Common Core, Diversity, and the Lessons of Rebranding

The biggest unforced tactical error made by the folks behind the Common Core was giving it a brand name (well, second biggest, right behind creating a crappy bunch of standards in the first place). They added to this error by not sticking around to defend and gatekeep their brand. 

And before you could say "David Coleman is a twit," folks were slapping the Common Core brand on every stupid education thing they didn't like. Common Core supporters were increasingly frustrated about having defend their brand both from legitimate attacks and from stuff that was made up and unrelated to the actual standards.

They eventually caught on and dropped the actual brand in favor of vaguer language about college and career readiness. It's not snappy and makes for limp marketing, but it's also hard to poke back. It pushes everyone in the direction of arguing about whether or not Policy X actually helps students prepare for college and a career, and it lets us have pointed discussions about whether or not education should provide more than vocational prep (spoiler alert: it should). 

Right wing folks have been applying similar lessons for several years now. First it was shortening Black Lives Matter to BLM, then turning around to apply BLM to anything they found objectionable. Then it was Critical Race Theory (again, shortened to CRT, because initials can mean anything) and a ploy that was so transparent because Chris Rufo announced explicitly what he would do-- take the term and redefine it to mean "anything anyone might object to." 

As he infamously tweeted, "The goals is to have the public read something crazy in the news and immediately think 'critical race theory.' We have decodified the term and will recodify it to annex the entire range of cultural constructions that are unpopular with Americans."

So now it's Diversity, Equity and Inclusion-- again, more easily attacked as initials. Adam Conover (the Adam Ruins Everything guy) has a post in Bluesky today that gets to the point:

The attack on DEI shows why liberals should stop arguing about "strategic" use of language forever. DEI stands for three uncontroversial virtues that most every American accepts, and the right still turned it into a vile slur. It doesn't matter what you say - they will poison it because YOU said it.

— Adam Conover (@adamconover.net) February 27, 2025 at 8:19 PM

So now the feds are bringing a full-on attack on DEI to schools, including a website for turning in a teacher or school "to report illegal discriminatory practices" to the education department, because "DEI" means whatever they want it to mean. 

In fairness, a generation of half-assed, ill-considered corporate DEI programs had already sullied the brand. But it wouldn't have mattered, any more than it mattered that critical race theory was never really discussed outside of university classrooms. Branding creates a shorthand that cuts both ways. Just as critics can attack and redefine the label while ignoring what it stands for, schools and corporations can pay lip service to DEI without addressing the values it's supposed to represent.

Rebranding is no solution. The far right is already anticipating that, pre-emptively feinting at SEL. Vice-President Trump already warned that attempts to rebrand DEI would be punished. All labels, all branding, have the same built-in weakness.

It's time to unbrand. Let's just talk about diversity. Make the opponents of diversity (because that's what they are) explain why they are against persons who are not like them. Let them explain in plain words that they are against anything that doesn't result in their domination of diverse persons. Let them explain why a school that serves a diverse student population should act as if it does not. 

It will not settle things quickly or easily. They're going to argue that we should focus on what unites us ("get behind me and agree with me") and recognizing diversity just highlights differences. Diversity is a historical strength of this country, but not everyone sees it that way. Make them say why. 

Instead of getting sucked into arguments about what DEI "really" means, argue about those things. Never mind DEI-- tell me why you're opposed to being inclusive in this school, and while you're at it, point out to me the students who shouldn't be included and tell me why. 

Create programs that recognize the many different sorts of students in the school, create ways to make sure they get the education they deserve, and actively seek to make them part of the school. And don't brand these programs with a snappy name. Stand up for the values and principles. Labels are just convenient targets. 

Department of Education Has a Diversity Tattling Site

The Department of Education wants you to narc on all the ideologies and indoctrinaters out there in your local school district, because apparently the folks currently operating what's left of the department are unfamiliar with the internet.

The website has the nifty url enddei.ed.gov, and its text is short and... well, it's short. Under a big bold heading "Schools should be focused on learning," we get this copy:

The U.S. Department of Education is committed to ensuring all students have access to meaningful learning free of divisive ideologies and indoctrination. This submission form is an outlet for students, parents, teachers, and the broader community to report illegal discriminatory practices at institutions of learning. The Department of Education will utilize community submissions to identify potential areas for investigation.

The press release for this portal comes with a quote from Tiffany Justice, one of the co-founders of Moms for Liberty, a group well-known for its interest in civil rights for all:

“For years, parents have been begging schools to focus on teaching their kids practical skills like reading, writing, and math, instead of pushing critical theory, rogue sex education and divisive ideologies—but their concerns have been brushed off, mocked, or shut down entirely,” said Tiffany Justice, Co-Founder of Moms for Liberty. “Parents, now is the time that you share the receipts of the betrayal that has happened in our public schools. This webpage demonstrates that President Trump’s Department of Education is putting power back in the hands of parents.”

It's all one more trip through the looking glass to that magical land where the only civil rights that are being damaged are put-upon conservative christianist white folks, where a four star general and an experienced naval officer are DEI hires, but a mediocre talk show host is a champion of merit. 

But now this thing exists. Fill in your email, your school district name, the zip code, and your description of whatever "discriminatory practice" is making you feel bad. You can even attach a file, and do your part to stop whatever illegal discrimination against straight white males is going on in your neighborhood. 

We have seen this movie before. Previous Lt. Governor and Current Failed Candidate Mark Robinson tried this stunt in North Carolina, and Lt. Governor Janice McGeachin tried it in Idaho. Oh yeah-- Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita tried it just last year. These are the kind of performative actions one can expect from middle aged people who are not familiar with how the collective wisdom of the internet works (Hey there, Boaty McBoatface). They ended poorly. 

Who knows-- maybe the site will bring in all sorts of serious posts from people leaping to defend students from being taught Scary History or Naughty Books or Things That Make Certain People Clutch Their Pearls. Maybe it will have the desired effect of chilling classrooms and making teachers think twice before they commit crimes against the Cultural Revolution. 

But what it deserves is to drown in reports that treat the anti-diversity initiative with all the respect it deserves. After all, witch hunts have historically always turned out well for this country. 

At any rate, here's the site. It's right here. So if you have anything to report, just click on this link. I trust you to do the responsible thing.

Crypto-Education

I have put off trying to educate myself about cryptocurrency, but finally gave in, read a book, and golly bob howdy, if it isn't the same guys, the same grift, and the same bullshit as education privatization.

The book was Easy Money: Cryptocurrencym Casino Capitalism, and the Golden Age of Fraud, written by Ben McKenzie and Jacob Silverman, and if McKenzie's name sounds vaguely familiar, that's because you used to watch The OC on which he played Ryan. But before he was an actor, McKenzie graduated from the University of Virginia magna cum laude with a degree in economics and foreign affairs. Silverman is a journalist who covers tech, crypto and politics. 

The book is tied together by the narrative of McKenzie's growing interest and his concurrent growing sense that crypto was an emperor with no clothes, a burning building for which nobody was pulling the alarm. It's clear, compelling, and easy to understand even for those of us with no economics background. 

It is also, if you've been deep in the education debates, oddly familiar, sometimes in ways that I found illuminating. Familiar themes include--

Techbro awesomeness

The techbros driving the movement are absolutely certain that they Know How It Is, that they possess all the wisdom and know-how to engineer a complete replacement for the system already in place. People who stick up for that system are just showing that they aren't as smart as the bros. See also: Bill Gates on education. 

Ignorance of the past. 

If you're smarter than everyone, you don't have to listen to anyone, including people who know the history of the field you want to disrupt. The techbros driving the movement are sure they are pioneering bold new uncharted territory. "Behold! I have invented a new piece of technology! I shall call it [drum roll] The Wheel!!" 

But as the authors point out, the idea of launching a "decentralized" currency backed by nothing but charm and big brass balls has been tried in this country back in the mid-19th century. Spoiler alert: it did not work. See also: Mr. Lancaster's System by Adam Laats.

Frauds and scamsters

McKenzie and Silverman mention several times that having been scammed is seen as a regular and normal part of the crypto landscape. It is so pervasive that most of the folks they talked to freely talked about their own losses as if being scammed was a rite of passage. The underlying assumption-- that scammers and fraudsters are just part of the price of "freedom" and that it's up to the marketplace to do their homework and avoid getting fleeced. Fraud is how we know we're really free, I guess.  See also: complaints that school choice must not be hampered by regulation or oversight.

Lies about Decentralization and Power

Crypto is supposed to do away with the idea of money controlled by some central authority-- "government money," if you will. The power will be decentralized, declare crypto stans. Except that it isn't so much decentralized as simply moved. And it's not moved to the people who will supposedly benefit, but to a new, small set of people. And unlike a government, these people do not have to answer to anyone. They do, however, use the power and money they accumulate to make sure that elected officials and legislators stay friendly. 

But the notion that this disruption is somehow creating more freedom and opportunity for the ordinary citizen is a fiction. Instead, by removing a trusted third party, they create an unregulated marketplace where the real power is in the hands of a few rich folks, and the average person is a sheep ripe for shearing--and no recourse should such a shearing happen. Without a trusted third party in the mix, the rich and powerful are free to set rules that serve them. See also: the entire school voucher biz.

Some of the stories are just astounding, like the folks who lost millions of dollars because when market fluctuations became extreme and investors went to cash in, the exchange simply shut down so that they couldn't until the moment had passed. Yes, crypto shares certain folks' naive faith in tech. 

McKenzie and Silverman travel through many of the halls of crypto-land and talk to many of the major players (some of whom are remarkably willing to reveal to talk). In the end, you have to conclude that however bad, scammy, and fraudulent you thought crypto might be, it is probably way worse than that. And many of its worst features echo the school privatization movement. 

Crypto uses the language of known, trusted stuff-- it's "currency" and "coin"-- to get folks to offer trust to something that has no basis in anything other than its creators' will to make something out of thin air that can be used as a foundation for grift. Sure, there are some people involved in good faith, but the whole edifice is built on smoke and mirrors. 

Radical Solution to NAEP Score Drop

Some real outside the box thinking here.

The NAEP results have been a big talking point, a way to trumpet the "failure" of the public school system. Will changes in US schools raise the scores? 

We may never know, because the NAEP is now one more victim of Trusk spending cuts.

“The U.S. Department of Education has decided not to fund the NAEP 2024-2025 Long-Term Trend Age 17 assessment,” Marcie Hickman, project director of the NAEP Support and Service Center, said in an email to state officials. “All field operations and activities will end today, February 19, 2025.”

I would have expected more squawking, but so far only The74 and Education Week have reported on this. 

The test is federally mandated, which means President Musk shouldn't be able to legally cut it off, but we all know how much that means these days. Ed Week reports that "the decision appears to have been made without the approval of the National Assessment Governing Board," which seems about par for the course. 

What has actually been canceled at this point is the test for 17-year-olds that was supposed to happen in the near future. Nobody seems to really know whether this cancellation will also affect all other future NAEP testing, but since Musk has gutted financing for the Institute of Education Sciences, the data wing of the education department, it sure doesn't look good.

So much for all those fun conversations folks were going to have while parsing the test scores and arguing about what they meant for public schools in a post[sic] pandemic world. 

Regular readers know that I have no deep love for Big Standardized Tests, but the whole School Criticism Industry has depended on these scores, and I don't know what the heck they're going to do with themselves without the data.

Perhaps the next phase will involve the Musk Method that has been used so expansively in the DOGE process. Never mind talking to experts, don't try to look at actual data, but just kind of eyeball things and make declarations based on how you personally feel about it, unhampered by any actually reality. Boy, those are going to be some fun times. 

AI Techno-Bullshit

Like most folks, I can no longer complete the simplest written objective without some degenerate descendant of Clippy trying to butt in. Want to wish a friend a Happy Birthday on Facebook? There's already a draft completed. Did someone just email you? Here's a selection of replies you can send. Writing a document? Sure you don't want some help with that?

No, no, and no. In fact, now I'm going to craft a Happy Birthday wish that not only says "Happy Birthday," but also "I took the trouble to do more than just click on the pre-written wish."

Words matter, and how we use them matters. The deepest existential challenge of being human is that we are consciousness, ideas, feelings, memories and grasping comprehensions, all trapped in a singular isolated body with no way to directly communicate or share any of what we are to any of the other meat-trapped spirits in the world. Over millennia we have crafted art, music, movement and, most of all, language to try to bridge that unfathomable gulf between human beings. 

So, yeah. Language is a big deal to me. It is how we are our best selves, how we are fully human in the world. It is how we access love and trust and the impossible beauty of connection with creation. 

And like any powerful tool, it can be misused. A hammer can build a house or break a window. Language can be used to lie. 

There are plenty of shades and shapes and definitions of lying (omission, commission, white, dark, etc) but for me, it comes down to this-- communicating things you don't believe are true in order to control somebody else's behavior. I like the wikipedia definition of bullshit-- "statements made by people concerned with the response of the audience rather than with truth and accuracy."

Our country is used to being awash in bullshit, from the casual lies of marketing to political lies-of-all-size. No, my congressperson did not personally send me an e-mail because they are alarmed and want to hear form me, and no, the US wasn't winning the Vietnam War, and no, Donald Trump did not win the 2020 election. No, that's not what that famous person really looks like. 

The explosion of technology has given us whole new gushing rivers of communication, and that turns out to mean bullshit with an intensity, frequency, and quantity unlike anything ever seen before. Use tech to collect tons of data that reveals where peoples' buttons are, then craft some techno-bullshit to push those buttons. It looks like communication, like human beings trying to bridge the gap between them, but it is not. It is something else, something morally empty. It's a lie.

It becomes most obvious when we consider that most modern form of lying-- trolling.

Trolling is anti-communication. It is a simple observation-- when I say or do X, people jump. Somebody throws up a white power ok symbol or, hell, an actual Nazi salute, and a host of people mistake this for an attempt to communicate. Is this guy really a fascist? Is he not really a fascist? The question is beside the point--he's a guy who has figured out that if he makes this symbol, a whole bunch of folks freak out and react and he has some by God power over them. He can make the puppets dance, and feel powerful inside his sad little isolated meat sack. 

It's an exhilarating lesson-- your words don't have to mean anything exactly in order to get reactions out of people. Or they can mean many things. Or they can mean what you decide they mean. Language isn't a means of bridging the gap between yourself and others; it's a tool for manipulating those others. It's a weapon for exerting control. Once you let go of the idea that words are supposed to mean something, that language is supposed to be anchored within you on your own truth and intention, you are ride the Nihilism Express all the way to the Land of Do As You Please.

Generative AI, chatbots, Large Language Models make excellent tools for bullshit. Where most humans have to work to disconnect their language from anything in their actual consciousness, LLMs arrive fully unmoored from any such baggage, making them excellent tools for creating language-shaped sticks with which to poke other humans. Computers and technology have a useful place, but it's up to humans to decide where to find the limits.

Language disconnected from a human intent or consciousness is a morally empty exercise. I don't mean to suggest that everyone who disconnects in this way is evil or even terrible, but I do think they've lost the plot. For people who have lost that plot, who have drifted over to thinking that language is mostly a tool one uses to prod other humans in a particular direction, LLMs will seem like a perfectly natural next step. If you're not using language for personal, conscious, intentional expression, then why not outsource the job?

For those who think our human task is not to communicate with other humans, but to dominate and subjugate them, language generated by algorithm must seem like the ultimate refinement of language-as-tool. When Mike Johnson excitedly tells us that Elon has "cracked the code" and algorithms will crawl through the data and "transform the way the federal government works," these must be exciting times. "Data," he says Elon told him, "doesn't lie." But automated language does, and easily, at that. 

Automated language production is by its nature disconnected from human intent and consciousness, and as such is not a means of communication, but a tool for other things, like various forms of bullshittery, manipulation, and trolling. Maybe there's a non-zero number of times that this is okay. Maybe. At a point in our history when bad actors have shown a willingness to reduce language to a tool for separating rather than connecting humans, quick and easy morally empty mimicry of human communication is worrisome.

The undermining starts early. On social media, a teacher opined that since her students have trouble coming up with ideas, she just has them ask ChatGPT for essay ideas, as if the actual thinking part of writing is a minor feature barely worth considering. The calls to incorporate AI into the classroom is loud and relentless, a cacophony of marketing bullshit marketing marketing bullshit.

Maybe some of it is Not So Bad, like the miles of AI-generated marketing bullshit that is replacing and outpacing old fashioned human-generated marketing bullshit. Maybe there are social conventions that merely require an exchange of language-adjacent artifacts. maybe some folks really want to be governed by AI instead of other humans. 

But it's both scary and sad. Here we are, vibrating spirits in our isolated fleshy vessels, trying so hard to connect with other humans because it helps us understand the world and it helps us understand ourselves and it fulfills a basic human need to see and be seen. How shitty to grab one of those bridges of language and discover at the other end... nothing. Not a consciousness to be seen and heard, nothing but dead empty eyes staring not at you, but at nothing, and no connection to make at all. I can't help thinking it is a misuse of a fundamental human feature. 

I often describe education as the process of becoming your best self, discovering what it means to be fully human in the world. It seems, to me, to be the most foundational human activity, and yet so much of what surrounds us seems designed to thwart it, from authoritarian mock versions of leaders to empty technological mock humans. 

What to do? Be human. Search for your truth and then put it out into the world, aimed at other humans. Make real connections. When you see bullshit, point and laugh. Try to stay true; I know that's not always easy, but as I used to tell my students, life is too short to sign your name to a lie. This is not woo-woo fuzzy advice, but a down-in-the-dirt practical goal-- more practical than believing in magical algorithms that create the illusion of human interaction with no humanity attached.

ICYMI: George's Birthday Edition (2/23)

Okay, George Washington's birthday was yesterday (or actually the 11th by the old calendar), but it seems like a good time to remember the guy who, for all his faults, argued that he should not be crowned king and not allowed to serve more than two terms as President. Just saying. George would be 293 today.

Here's your list for the week. Remember, you can be an amplifier. Share posts. Subscribe to folks-- even if it's a free subscription, you increase their digital footprint. 

The White House said book bans aren’t happening. Now JD Vance’s memoir is a target.

Hillbilly Elegy, besides being poverty porn, has plenty of naughty words and even recognizes that LGBTQ persons exist. Cue the Department of Defense purge.

Trump's Education Agenda is Unpopular

Jennifer Berkshire must have calluses from beating this drum so hard, but she's right-- look at conditions on the ground and you find that even the people who love Trump don't love his ideas about education.

Trump Is Not Taking the State Out of Public Schools, He Is Putting Christianity In

Anne Lutz Fernandez looks at the MAGA religious agenda for K-12. 

The SC House Debates Education and School Vouchers

Steve Nuzum reports on education debates in the South Carolina House, which include the usual unsubstantiated slander of teachers--but also people on the far right who oppose the universal voucher bill.

It Is Fun to Pretend That Hard Things Are Easy!

Dan Meyers on an online platform that promises to teach you math 4x faster. Yay, miracles!

Why Education Reformers Will Find a Home in the Trump Administration

Jeff Bryant takes a look at continued upward fail that is Penny Schwin's career. Seasoned reformster or common grifter, Schwinn shows what kind of ideas are running Dear Leader's education policy.

Strange Science of Reading Law Suit

Thomas Ultican pulls up the background on the first-of-its-kind lawsuit meant to support the Science [sic] of Reading folks. 

Bad Words in Schools

Do you subscribe to Nancy Flanagan's blog yet? Because you should. Here's her musing about what words are or are not okay in school these days.

Automated Contempt

It is a mistake to call Audrey Watters simply the ed tech Cassandra. She has an outstanding ability to connect the dots between many different pieces of history, technology, and culture. Her posts are also full of excellent links, like this one, that mulls on how well the inhumanity of AI fits the inhumanity of the political moment.

Elon Musk’s DOGE cuts at the Department of Education are already harming North Carolina’s most vulnerable students

Justin Parmenter reports from North Carolina on some of the real effects of President Musk's chainsaw work. 

What Did We Learn from Linda McMahon’s Confirmation Hearing?

Jan Resseger provides an excellent digest of observations from Linda McMahon's confirmation hearing for the Secretary of Education post. No good news here, but forewarned and all that.

The War on Learning: How Politicians Are Dismantling Education—And How We Fight Back

Julian Vasquez Heilig on fighting for academic freedom and inclusive education.

There IS Proof Knowledge Works. And It's Overwhelming.

Yes, this is from Robert Pondiscio, a long time part of the AEI/Fordham axis of reforminess. He and I disagree on some stuff, and agree on some other stuff, and one part of the other stuff is the idea that content knowledge matters when it comes to reading (and learning). 

The Josiah Bartlett Center takes a beating.

New Hampshire libertarians have had a rough couple of weeks. Andru Volinsky explains some of what's actually going on.

Senator Simon’s SB166: Administrative Efficiency in Public Schools

Could Florida actually do something to help public schools? Anything is possible. Sue Kingery Woltanski explains what the bill could do.

Parents at Army base in Stuttgart say students grappling with new school rules

Stars and Stripes has been covering the effects of federal anti-diversity measures on Department of Defense schools. John Vandiver takes a look at Stuttgart, where nobody is sure what the rules are, but some students are pretty sure they're being erased.

Educators calculate their risks in class as states escalate anti-DEI pressure

The Southern Poverty Law Center looks at some teachers who are navigating the new racist restrictions on education. Can you teach Black history and keep your job?

Who is a cognitive scientist?

Benjamin Riley considers what cognition is, and who counts as a scientist studying it.

Boston Herald, Pioneer Institute, and Massachusetts Opportunity Alliance Push Great Replacement Theory

You know what's not great for education? Treating Those Peoples' Children as interlopers who are out to replace proper white folks. And yet here's The Boston Globe, a major newspaper, pushing the Great Replacement Theory. Maurice Cunningham has the story.

“I’m Afraid We Are Automating This Work Without Really Understanding It”

Gretchen Gravatt talks to Allison Pugh about using AI to replace human connective labor.

The Department of Government Exploitation

The current administration's rush to privatize everything is, of course, pretty familiar to folks in the education world. Conor Lynch at Truthdig explains what's up here. For instance, the federal workforce actually hasn't increased since the 1950s. The number of private subcontracts on the other hand...

If the ultra-rich want to escape from reality — good riddance

Troy Farah's Salon piece can get a little harsh for my tastes, but it does include this Douglas Rushkoff  quote--

they have succumbed to a mindset where “winning” means earning enough money to insulate themselves from the damage they are creating by earning money in that way. It’s as if they want to build a car that goes fast enough to escape from its own exhaust.

This week at Forbes.com I wrote about the Texas conservatives who hate hate hate Greg Abbott's voucher bill.

Sign up for my newsletter--always free.

Rest Well, Dr. Zolbrod

Word came this morning that Paul Zolbrod passed away yesterday. May his memory be a blessing.

Dr. Zolbrod first taught me when I was a freshman at Allegheny College. It was one of those survey course that English majors, even English majors at a liberal arts school, must take--the first half of a survey of British Literature. 

That was fifty-ish years ago. I dug out some musty folders of old college papers this morning, and it is amazing how many of my professors I have forgotten, past even the point of look-at-the-name-and-oh-now-I-remember. But I never forgot Dr. Zolbrod. He was one of the teachers who shaped my entire career.

Dr. Zolbrod had several rare gifts as a teacher. There was the more typical gift of helping you see why the material was interesting and compelling. He challenged you to really think through stuff, which was a welcome new challenge. College was the first time I understood that there were two basic flavors of literature teachers-- those who would listen to any interpretation as long as you could back it up with evidence and reason, and those who knew the One True Interpretation and expected you to spit that back. Dr. Zolbrod was the former, and sitting in his class solidified for me which kind I wanted to be.

Dr. Zolbrod was no pushover when it came to grading papers, but somehow, when I left his office after talking about the crappy paper I'd just gotten back, I felt good about myself. I could see where I'd missed the boat, but I also could see the strengths that I was going to carry into the next one.

As Facebook has filled up with tributes to him, I see multiple versions of what I wrote-- He could see possibilities in you that you could not see in yourself. It was so energizing and empowering. It would have been easy for him to make me feel stupid; instead, he made me feel smart and capable and I promised myself that I would try to do that for the students I hoped to teach some day. 

Dr. Zolbrod gave us a choice-- write a final paper, or go teach a unit about one of the works in the middle school down the hill from the college. I jumped on that opportunity, and later he set me up with the chance to teach several weeks' worth of Beowulf to gifted third graders. It was exciting to get a taste of the work, and he made that happen.

He retired from Allegheny in 1996 and moved to New Mexico where he kept teaching and focused on the work he had been doing for years with the Navajo Creation Story. He had started out in Pittsburgh, served in the military, looked at the student radicalism of the 60s, published a variety of works, and really never stopped displaying curiosity and engagement with life (here's a remarkable interview he gave when he turned 90). As his daughter wrote, 

He looked so closely at what was around him , whether it was the sun rising over the mesa, the woods on a morning walk on Rogers Ferry, the arches of the churches in Tuscany, the weave of the Navajo rugs he studied. And he paid such careful attention to the people he interacted with, especially to working people, with whom he closely identified. And of course, he read so deeply, and listened so intently to oral recountings and to music. He was so engaged with history of places, including Crawford County, where my brother and I grew up, and with ideas, and the way they intersected. He wanted to capture all of it. The soundtrack of my childhood was the clackety clack of his manual typewriter coming from his basement office.

I connected with him, like many of his former students, on Facebook, where he shared personal recollections as well as thoughts and insights about the world unfolding. It was miraculous to me that he remembered me, had followed some of my teaching career, and read some of my writing about education. 

Dr. Zolbrod is one of a handful of people who were an inspiration and a model for me as a teacher; I was a better teacher because of him. The world is a better place because he was in it. Condolences to his family. May his memory continue to be a blessing.