JH football was the first address of the evening. i told a few anecdotes, handed out my awards, and left the stage. i was nervous and it showed. i know, because students told me.
the second was JH boys' soccer. having gone once, my comfort level was much higher. i'd also been able to observe what the other coaches were saying and how the audience was reacting.
sand volleyball was the last sport of the evening. this time i went up with only a vague outline of what i was going to say, was completely relaxed, and even kept talking for a few minutes after i had given out my awards! and it was by far the best. i know, not just because it felt better, but because i had people i didn't know coming up and saying i was funny, and so on.
overall, this experience was both frustrating and encouraging. how can i go from one extreme to the other in one evening!?
really, it only reinforces something i already knew. my intense childhood shyness is still present, but i can overcome it with rationality and experience. i know at a rational level that it's silly to care what people think, and that being self-conscious only draws more attention. i also know that my confidence skyrockets after having an opportunity to experience/observe something. this is true for most people, but maybe even more so for me.
this three-hour event mirrors my three-year experience at Hillsdale. yeah, i was only there three years — i transferred, remember?
at the end of my third year, i hated leaving, but i also felt like there was nothing left to accomplish. if i had a fourth year, there's nothing i would change/improve from the third.
this ties in with something else i've been thinking about lately (surprise!).
i understand teaching now, because i've been a teacher. i haven't been a great teacher this year, but i've learned a lot. i'm in a position to improve across the board (is that a pun?) next year.
so here's my crazy thought: what if i keep doing this? what if i take my ability to analyze and adapt, and put it to the ultimate test? what if i use my three-year hypothesis on a bunch of different jobs? i could make a list of jobs which an economist would need to understand in order to be a good economist, and i could go into each of those fields for a few years.
on one level, this seems arrogant. assuming i could succeed at anything i attempt? definitely too cocky.
on another level, i believe i could do it.
think about it. the primary reason for conflict and misunderstandings is simply an inability to see from alternate perspectives. economists need to understand the incentive structure of the people's actions they are trying to predict. the best way to learn incentives of a particular profession is to do it. try to be a butcher, baker, and candlestick maker, and see first-hand how their individual self-interest benefits the whole (or, doesn't).
then, after i've done it "all", become a full-time economist. make waves.
this is just an idea. for now, i'm loving being teacher.
No comments:
Post a Comment