I belong to a "professional teacher forum," and the other day someone was complaining about people who were planning to enter the field of education as a second career because "they can not be successful in other jobs," and as part of her rant she commented that they were social misfits who still lived with their parents.
As someone who entered the field of education after years of working toward another goal, I felt compelled to reply. Another teacher responded, "the spare elegance of your writing is a joy to come upon." How could that not make my day?
And because, while I may be capable of spare elegance in my good moments, I am basically a lazy writer, I copy for you here what I wrote there.
I entered teaching after many years of trying and not enjoying other careers. None of them fulfilled what I eventually learned were my criteria for a satisfying career - 1)make a difference 2)be creative 3)be challenged 4)have daily variety.
I had the opportunity to teach single-subject because of my degree, and it came at a time when I didn't know what else to do. So I took it.
From the moment I started, even if I didn't know exactly how to teach, I knew that I was supposed to teach.
So I absorbed every bit of advice I could from colleagues, my principal, books, and other teachers, and I went back to school and earned my credential, and it might look like I'm doing it because I couldn't do anything else, but really I'm doing it because I wasn't supposed to be doing anything else.
And I lived with my parents that first year.
1 hour ago
3 comments:
I'd also like to point out that the original teacher was incorrect in her use of "can not." It should have been "cannot."
You use "can not" when you mean that there is an option of "not" doing something and "cannot" when there is no possibility.
"I can not eat that whole cake; I have the will power." -- "I have the will power and am capable of not eating that whole cake."
"I cannot eat that whole cake; I don't have the appetite." -- "There is no way I can eat that whole cake. It is too big for me."
And thus ends your grammar lesson for the day.
You go girl!!!
Haha...thank you. This sparked a nice debate with a colleague. Please correct me if I'm wrong here.
I explained, "can" means you're able to do something, "cannot" is the negative form of "can". If you are unable to do something, then you use "cannot". When you use the words "can not" you are not using the negative of "can" but you are adding a negative to the verb (in your example, "eat"). Therefore, it means you are able to not do something--so far so good, right?
My colleague goes away convinced, and then returns with Merriam-Webster's dictionary which gives the exact same definition of both, "can not, to be unable to do otherwise than." What do you make of this? It has shaken my faith in Merriam-Webster to say the least!
On a side note, I love that someone with such a care and appreciation for grammar has the guts to begin a sentence--nay, a whole paragraph--with a conjunction. Take that Strunk & White!
Post a Comment