if you haven't already posted a harlem shake video you might as well be planking.

ways to keep your nonprofit relevant...#opportunemoments...#trending...#goingviral...#keepingup
so, quick! figure out how your cause relates to the beloved matthew crawley #downtonPBS or you'll be all left in the dust again...

(this one's my fave)

What's love got to do with it?

Well, this week some of the world celebrated Valentine's day. I always thought it was such an awkward holiday myself (ugly babies flying around with bows and arrows and people getting ugly heart shaped boxes of fake chocolate?)--especially for those in budding relationships. What is worse than the stress of wondering whether you've been in some sort of "relationship" long enough to exchange love/romance-based gifts? Like, uh, should you get your beau of three weeks those silk boxers with lips on them? Doesn't matter because if you get them and he doesn't get you anything-it's gonna be a bad time. And, if he gets you something and you don't get him anything-then you feel like a schmuck don't you? Yes. You. Do. So, basically, it's awkward either way.

Having been married 15 and then some years and not celebrating Valentine's day for any of them--I wouldn't even know what the standard procedure is anymore for handling those types of situations. My husband and I tend to be sort of anti-most holidays--especially one which probably originated with some sort of agreement between Milton Hershey, Hallmark, and the American Greetings Card Company!
Though I must admit I appreciate this witty post on fb on the 14th was: 

"Happy vaLINtine's day."  ;)

You may be wondering where I am going with this post; I am too! I knew a few hours ago when I was walking the dog and watching five kids (not all mine) at the park! I think something triggered my thoughts about gold digging girls wanting to find a sugar daddy and that made me think of fundraising and "looking for love" in the form of donors...

Oh! Yes, it's coming back to me! It made me think of the anti-gold diggers too...those who believe they'll just "live on love." And just as love will not pay the bills, honey, I'm sorry to tell you...when it comes to fundraising and nonprofs...good hearts and great causes certainly don't pay the bills either. 

What I mean is that it simply isn't enough to have a great cause. Fundraising really is a must! And did you know (looking at the title of this post) that Tina Turner will soon be trading in her U.S. citizenship? 

And since I'm on the topic of love and asian vaLINtines...I'll let you in on a little asian romance I happen to currently be involved in...I just happen to be making LOVE--RIGHT NOW...it's not what you think--get your mind out of the gutter! L-O-V-E in the form of boba! Any boba lovers out there?? 71 minutes to go--not that I'm counting or anything! In my opinion boba is almost as good as bacon and my favorite food: BUTTER. Almost. 

Went home last Thursday and designed this...it's part of something I've got up my sleeve...deets coming soon! ;)

What is writing really?

Anyone out there need some humor after this gloomy day?
Here's a pic from my go-to source of never-disappointing funnies: Bill Waterson's, Calvin & Hobbes of course.
BTW, one reason I love C&H SOOOO much?? It's the FIRST thing my dyslexic son ENJOYED reading. When you're a mama and you have a kid who struggled with reading and you get to the point where you hear your baby laugh out loud at something he READ...the word priceless doesn't even begin to explain...
Anyway, I hadn't even thought of all that before deciding to post this...just in a little homework slump and thought I'd see if anyone else needed a giggle.
If you don't think Calvin & Hobbes are funny--you don't have a pulse!!! ;)

And on a side note, (since I already went all soapboxy on you), Calvin really could be the poster boy for a dyslexic male child with ADHD (which is also highly correlated with dyslexia) and if so, then Dick and Jane are the evil enemy to children everywhere who wish to become good readers and spellers.

Those evil little readers are the epitome of whole-word learning (or sight word learning/whole language), which is a dumb philosophy our educational system has bought into (hook/line/sinker) and arrogantly refuses to let go of.
What Dick and Jane replaced was something called, "phonics," which is not to be confused with, "hooked on phonics" (which is still another version of whole language poo).

Phonics-rhymes with tonics, ebonics, onyx, Sonics (plural, as in "wow, this town has a lot of Sonics, I bet the obesity rate is high!"). If you're not sure what that word means (because if you're less than 100 years old, chances are you probably don't REALLY know what it means) look it up in the dictionary. And, while you're at it...why don't you grab a book called, "Why Johnny Can't Read."

See, I started out trying to cheer everyone up, and now I'm getting angry all over again...Breathe...In...Out...Whew...Sun salutation...Okay folks, teaching any kid--dyslexic or not really isn't rocket science. It involves teaching them to recognize that every letter is a symbol which corresponds to a sound (or several). It involves teaching that words are made up of those sounds,which correspond to those symbols. It involves teaching rules such as when a "g" says a soft sound or a hard sound, or why some words have silent final e's or why words like "all" and "puff" and "fizz" end with double consonants, etc. If one has learned these rules then they can spell correctly pretty much all of the time. Why? Because they have mastered the code to our language. The rules are the code. If you have the code, you can sound out pretty much any and every word and spell it too! (If you don't believe me research how people win spelling bees--it involves mastering the code.)

However, rather than equip people for success (God forbid!), we take the lazy way out and "teach" whole language. We teach children not to master our language; we teach them to memorize it. Therefore, language to them has no rhyme and no reason. It is unpredictable and unreliable. They have no code to fall back on. They are equipped to be poor guessers because they don't know what to do when they encounter the plethora of exceptions out there. Gee, if you read our nation's reading report cards you might start to notice some trends.

Dyslexics are horrible at memorizing random facts which have no value or meaning...which is why memorizing sight words is like...not gonna work for them. I assert that because of those scum bags, Dick and Jane, it isn't just the dyslexics who miss out. It's also all of the other kids who struggle with reading. With 20% of the population being dyslexic, the rest of the percentage of our kids who are failing readers are just Dick and Jane casualties.

...wouldn't it be nice if that ole monster bureaucracy we dump exponentially increasing amounts of money into every year, the dept of edumacation (or something like it) were willing to change?

Wouldn't it be nice if Spaceman Spiff could declare some sort of Zog war against them until they actually do something in the best interest of children across America? Too bad Obama won't appoint Spiff to head up edumacation and take Arne Duncan's place...

Oh dear! I just posted a picture which contained an instrument which resembles a gun (please don't get the zero tolerance police after me!) I mean this is Arkansas, so let's just pretend he is just holding his pistol in church! ;)

Moral: 

Calvin and Hobbes= funny, creative, great reading material for dyslexics and anyone with a heartbeat

           

Dick and Jane=satan and his evil lady companion transmogrified into freakishly-nice-looking children who will beat any capacity for reading right out of kids with a rusty lead pipe while mocking them and spitting in their faces. 

"I think 

the idea of 

getting 

Government to get 

teachers in schools 

trained 

to become 

dyslexia specialists 

is 

OBVIOUSLY 

ESSENTIAL." 

-Sir Richard Branson

(my 2nd favorite Branson quote which encapsulates 

the spirit of the many SUCCESSFUL dyslexics out there)

(my third favorite Branson quote--which is why dyslexics are such an asset to innovation)

Just check out Branson's blog, click on companies, and discover that this guy obviously knows what he's talking about when it comes to jobs, the future, success, and on and on. Respected throughout the world, he is not shy about being a dyslexic. 
Just think what Arkansas would/could be like if we gave our dyslexic children hope and taught them to read---the way THEIR brain learns to read...we might just get a whole crop of business-minded entrepreneurs, investors, creative thinkers who will invest in Arkansas because Arkansas invested in THEM. Senate Bill 33 is an opportunity (a beginning) for Arkansas to move forward.

Another Branson quote from: extraordinarypeople.com

“

Being dyslexic can actually help in the outside world. I see some things clearer than other people do because I have to simplify things to help me and that has helped others.”

Mind mapping

Here is a beautiful chart which sums up chapter 2 of the class text (Grant Writing and Fundraising Tool Kit for Human Services by Dustin).
Enveloping all of the very technical chapter 2 in a clearly defined map, is this image (appendix A).

And while we're at it, we might as well peruse over to appendices B and C; drafting two gift chart goals (one specific for the org and another generic for donors to have a visual) is helpful--I daresay key to a successful fundraising campaign.
What struck me was the one for donors; but it makes so much sense. Really, it helps get them involved. You're including them in the plan. You're showing them you really want them to understand what your goals are, making them not just donors, but team members!
I am just loving how organized the textbook is! However, I just wonder how many nonprofs start out "the right way" like this. I wonder how many of us will dig into our orgs and realize that underneath a great mission statement and cool website was a hot mess just waiting to be uncovered.
My training as a respiratory therapist comes back to me. In class and in the books, everything comes together so neatly. Things happen as they should, aligning, as they should, in a predictable sequence. However, in clinicals, you have to adapt, be on your toes, violate rules--
Example:
You're in a patient's room giving them a breathing treatment; a code blue is called on your floor and you're on the code team. Do you calmly wait until your patient's treatment is over, asking if they have any questions? Then do you run into the next room where someone's life has abruptly stopped short saying, "hello, Mr. Doe, I'm Nicolle from respiratory. I am going to attempt to save your life now (all while washing your hands first complying with hospital policies)? Do you first read his chart, noting any allergies and checking his pharmacological records???
!!!!!!!!!! Um, NO!!!!!!!
You hear a code called and you respond. Period. Taking the time to wash your hands might be the precious seconds that person needed. You do what you can to ensure safety precautions and provide as sterile an environment as possible, but you are no longer in the land of happy textbook situations; you're top priority at that moment is not preventing pneumonia or even staph--it's preventing DEATH. Textbooks somehow don't prepare you for that.
I predict it might be applicable here to or to whatever we learn from textbooks, for they can't possibly address every circumstance we'll ever encounter. That's completely understandable.
That said, knowing how things ought to be at least tattoos a gold standard into our brains, so that we at least know when something is off course and to which hemisphere we should steer.
And, while steering, maps are helpful.
So, enjoy these below:

Dear Abby,

Dear Abby (who just passed away this month with Alzheimers...which reminds me of this blog),

This post began as a comment to a classmate's hilarious blog post. I casually began to respond in the comments section, however, the response just kept flowing...and growing...and then I started to feel like I should probably call some sort of hotline for help; the left side of my brain waving red flags and saying, "this is way too much to post on someone's blog" and "you're totally hijacking this post." It wasn't intentional. Promise.
I'm writing to you, Dear Abby (or your legacy or trust), because I took a step back and decided maybe I should save my soap box lecture for my OWN BLOG. (Dude, if you just clicked on that link don't admit it in public, okay?...I mean... you're already...on my blog... It was a total set up!)
Dear Abby, here are my comments-turned-blog-post below, would you please talk me off of the ledge??? Your faithful reader, Nicolle ;)


"Hollis, 
Great post! It was funny and provoking--which is everything I want to be! And although I think you did a good job of making this blogging thing sound light and funny and trivial--that these things are so foreign to you...me...us in general, is no laughing matter.

You bring up a VERY important discussion (or can o' worms in this case)--one that, as a writing major, I feel quite frustrated and passionate about (uh-oh--here I go), namely: how prepared ARE graduates of today's writing undergrad programs for writing in the 21st century?

I can't help but feel that nearly every class I take in the writing program should've had some graphic design prerequisite (!!!!!!!!!!!!!! my hands are all over the place on this one! hee hee!), for we are at least exposed to how writing takes place in the 21st century (and that's a good thing) but then we are expected to crank out projects ranging from prezis to html newsletters to web page design to instruction manuals and beyond in a matter of weeks...while limping through software that could easily take a semester to learn how to use such as Dreamweaver and InDesign (free trials or purchased on-the-side), or worse--FREE programs that we would NEVER use in a real job such as, Komposer). 

Fundamental problem: We learn how to make those things, but maybe not in the best way becuase we are NOT taught how to use the complicated software it takes to produce those things. It is an injustice I tell you. ;)

Can't UCA afford an Adobe site license or SOMETHING so we can teach and use state-of-the-art tools? Do we need to speak with the Executive Director about fundraising and start following money trails??? Can't we add this into the curriculum somehow for example: 
before you take this writing class in which you will basically need to know css styles, you should take this class in graphic design 1.

It seems instead we try to skate around graphic design without actually learning it...even though it is absolutely necessary. This just creates conflict--which on a side note might create a great story one day? Who knows? Maybe "graphic design" could be this crazy tech savvy minor (get it, minor?) who stalks a bewildered 21st century digital communications illiterate college student or something. (Btw, if you would pay money for a book like that---please let me know!)

My point is---we SHOULD be taught how to write in the 21st century. It is great to get exposure to these things in our classes, but I never can help but feel that in order to be a writer today, one must also be a graphic designer, for so much of our writing is not JUST words, but also the colors we choose, alignment, typography, fontography, css styles, rasterized vectors and html code--it's all part of our message to our audience. Sadly, we are not fully taught HOW to construct that component of our message.  And aren't companies, who are looking to hire writers, also looking for writers with Adobe programs on their resumes? We sooooo need more technology. What I don't know is whether this is a UCA funding issue or whether this is a widespread problem for writing students everywhere caused by some out-of-date-linearly-conceived-concept (that seems like the beginnings of a great tshirt catch phrase, doesn't it?). I suspect it isn't just UCA.

Nonetheless, I feel like we are some sort of hybrid-type-of-writers emerging from these programs; and it is still yet-to-be-defined (my, my, aren't I fond of drive-my-point-home-hyphenated-phrases today?) exactly what we are. If you think about it--writers really are expected to be psychologists, advertising gurus, educators, politicians, graphic designers, journalists, super multi-taskers and basically, God all-at-the-same-time-each-and-every-time they compose. I suppose it is difficult to fit all of that into one undergrad writing curriculum. 

I really am not dawgging the writing program. I have truly enjoyed it so far. I respect my profs (I sincerely have learned a lot from them--picking their brains, seeking their advice, absorbing as much as I can from them) and classmates too, but I feel your post, Hollis, sort of (obviously) got to the heart of my frustration with it...or all writing programs, in general, i.e. they need to include more technology training. 

And, if you think about it, don't we best learn language by immersion rather than mere exposure? So, why don't we as writers get to learn our writing language (which in the 21st century, IS FOREIGN) by immersion as well (spending a few months in the foreign country of graphic design, grappling with the language, hanging out with the locals, picking up all the slang and really---really practicing and really really learning this component?

Every project in my writing classes has been a learning experience, however, the components of those projects that I'm ranting about here were learned off of youtube, not so much in class, yet..I'm paying UCA...So school me, Tom Courtway!!

(Stepping away from the soapbox) That said, blogging is a great experience. It's so relevant. As a writer--instantaneously putting yourself out there--can be challenging, but it is so necessary.

And I can see how it is even necessary for advocacy...or fundraising...(attempting to swing full circle here) Blogging allows you to have continual connectedness with your audience (especially when required for class!) ;)  And, since they come to you by choice you don't feel like you're harassing them when it comes to blogging. It's so...so...digital age...so social media-ish...so 21st century-ish, and I like that. I want more of it! So, UCA, 21st century communication---BRING IT!"

And, thank you, Hollis, for helping the stew in me find it's way out! ;) Aren't you glad I didn't go all psycho on YOUR blog? ;)