Author Archives: David Truss

The Van Gogh Exhibit

Here are some images and a short video from the Van Gogh Exhibit at the Vancouver Convention Centre:


This was truly a visual experience to be had. It begins with written information shared in socially distanced panels, then opens to the room in the images I shared above (there are 6 to scroll through on the Instagram post). If you get the opportunity to go, you will enjoy it.

Ocean waves

The ocean has always spoken to me. I love the sound of waves gently crashing on the shore. When I do my morning meditation I have the sound of the ocean in the background. Today as the meditation was ending, I thought of a shoreline and how it is a great metaphor for constant change.

A shoreline is an interesting idea. It is something that can not be measured accurately. The more you zoom in, the longer the shoreline is. From a far distance, the shore on a straight stretch of a beach is almost a straight line. Zoom in and you see an uneven wavy line. Move closer still and within that wavy line are small ebbs and flows, and closer still we see yet a rougher edge, with water moving unevenly across the sand. If you try to measure that shoreline, every zoom in gives you more zigs and zags to measure, lengthening the distance.

The shoreline constantly changes, and still remains a shoreline. We constantly change, yet we remain ourselves. We follow patterns we create over years of being who we are, yet we always have the opportunity to express ourselves differently, to zig and zag in ways we have not done so before. What is certain is that we change over time, but we tend to follow patterns in our lives just like shorelines tend to follow patterns. The difference is that we can make choices, but the ocean must follow set laws of energy, gravity, and viscosity to determine where the shoreline is. We on the other hand can determine how we will move next.

Most often we will follow the patterns we have laid out before us, but sometimes… sometimes we can break free and choose to create a whole new shoreline for ourselves. We have the power to do so, but more often than not, we listen to the waves, we don’t make them.

Choice time for teacher Pro-D

Last Friday I had a Pro-D, Professional Development Day, with the Inquiry Hub staff. We started the morning with a book talk, sharing what we have learned from books we are reading.
A few weeks ago, I had my teachers fill out a form sharing the title and link to a book that they wanted to read for their own personal development. I said that it didn’t have to be education-related, just something they wanted to learn from. Even though I said no obligation for follow up, my iHub staff suggested the book talk as part of their Pro-D day.

I loved hearing all the ideas and educational connections they made to the books they were reading.

Next, we moved on to personal learning time. We each shared what we were exploring, planning, or investigating, and then had an hour and a half to work on it. For example, two teachers worked on updating a questionnaire we give students when the apply to the school. Another teacher worked on a unit in one of his courses he thought needed work, and another teacher created a ‘Diversify your feed’ document and shared it with our staff and students:

I decided to create this image using information our team developed at our previous Pro-D. My way of making sense of our vision for the school:


We got together again (digitally, we weren’t meeting face-to-face) after lunch to share what we’d done, then we did some group planning around our timetable next year… a real challenge in a small school with a small staff that offers so many options for students.

Most of our day was about choice. Teachers got to share learning from a book of their choice, then they got to choose what they wanted to work on, before getting together for collaboration time. We spend a lot of our day at Inquiry Hub giving students time to work on things they want and need to work on. Our students have a lot of self-directed time at our school. It only seems fitting that when it’s time for our staff to learn, that we do the same.

Even though teachers got to choose what book they learned from (it didn’t have to be the one I gave them, although that seemed to be the one they mostly shared from), they were able to be really diverse in their sharing. Even though there were no constraints on what their personal learning time was used for, we shared our intentions before splitting up to spend that time on our own, or together by choice. We had accountability built into the day, but it was filled with personal choice.

It’s not just our students who benefit from choice in learning, our teachers benefit greatly too!

The wrong focus in the news

I’m becoming more and more disappointed with news reporting. Journalism has become a way to tell a predetermined story, with the focus being to exaggerate a narrative that is negative. Here are two examples:

1. TV – A report on the AstraZeneca vaccine in Canada. A large amount of the vaccine is is about to expire, but because of the fear of blood clots, which is extremely low, officials are acting slow in deciding what to do with this supply of vaccines. In the report, they mention that the blood clot risk for the second shot is significantly lower than than the low risk with the first shot. Then they interview a woman who had her first AstraZeneca shot and is cautious and doubtful about having the second shot. She becomes the story. Not two people with different views, one saying yes, and one saying no… just the cautious perspective.

2. Newspaper – This is a message from our local paper to our Valedictorian:

The Tri-City News is reaching out to SD43 valedictorians about what it’s like to graduate during Year 2 of the pandemic.

Can you please write two paragraphs — no longer than 150 words in total — about your Grade 12 experience, and describe what it’s like for you and your fellow grads to transition without any official ceremony?

Congratulations valedictorians, please write to us and tell us the reasons why you are disappointed with your last year of school.

What an awful thing to ask!

In both of these news stories the focus of the story is one that stirs emotions, not to benefit anyone, simply to prey on the emotions of the audience. I’m seeing this time and again. The question isn’t ‘what is the story here?’, the story is ‘what will get the most watches, clicks, likes, and shares… at the expense of good reporting.

I find myself wondering, is real journalism dead? I hope not. But I don’t know the way forward? It seems to me that this kind of negative reporting hits a chord that less biased news does not… and in a very competitive market for people’s attention, stirring negative emotions makes for better views. What’s the way forward from here?

5 weeks

It’s hard to believe that we are just 5 weeks away from the end of the school year. I usually get pangs this time of year as I question what was accomplished versus what I’d hoped for. This year, I think more about just getting to the end safely, and ending the year on a positive note. In December of last year I started saying to myself, in connection to the Coronavirus pandemic, ‘Things will start to get better in January 2022′. I wrote off this entire year with respect to normalcy.

Yes, the vaccine rollout is gaining traction, and now 12 year olds and up can get their first shot, but the percentage of Canadians who have had their second shot is shockingly low. Yet, it looks like my projection might have been pessimistic, and perhaps we might start to see normalcy return in the new school year, but we can’t control who chooses not to be vaccinated and what new variants might start to spread in our communities… I’d rather stick with my projection of next January and be pleasantly surprised that things normalize sooner, rather than be sorrily disappointed if they don’t.

The end of the school year will arrive very quickly. Time will fly by with all the crazy ‘to do’s that must get done to finish off the year. Then I’ll have a couple weeks to tidy up everything and build some excitement for September 2021, a school year of unknowns: A year for optimism blended with caution, hope blended with hesitancy. But right now, the only focus is the next 5 weeks.

A One Dot Day

Starting January 1st, 2019, I’ve been tracking my healthy living goals. Four goals each getting a sticker, on a year long calendar, when I do them each day. This year the stickers/goals are:

  • Red – workout: 20 minutes cardio (10 if rowing), and some strength, core, and/or stretching
  • Yellow – writing on this blog, and some audio book time (usually while working out or commuting or doing chores)
  • Blue – minimum 10 minutes meditation
  • Green – Archery, with an original goal of 100 days this year, now updated to 125.

On Saturday, I had a 1-dot day, (one sticker on my calendar), for the first time this year. Then forgetting to meditate again Sunday (yesterday), I had my first back-to-back miss of mediation in over 2 years.

This made me look back and find a pattern I don’t like. I’m getting lazy on weekends. I’m not waking up early to start my routine, then I no longer have a routine. When I started these goals, I intentionally started them at the end of a holiday break when I was going back to a job that was the busiest I’d ever been. I told myself that if I could maintain these habits when at my busiest, I could develop life patterns of staying healthy. Before this I always had the excuse of “I’ll start again when things slow down.”

Well now I’ve been able to maintain my healthy goals through the craziest of busy times, but I’m becoming a bit of a sloth on weekends/breaks when I have more time. It’s good to notice the pattern and learn from it. No more one dot days for me this year, and I’m going to endeavour to always have three dots on days off work. This isn’t a chore, it’s a lifestyle choice, and my lifestyle is going to include lots of daily dots.

Colourblind discovery

A few years ago I developed Central Serous Retinopathy in my left eye. It sounds scarier than it is. Basically, a small bubble forms on the back of your retina, blurring your vision but only at your focal point. This is extremely annoying. Imagine trying to read something and the only word that is blurry is the one you are trying to read.

It can be stress and insomnia related, among other things, and happens mostly to males 40+. It is also something that goes away over time and seldom needs treatment. For me it was extra annoying because I’m left I dominant, and that’s the eye that wants to focus on things close to your nose… like a computer screen. Eventually it went away, but my focus is definitely a little softer for things like reading, and when I’m fatigued, I find it hard to read, and will put on readers with a low, but necessary magnification.

Yesterday I was out in the sun for a while and had suntan lotion on my face. Later, I was lying on the couch, playing a mindless pop-the-bubbles game in my phone that I sometimes play. I like it because a round is really short and I don’t find myself wanting to play too long… a quick break that doesn’t become a large distraction. I’ll play it when my wife is watching the news. I can listen in and don’t need to watch him the screen.

So I was playing this game where I have to have to shoot a coloured bubble and hit at least 2 more of the same colour to pop them. I think I rubbed my right eye and some suntan lotion got in it. It was streaming tears a bit and I didn’t realize I was only looking through my left eye. Then I pointed a blue bubble at two green and one blue one, thinking they were all blue and that they would all pop. They didn’t. I thought there was a glitch in the game.

I looked again with both eyes and suddenly I saw the green. That’s when I realized that I’m blue/green colourblind, but only in the focal area of my left eye. I shut my right eye and any green that I looked at became just a slightly lighter version of the blue, but only where I focused, the other green dots in my peripheral vision stayed green.

I found this test online, and sure enough, I can’t read it with my left eye, but the blue numbers don’t completely disappear, parts of it fade out depending on where I look.

I wonder if this is something I’ve had my whole life or if it was brought on by the Central Serous Retinopathy? A Google search hasn’t led me to believe these are connected yet they both have affected only the focal area of my left eye. Also, this seems like a weird thing to not know about myself for 53 years of my life.

It is a weird experience shifting my focal point and watching coloured shapes morph or disappear right before my eye. It makes me think about all the things we go through life not seeing, not being aware of. We don’t see the same ranges of colour as other animals. What do we miss that our eyes aren’t capable of seeing… and what are we missing simply because we are oblivious?

Likes, likes, and more likes

I am fascinated by the whole process of ‘Liking’ something on social media. So many people use it in different ways. For a long time, my ‘liking’ habits looked like this:

  • Facebook: Family, a few friends, ignore everything else.
  • Instagram: I love the photo for it’s artistic qualities, or ‘No like for you!’
  • LinkedIn: Great article, a like will probably also get a share and/or a comment too.
  • Twitter: I really like what you said and want to ‘keep’ it, or someone shared something of mine and I want to thank them.

But that has evolved… or rather devolved. Now a ‘Like’ is just an acknowledgement. I shifted to this unconsciously as I’ve watched others do the same. It wasn’t intentional or thought out at all. I miss being a lurker on Facebook, not caring if others knew I came to visit things they shared or not. I miss seeing my favorites on Instagram only being wonderful photographs. I miss going to my ‘Likes’ on Twitter and only seeing things worth reading again.  I’m still not that much of a ‘liker’ but I definitely ‘like’ far more than I used to.

I’m not sure I’m going to change my habits back? It feels rude. Isn’t that interesting? I feel an obligation to be more generous, more ‘like’-able. I share an anniversary photo on Facebook, someone takes the time to send us well-wishes, I guess I should like their comment. I share something on Twitter and someone responds. I don’t have a response in return, so I should like their tweet as my response/acknowledgement. Someone shares a wonderful family moment on Instagram, I should be nice and like it, after all, they liked my family photo. And so suddenly my habits above became watered down to things I should do to be polite on social media.

We have moved to a world of likes, likes, and more likes… and I’m not sure I like it?

Idiots With Guns

It doesn’t matter where you live in North America or what news network you watch, if a violent gun tragedy happens in Somewhere, USA, well then that will be the lead story. If it bleeds, it leads.

I’ve written about this in A new tragedy of the commons,

“Turn on the news and what do you see? Tragedy. You might, in an hour long program, see one ‘feel good’ news report. You will see sadness, destruction and loss (of property, of profit, of freedoms and rights, of life).”

This quote caught my attention today:

But this is an arms race of sorts, with no network wanting to ‘lose out’ by not covering the story. So what can be done? Here are two suggestions that I have, that I think networks can do right now, based on the advice Dr. Dietz gives… taking it one step further:

  1. Do not share the killer’s name or photograph.
  2. Replace the killer’s name with, ‘Idiot with a gun’. Such as, “An Idiot With a Gun in Somewhere, USA went into a shopping mall and started shooting.”

Don’t interview his parents, don’t troll his social media, don’t show his picture, and don’t mention his name. His name might come out in a courtroom story, long after the event.

Right now, I could name a few cities, and you would likely be able to name the idiots that shot people up in those cities. That’s sad. These idiots do not deserve the notoriety, they don’t deserve the fame. We don’t need to live in a world where we empower idiots with guns! So let’s be realistic and while tolerating the ‘if it bleeds, it leads’ mantra of the networks, remove some of the poison being spread by these idiots. Take away their identity and fame… a small price they deserve to pay for taking away people’s lives.

Ideas on a Spectrum

The world seems so bipolar right now! Topics that used to be on an ideological or political spectrum have become dichotomies.

di·chot·o·my. /dīˈkädəmē/

noun ~ a division or contrast between two things that are or are represented as being opposed or entirely different.

It can be dangerous to take a spectrum of ideas and polarize them. We do not live in a Yin or Yang, black or white, world. Where the greatest danger lies in this polarization is in the importance of having a right to free speech. As I said in My one ‘ism’:

“We want to live, thrive, and love in a pluralistic society. We just need to recognize that in such a society we must be tolerant and accepting of opposing views, unaccepting of hateful and hurtful acts, and smart enough to understand the difference.”

It is getting harder and harder to do this because people find opposing views, equally as hurtful as hateful acts. This is delicate, and very problematic. This is where we need some bipartisan cooperation. 

bi·par·ti·san. /bīˈpärdəzən/

adjective ~ of or involving the agreement or cooperation of two political parties that usually oppose each other’s policies.

Right now there are untouchable (un-discussable) topics that make dialogue impossible. 

di·a·logue. /ˈdīəˌläɡ,ˈdīəˌlôɡ/

verb ~take part in a conversation or discussion to resolve a problem.

In a civil society, dialogue is the one problem-solving strategy that should be sacred. To do this, free speech is essential. But right now there is a culture of ‘attack the opposition’ that is very scary. This seems to play out at its worst on Twitter:

~ A prominent person tweets something insensitive or careless and they are attacked as if every fibre of their being is evil.

~ A little-followed user tweets something ‘inappropriate’ and suddenly they are famous in the most infamous of ways. 

~ A person with an unpopular opinion tweets that opinion and they become ‘memed’ as the poster child for ridicule on the topic. 

We can’t live in a civil society where dialogue is shut down, because at that point hate and violence are too easy to be responses, where dialogue should suffice. We are seeing this happen on different ends of the political spectrums, such as: 

~ undemocratic societies shutting down/arresting/killing opposition to those in power.

~ extreme right wing groups being unabashedly hurtful. 

~ extreme left wing groups physically attacking journalists and public figures with opposing views.

None of this moves us towards a freer, more open and accepting world. None of this fosters conversations and dialogues that can help us grow as a society. None of this creates an environment where middle ground can be found, to allow the vast majority of us to coexist in a civil society. 

We are living in a time when the extremes seem to be the voice of everyone. That’s scary! If someone has a centrist view they are identified by the extremes to share the opposing extremist view. Or, they are considered collaborators, co-conspirators, or unacceptably sympathetic to the other extremist view, (sometimes by both sides simultaneously). And so the vast majority of people that do not hold extremist views are either pushed out of the conversation, (forced to be silent for fear of some form of retribution for holding a ‘wrong’ view), or they are attacked in unfair and hurtful ways. 

I don’t pretend to have answers, but I’m pretty sure that two things can move us in the right direction:

  1. We need to recognize the difference between opposing views shared in discussions and hurtful acts, and treat them differently. When someone does or says something harmful to a person or group of people, legal responses and a judicial process should prevail. When someone says something hurtful (as opposed to hateful/harmful/prejudiced), the response should be dialogue. That dialogue might not bring about any kind of consensus or agreement, but it is what we need to do in a civil society that allows freedom of opinion and speech.
  2. We need to move away from public attacks and shaming as recourse for every wrong-doing. Treating every mis-step and error a person makes as unforgivable is harmful to our society in two ways: First, it does not provide the space for apology, forgiveness, and learning; Secondly, it actually waters down the response when someone does something truly unacceptable and deplorable… if they are treated no worse than someone who mis-spoke and is apologetic. 

We can not let the extremists and the misguided be the voices for the masses. Most people in a civil society have opinions that lie on a spectrum, and not at the polar opposites of each other. To focus on the extremes is to move us towards a society that is less free.

“We want to live, thrive, and love in a pluralistic society. We just need to recognize that in such a society we must be tolerant and accepting of opposing views, unaccepting of hateful and hurtful acts, and smart enough to understand the difference.”

More on this idea here: Having hard conversations