Hello ladies and gentlemen, are you ready to rock!?

Is it important to build an audiance?

The short answer to the question is-Yes.

 I could go into how it helps the kids feel supported and part of somethig, I could say that its a good way to validate your work, I could even go as far as saying it helps students understand why its so improtant to learn thier parts and play well together, but in my honest opinion, one thing stands out more than anything else is,
MONEY... The world spins on money (unfortunetly).

Most BOJC programs in America rely heavly on donations from members of the community. Seeing as bands are constantly trying to raise money so they can offored equipment, it's incredibly important to have a good and returning audiance.
Building a good audiance not only helps spread the word about the sucess of your program but it also enables you to recieve more charitable donations and support from the community. Dontations that are vital to your programs well being.

Of course its not all about the money, but at the end of the day, theres nothing like not having to worry about how your going to make ends meet in order for your program to strive.

Thunder Soul

I finally got my hands on a Netflix account (thanks to a friend Justin for letting me borrow it) and found some time to watch the documentary "Thunder Soul".

All I can really say about this documentary is "Wow!".

I was completely blown away by the story. An innovative band director (Conrad O. Johnson Sr) taking a group of students and helping to create one of the best band programs/funk bands of the time.
The sheer talent that was displayed in the film was mind blowing and the way the students spoke about Conrad was incredibly uplifting. Many of them viewed Conrad not only as a great band director but also a father figure.

What I really enjoyed the most about this documentary was that Conrad saw what the students liked to play/listen to (funk) and instead of completely ignoring it and working on what he thought they should play, he adapted funk into the bands style.

By doing this, he helped to inspire the students to play at their best and really believe in the music that they were playing. He also helped to become an international phenomenon, taking his band all the way to Europe to perform.

I have always believed that the students should have the option to play music that they want to play. I've always believed that if you allow students the opportunity to do something that they believe in, the opportunities would be endless.  This documentary is the exact example of that.

Conrad saw a musical opportunity for his students and took that opportunity to expand on their love of funk. By doing this he not only made them better musicians but also gave them something to believe in. This opportunity helped students understand that if you work hard and believe in what you do you can achieve anything.

Finally, following the success of his band program, the entire community came closer together and students at the school began to achieve higher grades and great athletic feats. It a true story of what a great band program could do not only for the students in it but the entire community.

So how can I make a love of music in my program. Well in my opinion there's a very simple answer to this. The best way to find a mutual love of music (between your students and your self) you have to find a genre that majority of the students really enjoy listening to. Just like Conrad did. Once you find this genre, you must explore it with your students and write music/ cover music that both of you enjoy. When this happens students will become enthralled with the music and will show how much they enjoy playing it by playing it well.

National Anthem Lesson

On Monday I had the opportunity to conduct a lesson on national anthems. Upon doing my research on this topic I realized that 2 out of the 3 national anthems I chose (Mexico, America and Canada) have nothing to do with the people of that country (presently). Mexico and Americas national anthem is pretty much completely about going to war or fighting a war and in my honest opinion, that has really nothing to do with being a citizen of either of those countries (yes, I understand it's part of their history but both Mexico and America have contributed allot more to the human race then just fighting a war(s)). Canada's National Anthem was the only one that was actually about being a Canadian present, future and past.

So my lesson, do the 3 national anthems have anything to do with the people of that nation? And lets make our own national anthem!

I started out my lesson as usual, with lots of energy. I played students each national anthem and gave a brief history on only the American national anthem. I realized as the clock counted down I was only going to have time to splurge some history on one (Which is unfortunate because I planned to give some history all 3). After each national anthem I asked students if they felt that the anthem represented the people of that nation. They agreed with me that the American and Mexican National Anthems don't have much to do with the current citizens of both the U.S and Mexico. As the lesson went on I couldn't help but feel that students were growing concerned, "how dare he question our national anthem!" but alas, this country was built on people being defiant.

My main goal of this lesson was to leave students wondering "why do we sing about something that really doesn't have anything to do with our present life and call it our national anthem." I believe I achived this.

I also kept the class engaged with lots of questions and lots of movement.

In the future I will be sure to let students know that we are going to be analyzing the meaning of the national anthems instead of just saying "We are going to be learning about these 3 national anthems."

This way students will have a clear understanding from the get go as to where im going with my lesson.

On another note, I do believe I got the students thinking and engaged, I also believe that I more or less got my point across, especially since I've had a few people come up to me after my lesson and speak to me about the point that I was trying to make.

For future lessons, I need to learn how to time manage better and develop a quicker way of getting my information across with out losing any substance.

Mom? Can I borrow 50,000 dollars for our band program?

Should we rely on parents to raise money for the BOJC (Band, Orchestra, Jazz, Chorus) program?

In a perfect world, the answer to this question is no, but in the real world the answer to the question, in my opinion, is yes/ kinda.

The reality of the situation all circles back to the world of the arts and how people view it. Pretty much every one you talk to these days likes some form of art. Whether it be music, TV, drawing, painting,music, video games, ETC. The fact of the matter is pretty much all forms of entertainment are based off some form of "art."

Unfortunately, people often forget the fact of how much they love all that is mentioned above when it comes to schools art programs. Most people have no idea that a large majority of the creativity that they love stems all the way back to a schools art program.

Due to this sad fact, when it comes time for cutting the budget guess who's first to get the ax? If you guessed the athletic programs you guessed wrong. Most of the time its the art programs.

So to answer the question above,

It is absolutely a necessity to have the schools community involved in raising money for schools BOJC programs. That includes parents and students. Should it have to rely solely on them? No it shouldn't. But again we don't live in a perfect world.

When it comes to BOJC and almost anything else, buying quality products doesn't come cheap. So first things first.

The director of the program has to make a quote for the school. Once that happens and an amount is approved, the director has to rely on all their resources to raise enough money to reach there budget goal ( if the school doesn't give him/her the full amount.)

Thats when we need to rely on not just the parents but the students and the community to spread the word, make the necessary events and put on great shows to help bring in support.

So to answer the question above, yes we should rely on the parents as well as the community.


For anyone who stumbles on to this that believes art programs aren't a budget necessity. Imagine living in a world with no cars, movies, pictures (of all kinds), television, computers, music, furniture, houses, clothing, ETC..... Yea... All that mentioned above, some artist designed it/ designed its concept/developed it/ worked on it/ created it. Think long and hard about each one of those criterias before you say I'm incorrect.

Music technology. It has a nice ring to it doesn't it?

The question,

How has/will music technology effect music education?

Well, if you don't think it has yet then your doing something wrong. We live in a time where you can download tuning software for free on just about anything and with the proper software you can make even the worst of singers sound in key.

So for the"has"

Music is now more accessible than ever. Anyone with a key board and a slight idea of how to spell an artists name can find just about any song they want, even if it hasn't been recorded for an album yet (YouTube). And just like that people are also able to search for just about any lesson they want, whether it be how to play an  E major chord on the guitar or how to have the proper embouchure to play the clarinet. Just about anything you can think of in the realm of music has a free lesson somewhere online.

This new music technology boom has also begun to catch on in the classroom. We now have programs like Logic where students have access to just about any instrument they want and with enough knowlege and time for trail and error, students can write a symphony with ease, just by playing a midi keyboard.

 Seeing the opportunity in this, many teachers use these student made compositions to teach the creator and the class as a whole about the theory behind the composition. Some teachers sight examples such key signature, chord structure, ect. The teaching opportunities with student made compositions can become very in depth and is only limited by the teachers ability to explore the composition and the complexity of the composition itself.

Other teachers have begun to film themselves playing the instrument or piece they are teaching students and putting these videos up on their website to help guide students while practicing at home.

Now we even have Guitar Hero style video games where the player uses a real guitar to learn how to play a composition.

These are just a few small examples to help form the big picture of where music technology is/ and where its going in the classroom.

Now for the "will"

At this point with more and more free software being made I can only assume that music technology will slowly begin taking over the music classroom. In reality the only thing I can see holding students back would be the school administrations absence of such knowledge, their interest in the arts and the schools technology budget.

 In the near future, I believe that we are going to see allot more composition based software. Specifically because most of these midi software notates what the user is playing. Due to this the user can go back and analyze what they have just play in a notated from. This opens up endless possibilities for ear training, chord/ note structure lessons, song anylisis, ETC. Really anything that is taught in a theory class can be done on these programs, except now students and teachers can see the piece being played while the software highlights the notes.

I also believe that soon there will be allot more games that can be used in the classroom such as Rocksmith, where students can play the actual instrument to a backing track and the game will critique their performance. 

Some companies are even coming out with more child friendly electronic instruments such as the Korg Wavedrum. This drum allows students to experiment with all different types of sounds and can make learning and early childhood rhythm compostion incredibly simple while using an array of sounds with just a click of a button. What makes it even better is the drum can be played with sticks or your bare hands.


Many fear technology because it can bread laziness and a cumbersome lifestyle, but when it comes to music, I believe that technology could really help push students in the right direction and make learning music more accessible by those that may not have be able to participate otherwise. With the accessability of these new technologies we may very well make the world a more musical place. Isn't that what we the music educators want after all?

What it takes to be a GREAT (Music) educator

In my opinion there are three things a person needs to be a good and effective (music) educator.

1. Patients-
 I have listed patients first because in my opinion it is one of the most important traits an educator should possess. A good educator should be able to calmly make attempt after attempt at teaching a struggling student with out becoming flustered. A good educator does not give up on a student because they are having a difficult time understanding content. A good educator continually tries to make attempts from several different angles in order for a student to process and possess the knowledge that they require. As it has been said "Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better.". If you are thinking about becoming an educator and this sounds obscure to you then I can assure you, this IS NOT the field for you.




2. Knowledge-
A good educator must contain a vast amount of knowledge within their content area. They must be able to confidently and accurately teach their subject area with out relaying any false information. A great educator must also quickly realize when they are approaching content with in their subject area that they are unfamiliar with and then immediately study and understand it in order to effectively teach it. As music educators, our area of expertise is spread across a vast array, ranging from general music, chorus, theory, band, jazz band, music technology, ETC. We cover an array of subjects and each one of those subjects takes years upon years to master. As educators we must except the fact that we live in a world where information is constantly being changed and updated. We need to be able to adjust our knowledge accordingly and expand our knowledge when necessary. After all, an educator can never know too much. We must always do our best to be the greatest source of knowledge for our students. Like them, we to must be constantly learning and improving. Much like what Frank Battisti said "Individuals who strive to be the "best", are never satisfied."


3. Passion-
"We cannot motivate someone else; What we can do is inspire them to be motivated, to move themselves."
                                                                                                                                -Peter Loel. Boonshaft

Teaching, much like sales, is all about passion. When a person is passionate about something, specifically a subject area, it intrigues those who are around him/her to learn about that content. Have you ever had a teacher that was truly passionate about their subject? Did it seem as though they were living in that moment as they were explaining the content to you? As if they live and breath that information? Wasn't it difficult to look away when they were reciting the information? You must understand that with teaching there is almost a level of showmanship. As an educator you must be able to present yourself in a way that makes people want to learn. You must be enthusiastic and thirsty for knowledge and understanding. You must speak about your content in a way that makes students want to learn it and at times, have them hang off every word you speak.

Chorous warm ups

Do- Ra- Mi- COUGH* COUGH*

I may have had the opportunity to warm up what seemed like the most enthusiastic and ready to learn chorus of all time. I guess a hand full of music grad students are what makes a great chorus.

So reflection,

Upon my warming up of my very ready to learn chorus I realized that I was doing a whole LOT of talking and ALLOT of praising for things that probably shouldn't be praised. Things like doing proper sirens and lip trills. On the other hand I do like to keep my teaching environment very positive so that students will enjoy the experience. The only issue with this is that it can be difficult to correct poor behavior and/or poor technique. The other issue is that keeping it so positive may leave some of my students with uncorrected technique. Something that can be a nightmare when you're the teacher that has to reteach the student.

So for next time,

Maybe a bit less praise and a bit more examining of individuals technique and sound. Also, a bit less talking and a bit more doing.

Hopefully in the future every class I ever work with will be as excited as my fellow grad students were to learn and rehearse.

Alright Kid, show 'em' what you know. You've got 5 minuets. (reflection)

On Monday I had the pleasure of teaching Brandt, a 4 year old boy attempting to learn the clarinet.
The catch: I only had 5 minuets to teach him.

I should also probably mention, it was my professor doing a pretty accurate impression of a 4 year old.

When writing my lesson plans for this lesson, my two goals were:

1. Teach him how to put the clarinet together.

2. Attempt to see if he can play an open G (not nicely, just some screech of a G. After all there is only 5 minuets.)
 

Upon sitting down with Brandt and talking to him briefly, I realized "There's NO WAY I'm going to be able to have this kid able and  ready to assemble his own clarinet and play a G in 5 minuets."

So I had to make a quick decision, "Do I teach him how to play a G? Or, do I teach him how to get the instrument ready so he can be taught to play a G at any time."

Well I went with the latter. I figured " You've got to learn to walk before you can run."

So, reflection:

I think young Brandt walked away knowing you definitely need to put "chap-stick" or cork grease on the clarinet before putting it together if its dry. He also knows that you must be gentle when putting it together. Other then that, I'm not really sure if Brandt walked away knowing anything else. I didn't have enough time to finish showing him how the clarinet goes together. Luckily, the pieces only fit one way. Unfortunately there wasn't enough time for Brandt to learn how to put on the reed so the instrument was pretty much useless. I guess long story short, in terms of lesson plan goals: Mission failed.

Would I change anything?
The only thing I would go about changing is finding a better more child friendly way to set up the clarinet. Something easy to remember, such as a rhyme. Everything else other than that (my stretching warm up, keeping him engaged by asking him questions in-between steps) I would not change. Hopefully, I'll never have only 5 minuets to teach a lesson again. If I do, were cutting straight to the point.

No regrets, just new life notes.

Be honest with me..... Do we sound terrible?

How do we determine if some one is a good musician..

This is not the first time I've been asked this question and in my mind the answer is not a simple one, but alas
I shall do my best.

Over the years I have come to this conclusion,

There are two types of musicians, performers and creators. That's not to say that one can't do the other, its just generally speaking, in my experiences, some people often feels more comfortable doing one rather then the other.

Performers- Performers are those musicians that can have a piece of sheet music placed in front of them and play the piece note for note beautifully. The good ones can often play the piece with out error by their third attempt. These musicians can also transpose incredibly well and quickly. Some have the ability to remember an entire piece and play it note for note without any sheet music. Now of course there are pieces that are incredibly difficult to play and that's what separates the good musicians from the pros.
Example: A classical pianist.

Creators- Creators often create there own music and do not make a huge attempt at playing others pieces. A good creator has their ability to perform a piece they have written flawlessly with the emotion that they wish to convey. Another thing that determines them to be a good creator is their ability to pick up what someone else is playing and play along to it or improvise a solo to it, often playing completely by ear.
Example: A blues guitarist.

I have heard AMAZING classical musicians (performers) straight out say "no" to the thought of jamming with another musician because "If I don't have music in front of me, I will be lost and have no idea what to play."

And I have seen AMAZING rock musicians (creators) openly admit they have not the faintest idea how to read music and only play by ear (Jimi Hendrix)


The common ground on what makes them both good: They both know how to stay on time and stay in key. Their performance of the piece is next to near flawless and if they do have an error they are able to recover from it quickly.

Now I'm sure that you have thought of a handful of people that can do both of these things (create/read music)  incredibly well and good for them, but there are allot musicians out there that would much rather do one than the other.

Which leads me to my next point, which is training as a musician! Which is how I'm going to leeway into the discussion of  Brandt Schneider's "Creating Musical Flexibility Through the Ensemble"

After reading this article I was thoroughly impressed with Mr. Schneiders ability to turn a band program that had literally nothing around to being an award winning, competitive concert band program.

In the article Mr.Shneider stresses the point that students should have proper ear training, technique and discipline as well as a good background in music theory. By teaching his students these skills it helped him take them to the next level and made it easier for him to teach them. It also gave them the ability to play pieces more naturally, by ear and understand why they're the notes that they're playing.

Personally, I think this is a fantastic way to teach students. I wish I had this kind of teacher when I was a student in high school, but as most of us know, I am a self taught musician (EEK, every time I say this I feel a music major shriek and my credibility gets cut in half. "How dare you do it yourself!?").

I believe that teaching students music theory at a young age as well as giving them ear training is a fantastic way to give them the tools necessary to make it on their own as musicians. This comes with a big BUT though. That but being, I believe this should be taught in a music making setting. Not a bunch of students sitting in front of a chalk board, instrumentless, trying to memorize the circle of fifths. (which I once had to do once and it was AAWWFUULLL!! Give me a piano or a guitar for goodness sake! Let me hear what I am learning. That day, nothing was learned. I had to go back and figure it all out on my own.)

My only question for Mr. Schneider is, "Your technique for teaching students sounds amazing and informative, what a wonderful way to give them the building blocks they need to strive as musicians! But, what about the students that are easily frustrated? How do you get to them? Since most of the things that you are teaching them are interrelated, it's easy for a student to figure out one problem by studying something else, but what about those students that are having a difficult time making connections? What happens to them?"


All in all, I would say when trying to teach a group of musicians to be successful in the future and give them there own means to survive, Mr. Shneider is definitely on the right track.

DOES-NOT-COMPUTE!!!

                                                           DOES NOT COMPUTE!                                                           



Rubric.... Sounds allot like robot to me...

So here's the question? Does using a robot justify how a student should be graded. I'm sorry, I meant to say rubric***.

Me, I personally have always felt that there are certain subjects that require a rubric and there are certain subjects that should just use it as a (loose) guideline.

For example;

Special Agent James Bond must know how to disarm a Mark 27 Naval nuclear warhead before it's launched from the United States (by hostel British terrorists that took over a US submarine) to Russia, which in turn would cause WWIII.

Unfortunately, James was too busy hanging out with beautiful ladies that happened to be mixed in with the wrong crowed to open the disarming manual. As a result of this, James failed his Mark 27 Disarm test. In the simulation, James cut the green wire instead of the pink one which caused the warhead to detonate killing thousands off the coast of Alaska.

Here is a perfect example of where a rubric should be used, enforced and studied. For a skill set that requires exact details and measurements, a rubric should be used in order to score a test or performance.

Maybe a more realistic example would be a surgeon. You better hope that a brain surgeon was graded on a rubric before performing a brain tumor removing lobotomy. Or an EMT was graded on a rubric when demonstrating exactly how to use defibrillator and do CPR.


Then there are places where a rubric should be used as a guideline NOT as a standard.

For example;

Johnny is taking a 10th grade Beginner Group Guitar class. Johnny is taking this class to fulfill an elective and because he has always wanted to learn how to play an instrument. For his final, Johnny is required to play a Bb scale (which he nails) as well as several other scales. He is also required to play two pieces. One of which has several Bbs' in it.

Well, Johnny does a great job with his first piece and all his scales but plays 2 B naturals instead of Bbs' in his second piece. He got the other 15 Bbs correct and everything else he played note for note. After the piece, Johnny said to his teacher that he "missed 2 Bbs'", demonstrating that he understands where he made his mistake and what he needs to do in order to fix it.  The professor has heard Johnny play this song over 15 times correctly (while practicing in class) but according to the rubric it's a -10% point deduction for every note missed.

Here is the perfect example of a situation where a rubric is a ridicules thing to live and  grade by. The point of the class is to teach students how to play guitar at a beginner level. Johnny, who has attended all the classes, has always been prepared and who has clearly studied all the materials, grade is now in jeopardy because of a rubric.

Does this rubric, this test really demonstrate ALL of the information that Johnny has learned over the course of the semester? Does this rubric decide if Johnny really did all his work?

This is where the teacher needs to ask himself/ herself  "Should this really effect his grade? He has studied everything he was supposed to and demonstrated his knowledge of the content over the course of the semester. Should those 2 Bbs' really effect his grade?"

OF COURSE NOT!!!!

Johnny clearly knows what he did wrong, he knows how to fix it. He's not taking this class to perform live, its not "Guitar Performance class". He is taking it to learn how to play the guitar. Johnny has demonstrated that he has absorbed the content over the semester. He has also demonstrated that he can play guitar at a beginner level several times before his final. Therefore Johnny did what he was supposed to do, effective demonstrate his knowledge of the content. Therefore in my opinion, Johnny should receive an A.


 All in all,

There are certain subjects where a rubric is necessary. If you are teaching a specific skill that takes precise calculations in order to get a proper outcome then yes, live by your rubric. If one must perform a specific skill with an exact outcome and that's what the course is for then a rubric is necessary. A rubric should only be used when teaching factual user information that demonstrates the students ability to carry out an exact task.

But then there's other subjects, subjects that are more tuned towards a bigger picture, such as History. When teaching a subject such as history we have to ask ourselves, "Does the student understand the big picture? Have they demonstrated that they understand why this has happened? How it happened? When it happened?" If the answer is "yes" then a student shouldn't recieve major drop in their grade (according to a rubric) because he/she got the names of the guns the soldiers carried in WWII  wrong or because they misspelled a few words on a test.


We have to ask our selves, "Are we programing robots that perform tasks and do calculations? Or, are we teaching students to periodically demonstrate their knowledge of the content over a course of semester. Do they understand what the big picture is? Are we going to penalize them for small details that may not be detrimental to the actual subject? Does a test really demonstrate everything they have learned? Is taking a single test really a proper way to asses all the students?

When you answer those question, then you should decide how to use your rubric.

Rock TIll I Die, Blues When I Cry.

The question,
"Should music educators be experts in jazz or American folk music?"

America, we the people, the founders and creators of blues, the original rock n' rollers. The hippest and meanest of the improvisationalist, howlin' away at the moon every night.

We created this culture, no matter which way you look at it, it's all ours. Some other countries got a hold of it, put a couple chapters in the book, but its our birthright, our gift to the world, our psychotic, addiction ridden, hyper active love child.

So the question is, should American music educators be experts in jazz or American folk? Understanding American music is understanding America. It's understanding our culture, it's understanding our history, its understanding who WE the PEOPLE are, not those that represent us, but who WE are.

So I guess the answer to this question is, rock on music teachers, rock on.

Who am I? Glad you asked.

                                                        Who are you?

Who am I? The question “who am I?” has been plaguing me since I was a child. I know what I like and I know what I don't like, but with every passing day I learn something new and I change ever so slightly. Maybe change isn't the best choice of words. I would prefer to use the word adapt. What I do know about myself is that I'm passionate, driven, adventures, curious and loving. I strive for the best but I attempt to achieve my goals with modesty. I know what I want and I know where I want to go but I don't know who I am yet. I will never know who I am until I achieve all the goals I have set forth to achieve. Unfortunately for those looking for the short answer I cannot give you one. Why? Because my goals are life long. Some goals I may never accomplish, but I know that in my lifetime, time provided, I will give them my best shot. Some attempts may be failures. Perhaps all. But there wont be just one attempt. There will be multiple. Failure is an option but not a deterrent, and with every success comes a new goal. If I know myself, I know this to be true.

So to answer the question “who am I?”, I am James H. Darling II. I am one man who has the whole world in front of him and is looking at every possible path he can take to get where he needs to be. Making some new paths as he goes. I am not concerned about which path will get me there the fastest but more focused on the path that will allow me to see and do the most along the way. To put it simply, I am an adventurer.

                                                     What do you believe?

I have several beliefs I stand firmly by them. I believe that patients is an overlooked virtue, I believe that a proper education can open up an entirely new world for someone where as an improper attempt at education can leave a persons world in shambles. I believe that failure is just a lesson on what not to do on the next attempt or as Boonshaft referenced Samuel Beckett “Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail Again. Fail Better.”. I believe the word “can't” should really be “how”. I believe that hostility can be a motivator but letting someone know you genuinely believe in them is a far greater motivator. I believe that we as people need to be able to move freely and express ourselves with out concern but we fight both of these traits on a daily basis. I believe in the power of a good conversation, I believe that most people, with enough time to reflect would prefer to make positive choices rather then negative ones.

                                       What are your core values?

Through out my life I have been lucky enough to see and associate with people from all walks of life. I have had over $300 a plate meals paid for by people that believe money is no object and I have lived in a house that at times would get as cold as 34 degrees because there wasn't enough money in the budget to pay for the oil. I can't say I have seen it all but I have seen the difference. I have seen incredible acts of kindness first hand and I have seen inhuman acts of anger and aggression. Everything I have experienced thus far has shaped my core values, and I wouldn't trade any of those experiences for the world.

I believe there are moments in this world where your values are all you have. There are moments where nothing can help you or some one else other then your values. Every decision you make on a daily basis is based off your values. Even if you don’t think about them in that moment there is still something, some form of experience that is driving you to make that choice.

I stand by my values, some may even say I am stubborn. But I believe in these values and until something happens to change one of them, they will remain the same.

1. Always be a positive and nice person. Give people the opportunity to change their actions towards you before you react to them or a situation negatively.

2. If you are patient but assertive you will almost always come out on top.
3. Always graciously thank someone for helping you. Let them know that you genuinely appreciate them taking the time out of their schedule to help you.
4. Never let any one push you or a helpless person around. Stand up for yourself and others. Bullying will not be tolerated.
5. Be your own motivation. The only person that’s holding you back from doing something is yourself.
6. Take care of yourself physically and mentally. At the end of the day all you have is your health. Nothing more.
7. Things can ALWAYS be worse. Take a moment to find the light in every situation. I find that not making light of a bad situation is like holding onto a brick while swimming stranded in the middle of the ocean. Let go of the brick, you'll be able to tread water and swim for allot longer.
8. With the right amount of dedication, time and training ANYTHING is possible.
9. As the great Henry Ford said, referenced in Boonshafts book, “Don't find fault. Find a remedy!”. It's easy to point the finger, but all you're doing is taking time away from a solution.
10. Think about how your actions may effect others.
11. Don't be afraid to be passionate about something. As the great Dr. Seuss said. “Those that mind don't matter and those that matter don’t mind.”
12. Be yourself, it's allot easier then trying to be someone else.
13. Always strive to learn more, achieve more, be greater, push your limits. Play hard, party hard, rest easy, repeat.

I'm ALIVE!

Hello brave new world....