excellent! You know, that Yancey may have a heart after all. But, it's impossible to drink from a well that's gone dry. Then there's Basil who is so confused he doesn't quite know what to do with himself. Yanceys' roommate Windsor was a wonderful addition to the story. I see that you left it somewhat open...does that mean that we will see Basil and Yancey again? My book club, Sistah Circle hosted your book signing of Abide With Me at Black Images in Dallas. I recall then that you said Basil might get his own book. Let me tell you, "YOU HAVE OUT DONE YOURSELF!" This book was absolutely marvelous. I received all of the invitations for Yancey and Basil's wedding, excellent idea. Whomever came up with that idea, always keep them on your team. Excellent marketing strategy. E. Lynn, what can I say besides, I simply love your books. Again I will say, since you first came into sistah's lives with Invisible Life, you have caused us to look and think twice about the men we deal with. We often times find ourselves saying, 'I hope he is not a Basil Henderson!' and praying that he is not. Please hurry with the next one, E. Lynn Harris books are my favorite. Please, do keep up the great work.

Toni Jackson Dallas, TX

It uses a very clever premise to end the series: Samurai Cat descending into the depths of Hell to avenge his master, where he can re-encounter all of his foes who perished by his blade (or gun, or grenade, or ...) in the previous books. Admittedly, a first-time Samurai Cat reader probably won't catch all the references.

So if you've been following Samurai Cat through the years, what are you waiting for? But if you're a Samurai Cat virgin, then you should probably read at least one or two of the preceeding volumes before attempting this one.

Rogers is a master and his work is incredibly unique and refreshing. Thanks for taking the time and making the effort to write some truly wonderful satire.

I'm sorry to see him go, but thankful for knowing him.

Saionara Tomokato.

Minear provides just enough historical backdrop. What I admire is that he respects the reader enough to refrain from making a complete interpretation of the cartoons. He often poses rhetorical questions that suggest multiple motives for Suess. I like that; it leaves me to make up my own mind based on my own knowledge of historical events.

Children familiar with Seuss will have a natural attraction to the cartoons, as many of the forerunners of familar characters appear there. However, they are also likely to ask questions about things they don't understand. For children old enough (and that's a personal call), this can be a wonderful way to introduce them to the history of World War II and the political climate of the times. Suess had a strong anti-isolationist stance, but he also touches upon racism (labor exclusion practices during the war, anti-semitism). He also demonstrates some degree of racism himself, in the depiction of Japanese. True, that was the prevalent attitude of the times, but again, you have an opportunity to open up some deeper discussion with a child or with your own conscience. Teachers may be especially interested in tapping the potential of this book.

The parody on the CIA underworld was hilarious and so where some of the situations Smith and Pedrito found themselves in. This book leaves the reader with the thought 'What if a case of mistaken identity really happened to me?' and 'Do I have a double on this planet?' The plot is what keeps you reading, making it a great 'What If' novel.

For the author: A simple plea. Please write more.

Living on the Gulf Coast, I spend much time, money and effort preparing my annual "hurricane pantry". Nevertheless, I have never had a plan as comprehensive as the one set forth in this book. Thanks to this publication I now have a workable plan of action that will carry my family through the next hurricane season as well as the Y2k crisis.

Everyone with an interest in the present and future of higher education in America will find this book to be at least interesting, and for many, dismaying and perhaps frightening. Most college teachers, I think, will find many things to which they can relate. I found the chronicle of Sacks's college teaching experience so similar to the kinds of things I have experienced as an educator that I couldn't put the book down.

The first part of the book is a tale of Sacks's experience teaching journalism at "a large suburban community college in the West," which he refers to only as "The College." Prior to being hired there, he was a Pulitzer Prize-nominated journalist. For various reasons, he had doubts about his future in that profession, and when a teaching job presented itself, he decided to give it a try. Whatever ideals he had about the teaching profession were quickly replaced by "confusion and bewilderment" brought on by the behavior and attitudes of Generation X students.

Sacks began teaching with the assumptions that students would read the assigned material, take notes, attend class, and turn assignments in on time. He also assumed that "C" represented average work. He very quickly learned that not only were these assumptions unfounded, but that in order to achieve tenure, he would have to play a different game. He came to realize that what these students wanted, for the most part, was to be entertained rather than educated. And that they believed that just by paying tuition they were entitled to a grade of "B" or higher whether or not they did any significant work. If these conditions were not met, he would receive negative student evaluations. And student evaluations were the main evidence cited in tenure decisions.

In discussions with colleagues he discovered that there was tacit agreement that this was the prevalent situation on campus, and that if he wanted to succeed as a teacher his student evaluations would have to improve. He was constantly admonished to "teach to the evaluations." When he changed his methods to become more entertaining (described in a chapter called "The Sandbox Experiment"), and in particular when he inflated his grades to a B, rather than a C, average, his evaluations improved dramatically.

Along the way, he encountered (either in his own classes or those of colleagues) students who asked such questions as "Do we have to read the text?" and "Why are colleges trying to force this stuff down our throats and trying to make us think when our minds and opinions are already formed?" He gradually came to see that a vicious circle existed: high academic standards meant higher attrition rates which meant budget cuts which meant loss of faculty jobs. The key to success was to ward off student failure in any way that worked.

Part 2 of the book is a more general discussion of the relation between higher education and the phenomenon of postmodernism. Sacks is quick to point out that he is not an expert in the philosophical foundations of the latter. Nevertheless, his explanation is reasonably clear, and he draws a pretty convincing picture of a generation in which skepticism and critical thought is replaced on the one hand by paranoia and distrust, and by credulousness on the other (e.g., belief in UFOs, astrology, etc.), in which "truth" is merely a social construct, everyone is entitled to succeed (where success is defined by standard of living), and in which anti-intellectualism is a virtue.

In the final chapter, Sacks makes some recommendations as to what might be done to help rectify what he obviously sees as a dangerous situation. He realizes that merely to perpuate teaching strategies that don't work in a postmodern world, even when augmented by the latest technology (an important point), will not suffice. The focus of education must shift from what you learn to how one uses that knowledge--or in Sack's words, "any given course would be one in learning how to do something, and at the same time...thinking about what you're doing, wondering why you're doing it, and imagining new ways of doing it." The role of the teacher would shift from being a "transmitter of knowledge" to that of an "expert consultant," who "[guides] students in the use of information-gathering tools, i.e., helping them learn how to learn," and "[helps] students imagine new ways of looking at knowledge, while prodding them to appreciate subtle complexities about a discipline not obtainable from machines and databases."

Sacks realizes that simply to adjust the role of the teacher as above isn't enough, however. For him the key question is the survival of higher education as a meaningful institution in our culture against the "onslaught of hyperconsumerism and amusement." Grade inflation is an obvious place to begin work, and Sacks suggests some positive steps institutions might take to combat it. The use of student evaluations in tenure decisions also needs to be scrutinized. Further, Sacks suggests that performance assessment (he cites Alverno College as an example where this has been used with success) be tried as an alternative, or at least a supplement, to traditional grading. Finally, he thinks that America ought to look more seriously at the idea that a universal college education maybe isn't for everybody after all, and that some sort of "comprehensive, national system of vocational and technical education" ought to be tried.

The debate between modernists and postmodernists will continue in spite of books like this, until postmodernism has run its course or until some new synthesis is reached. But Sacks has undeniably put his finger on a real crisis in current higher education. This is a book that should not be passed by lightly, regardless of one's philosophical position on the fate of modernism.

I recognize some of these characters from my own college follies (one of my favorite professors was considered "arrogant" because he demanded such things of students as reading the NY Times and watching the news regularly!)... yet agree with other reviews that the poor attention spans and consumerist attitudes have only gotten worse. I blame SpongeBob.

I wonder if there's something else going on besides what Sacks writes about - with this idea of the "quarter century crisis", perhaps adolescence and its ambivalence and passive-aggressiveness, is lasting longer. The persistently bad economy isn't promising students anything great after graduation - at least Gen Xers had the dot.com world and the raging Dow to motivate them.

Meanwhile, this "grade inflation" is not starting in college - it's going back to high school and earlier. If the state of Wisconsin can happily inflate how well their educational system is doing, how morally hard is it to coach kids to do well on the California Achievement Test or PSAT? Meanwhile, high school students in Europe and Great Britain are graduating with two years more experience and knowledge than American kids the same age and "rank".

Postmodernist thinking has definitely chipped away at the idea of reverence for elders, leaders or experts. It's also hurt these kids' sense of their own capabilities and weaknesses. When everyone is considered "special," but in a bland sort of way, like a preschool video game where "everyone is a winner," why wouldn't teenagers only do enough to "get by" and then still expect A grades? Meanwhile, deep down, these kids know that they have yet to be really tested, or challenged - and while some of them go on to relish learning, others avoid facing their own inadequacies. You *must* face your inadequacies and take chances (whether you win or screw up) to grow! And if the school systems and colleges aren't making them face facts, and really learn - wow, just consider what sort of graduates we're feeding into every sector of society, from government to corporate America.

Over and over, I was shocked to see students at a so-called "socially progressive" school (it wasn't Antioch, but you get the drift) avoid taking on any real responsibility or burden for positive social change. Students would whine about the lack of action in the classroom or on campus, then back down when challenged or encouraged to use the resources at their disposal! Students would "talk the talk" but shirk responsibility or creative risk-taking, and that was saddest of all - if you can't take chances in college, and expand your academic and social boundaries, where else will you do it?