*** Grossly obese legislators or obsolete TV cameras?

I have been watching too much of SDPB legislative coverage on SDPB-TV2.  The 480 pixel coverage is a bit blurry and I suspected width artifacts due to changes in width, etc.  It seemed to me there were a lot of grossly obese males in the SD legislature now.

I finally called SDPB wondering if it was the legislators need for exercise or the public TV system needing better cameras.  According to Bob Bosse, the cameras used for legislative coverage are 12 year old cameras surplus from somewhere I missed in the conversation.

As for the obese legislators he was too polite to compare the effects of the cameras on the apparent legislator width.  I suspect it is a bit of both.   One of my friends suggested the legislature needs an exercise coach more than they need a preacher to lead them in a prayer-sermon they will surely ignore and which will never make them slimmer.

I also don't know if it is because I have had more time to watch the legislative sessions this year than in the past or if with the surplus of Republicans in the legislature that make them seem so much sillier and inane this year.  I have seen more time wasted on nonsense, irrelevant resolutions and KOCH-inspired legislation this year in the legislature.  Even with a shortened short session, they and the GOP Governor just can't get past their burning need to inject GOP mythology and ideological nonnsense in law and public misinformation.

The more legislators I see, the more I think a Unicameral with about half as many total members makes sense.

The Governor and the legislature think that teachers should not have tenure and should be continuously evaluated on some mythical evaluation system so that "merit' raises can be used.  This is absurd without scientifically-verifiable testing of evaluation systems.  That hasn't happened.  Perhaps another test we need is a gross weight total for legislative bodies.  It would be at least as relevant.

*** Stay tuned even if your life and livlihood are at risk during every legislative session-- Doug Wiken

Comments

[D.E. Bishop]

When you said, "This is absurd," you were referring to the entire thing, right? House, Senate, Gov's office, etc. Right?

[[[ Note from Doug: Well, no; but I can see how that might also be appropriate anyway. The idea of legislation without verified objective tests to determine "merit" is nonsense. In any case, the mischief possible with brown nosers and vain administrators is probably too great no matter what kind of evaluation. When I worked in state government, I ended up in evaluation courses and trying then to use them. It might work for narrowly defined secretarial tasks, but doing it right for work like teaching would seem to be very difficult. ]]]

[D.E. Bishop]

Thanks for the clarification Doug. Proper evaluation, as you know, is an extremely difficult thing to do. When I say "proper," I mean "fair." My experiences as a teacher showed that superintendents are the last, the very last people, who ought to evaluate teachers.

The best way to evaluate is with a team composed of the principal and 2-3 other teachers. Teachers know educating best. They also know the students. They know if Teacher A managed to finish the school year without killing Student B, that is a success! And if she was able to help him learn a thing or two, she is a star!!

Other teachers know that she managed to do some good things with very minimal resources. (Common in SD schools.)