the ADMIN pages

I've never written about this on the blog before, but I need a means to vent. Understandably, very few of you will understand the referee culture, but I'll do my best to explain.

As some of you may know, I work as a referee for youth soccer games in my area. I've been a ref for 5 years now, and attend a mandatory 6-hour recertification class every year. Originally, I started out doing low-level, recreational games in my hometown. In these games, there's no serious physical play, only two members of any given team are any good, and the coaches have absolutely no clue what they're doing (okay, the last one is true for all coaches :-P).

In the past year I've started officiating for traveling soccer clubs in the area. These are real games. The kids all know which direction to kick the ball, the coaches are certified as such, and the games are much better. While they can sometimes be very taxing physically, especially if I have several games back-to-back on a given day, I prefer them to the recreational games for one reason: they don't bore me. Oh, and they pay better.

It's important to point out that each league is independent of one another, although they are all loosely affiliated with national and state organizations. The slight exception is that some of the rec coaches are also coaches of my town's club teams, so I interact with them frequently outside of the recreational league.

But anyway, back to the recreational, park district league I work for in my hometown. As I said, the games are frequently very boring. However, with nothing else to do on a Saturday morning, why not get paid good money ($20-25/hour) to stand around and exert your authority?

Now, I could spend a whole post talking about some of the, er... lackluster referees in my town. In fact, I'll add that to my list of topics to write about later. Let's just say that many of the people I frequently work with--most soccer games are refereed by a three-man team: one center official (in charge) and two linesmen (assistants)--are not very um, good. They couldn't tell you the difference between a foul and misconduct, they're afraid to make controversial calls, and they don't take well to criticism. In general, they don't take their job seriously. I've seen referees in this league answer their cell phones while they're on the field. If you take away one piece of soccer knowledge from this post, know that a referee answering his cell phone in the middle of officiating a game is absolutely ridiculous, unprofessional, unheard-of, and wrong. One of my assistants (a kid a few years younger than me that I've known for years) during a game I did last Saturday accused me of taking my job too seriously. Let me tell you something: when you're a soccer referee, there is no such thing as taking your job too seriously. Referees are responsible for upholding the integrity of the game they are tasking with officiating and the sport of soccer in general. You shouldn't be okay with screwing that up.

Back on topic (here's where I get pretty heavy into the soccer lingo): with the exception of the stated rules of the league as well as the notion that this is a learning environment for kids, I apply the same Laws of the Game (LOTG) and standards of behavior to the recreational league that I do for "real" games. I don't take crap from coaches or players on the field. 95% of the time in the local league, this isn't a problem. But occasionally, mostly in the highest-age division in the rec league, coaches have a problem with the way I run things. One example: there was a coach several weeks ago who started arguing with me about my calls in the middle of a game. He was getting pretty vocal, and it was impeding my ability to do the game.

Allow me to interrupt to explain some soccer stuff: a yellow card ("caution") is shown to players who (among other things) show dissent towards my calls. A red card ("send-off") is shown if they (among other things) get two yellow cards or do other serious, violent acts. The rules of "real" soccer permit coaches to be verbally cautioned and/or sent-off, but we don't show them a card. However, the local league states that referees are to show coaches the card if they receive one. Good link for more info on cards: http://www.wikihow.com/Understand-Soccer-Referee-Signals

Back to this coach: I had stopped the game to talk to him twice already, and he was getting on my nerves, so I gave him a yellow card for dissent. Let me reiterate that cards are pretty much unheard of in this league. It's low-level play, and coaches generally know their place. I probably gave more cards just this past weekend (7) doing club games than the entire league got all season. This past season in the rec league, I gave a total of 3 cards (that I can remember): two send-offs for abusive language and a yellow card to this coach. And I've "stirred up trouble" on two other occasions this season. Once, I took issue with a spectator smoking on the sidelines during a game of 4th- and 5th-graders. He refused to leave until I got the coaches to go over there and handle it. One of the coaches later told me he "disagreed with the way I handled it." The other time, I sent a report to the league about one of the coaches who was yelling pretty profanely at his kids (also a game of 4th- and 5th-graders) and did some other questionable activities on the field.

Ugh. All this background for a tiny bit of actual content. Anyway, let it be said that I've probably raised quite a bit of hell in this small-town, recreational soccer league. At least, compared to any other referee. I know for a fact they've discussed my actions at the weekly board meetings several times. But let it also be said, I am not without my supporters on the board. It is my understanding that the board president and his assistant coach (also on the board), who are coaches for both a recreational team and a club team in my town, think I'm a decent ref. The aforementioned assistant coach actually came up to me recently (after the below-described events) and told me he thinks I'm the "finest referee they have" in my town. But there are several board members (who also coach) and non-board-member coaches who think I am "cocky" with players (according to one of the referee directors who sits on the board). Case one: the board secretary coaches a club team of very young players. This lends credence to the fact that his kids aren't top-notch players, just like every other nine-year-old boy. I only did one game of his this season (a club game). It was 40 degrees out, it was nighttime, I was given no assistants, and the field was in pretty poor condition. Needless to say, even I'll admit I didn't call a perfect game, but I think I did a damn good job considering the circumstances. He, however, sends a scathing e-mail to the referee director for the local league (remember: the leagues are completely independent) saying how bad of a job I did.

Case two: one of the local league's board members is an assistant coach for a U12 boys club team. Now, this particular team is pretty physical, especially considering their relatively young age. The first game I did for them this season, I cautioned 5 players. This assistant coach wasn't at the first game I did for the team, but prior to the start of the second game I did for them, he pulled me aside and told me (in no uncertain terms) that I shouldn't be giving yellow cards at this age. I disagreed, explaining that his team's level of physical play was unacceptable. During that game, I cautioned one of his players for telling me to "get my glasses checked" after I made a call. Dissent, plain and clear, even disregarding earlier comments from this player. The coach erupted at me, yelling that "we had an understanding" that I was not to give any yellow cards. I ignored him, although I very well could have sent him off considering the language he used towards me. As I said, he sits on the board of the local league, so I'm sure he's ranted about me to the local league too.

One of the two referee directors in the local league mentioned to me on the last day of the local season that they had received 3-4 complaints about me from coaches. He said specific complaints were "too many yellow cards" and being "cocky" with players. As I said, I gave one yellow card the entire season in the local league, but some of the coaches from club teams sit on the local board, so I'm sure signals are getting crossed there. He also questioned the yellow card I gave to the coach in the local league.

I should mention that I never heard any of this from the other referee director (the head one), which kinda put me off. Either she disregarded it, or didn't feel the need to tell me.

Fast-forward to a tournament sponsored by the local league a week later. I issue a yellow card to a player (whose family is very prominent in the local league) for dissent. I put it out of my mind-- I was completely justified and I knew it. The same referee director who told me to be conservative about my yellow cards questioned the earlier card as I was finishing up for the day. That really put me off. The guy is a good referee, no doubt about it. And technically, he is my boss, although in the referee culture it's not really thought of that way. But when he starts questioning my authority to use cards as I see fit (which I personally rarely do in the local league), I don't take kindly to that. And the tournament itself was a separate entity from the local league-- higher-level play.

Anyway... what I'm trying to say with this massive post is that I have been slightly turned off to this local league. Several board members are apparently questioning my actions on the field outside of their jurisdiction, and one of the referee directors himself is telling me not to use cards in the local league--which I generally don't do anyway. If they want to ostracize me from games in the league, that's fine. I'm at the point where I am dividing my time for several different leagues, most of which have games that, frankly, aren't boring. I'm starting work for an indoor league shortly that will run until April in a pseudo-managerial position that pays very handsomely. For the first several years of my being a referee, I relied on this local league as my sole source of ref income. Quite frankly, I can do without them now. This past season, I got anywhere from 3-5 games a week. I'd be happy with less next season. Less stress for me--in a small town that has a problem with referees who are sure of themselves on the field.

If I sound cocky, or by some coincidence a board member from the local league finds this, so be it. I have a high level of respect for most of the coaches and directors in the local league, but all I'm asking is that I not be second-guessed. It's no secret in the referee community that coaches generally don't know what they're talking about (we're only half-joking when we say this). And don't get me wrong, I'll be happy to work for your league, but only if you want me to. My only concern is that I hope I'm not asking for too much when I say I dislike conversation going over my head regarding my calls.

Today I spent the day shadowing a system administrator at The Palladium Group, a consulting firm on the north side of Chicago. Emile Harding, along with his boss, Danny Martin, and programmer Jim Watkins showed me the ropes and gave me an idea of what a day in the world of IT is like.

My first impression: hectic. Emile (who I spent the majority of my time with) was consistently working on 3-4 projects simultaneously. He seemed fairly used to it, but was not completely adjusted to the multi-tasking aspect. I got the impression that he was in IT for a career, and not for a love of technology. Not that there's anything wrong with that, it's just a different type of person than myself. And he definitely knows his stuff: Windows Server 2003, Exchange Server 2003/2007, print and file servers, domain controllers, Active Directory, Cisco hardware, mobile data networks...

I could definitely see myself getting into the whole routine of dividing my time and multi-tasking on projects, so this experience reaffirmed my desire to work as a system administrator.

My first few hours were kinda slow. I sat in Emile's office, taking everything in, watching him work, touring the server room, etc. But once he and Jim started working on a task that required the use of a mission-critical Linux box, I found my element. It turns out nobody in the office was highly specialized at Linux, so I helped them through configuring a remote backup agent, opening firewall ports, and other miscellaneous tasks. We spent the majority of our day working on the aforementioned backup software: Backup Exec by Symantec. Two phone calls to two hard-to-understand enterprise technical support agents took up most of our time, but because of our multi-tasking frenzy, we kept them on hold more than we were.

Other projects today: configuring a user's Blackberry to connect to the Exchange Server, waiting on a Dell technician to come in and replace the LCD screen on a busted notebook, locating and installing 64-bit drivers for the office printer, migrating a user's files to a new notebook, calling the phone company to change the caller ID name (from a recent merger), and troubleshooting password problems for a user from Palladium's Boston office.

I had a really enjoyable time today. Actually, I think "eye-opening" is the best word to describe it--I learned about the system architecture, software, and other skills needed to make it in IT. Not to mention the invaluable networking and personal connections I made--my LinkedIn profile is growing as I write this.

Looks like my goals for the next 10 years are set.

Originally uploaded by JBrd

The first quarter of my senior year of high school comes to a close this week. It feels like this year is going rather quickly. Just yesterday I was complaining about the cafeteria system and commenting on how easy my schedule is. Both remarks hold true.

The cafeteria payment system is still a mess, although I am quite partial to their new (but sporadic) offerings of strawberry- and vanilla-flavored milk. They lost $10 of my lunch money last week, and after repeated attempts to put it into the system, the manager just gave me a line of credit she wrote down in a notebook.

My schedule is still the easiest courseload ever. (That doesn't mean I'm actually doing what little homework I actually have.) Aiding for Mr. Workman is always fun, whether I'm grading papers or just chatting with the Biology teachers in the office during first period.

Realms of Possibility (formerly known as Science-Fiction Literature), my senior English elective, is probably the easiest class of core curriculum ever. Barely any work, decent teacher, and nearly everyone gets 100% on every assignment. The perfect class for us worn-out, overtaxed seniors.

AP Statistics is perplexing me. Not the content, mind you, but the dynamics of the class. How can I actually learn stuff without trying at all? I'm pulling a solid B in my sleep--literally. I also love the moderately heavy technology usage. Classrooms with computers are pretty cool.

PE: Um, whatever. We start bowling soon. Even less physical activiy than archery. I often forget I'm in a PE class.

TCD has its ups and downs. Some days (like today) bore me to tears. Other times, I actually get work done. I'm on a C++ programming track (completely self-directed), but I spend most of my time playing Counter-Strike. The cool thing about TCD is that they really push career stuff like job shadows and internships. I've got a job shadow myself this Thursday at Palladium Executing Strategy, a consulting firm on the north side of Chicago. Besides the obvious benefit of getting out of school for the entire day, I get to shadow a pair of system administrators (my top career choice for the future) as they work. Kick. Ass. I'll be networking with a bunch IT people (the work-based learning coordinator at TCD told me to bring a resume--I'll bring my LinkedIn URL instead) for a day instead of being bored out of my mind at school. I'm also in the process of getting an internship set up with an Internet start-up I'm involved in (can't say much more on this, but keep an eye out for more... it's gonna be big). If that goes through, I spend two afternoons per week working with them instead of going to TCD. More awesomeness there--plus a coveted school parking permit if I play my cards right.

On average, my school week consists of 3 days of boredom and 2 days of enjoying myself. My goal for second quarter is to improve that ratio.

Here's the obligatory "pardon our dust" posting to notify you that I am doing some heavy-duty work to the site. If you see a broken image or something else out of place, wait 48 hours, then e-mail me. Chances are, I screwed something up.

Dave Jakes recently wrote about the lack of student voice in education, and one of the comments rubbed me a little too far in the wrong direction:

It is interesting to me that you bring this up at this time.....due to the fact that we had two teenagers in WOW2 on Tuesday night -- and frankly I was pleased and on the other hand I was worried.

Pleased that they would contribute a great part to the conversation and we would learn from them. In fact, Arthus (14) (and I would like to invite Kevin W as well,) will be on our show in 2008.

Worried because we need to stay aware of that and choose words carefully at times because we have "youngsters in our audience. Not that they are immature, but adult chatter at times could be inappropriate....and we do need to stay wise.

Hmm. Perhaps I'm overreacting to the comment--I didn't comment on this at the original post in case I really am reading too far into the commenter's words. But that sounds like a warning to educators to watch what they say, because the students "just won't understand."

I don't mean to attack the commenter personally, but educators, please, don't mince your words simply because there are "kids" in your midst. I, for one, have entrenched myself in the world of educational technology, which consists almost exclusively of teachers, administrators, and other "adults" who work in the field. When I'm a part of this community, I don't want the same child filter I get when I talk to 90% of other adults in my everyday life.

Thinking twice about dropping an F-bomb when you're in the presence of a teenager? Fine with me. Changing your core message? Not cool.

Answering the call of the "EduTwitterVerse," here's a work-up for integrating Skype and Ustream.tv.

First, a little background: Skype is a software program that allows you to (among other features) make free phone calls to other users of the program. Ustream.tv is a web service that allows you to broadcast an audio/video feed live from your computer. Apparently, there is a desire for audience participation in Ustream.tv shows, and the edubloggers are all big Skype fans as well.

It's actually quite simple. The broadcaster/presenter of the Ustream.tv feed needs only to open Skype on the same computer they are broadcasting from, and start a conference call with select viewers of their Ustream.tv feed who wish to participate. Viewers of the Ustream.tv live feed would need to open Skype, join the phone call with the presenter (and other viewers), and... talk. The call audio would get picked up by the presenter's broadcast window on Ustream.tv.

Presenters: If you use a headset microphone, only plug in the microphone portion (if it's a USB headset mic, you'll need to play with your Windows sound settings), and use desktop speakers. In my case, I'm working off a laptop with integrated speakers and microphone, so the setup is minimal (or rather, non-existent). Using desktop speakers and a desktop microphone would be best. If your Ustream.tv viewers can't hear the Skype call, just turn the computer volume up. Keep in mind, also, that any sound your computer emits will be broadcast, so close those videos and IM sounds while you're broadcasting.

Viewers: If you are participating in the conference call on Skype, mute the Ustream.tv audio. You'll hear everything on Skype anyway. If you are just watching the feed (and not using Skype), just watch through the web normally.

Keep in mind, Skype has a 9-person limit on conference calls, but I'm not sure you'd want more than 9 people talking at once. Also, Ustream.tv has a very slight time delay in broadcasting, but it's not too bad. Skype callers will see the presenter talking after they hear it, but regular audience members will be fine.

For the more technologically advanced, you can play with audio cables going from your line out to line in on your PC, or a software-based solution like this.

I've been TwitterBusted by Dave Jakes for ditching school: