Tag Archives: MMU

Keep an Eye on the Money and the Snow


speaker2

Dr. Tracy Tunwall, chair of the business department at Mount Mercy University, speaks with Dr. Fred Croop, who delivered the annual Knapp lecture at MMU.

At first glance, the 2019 Barbara Knapp Lecture at Mount Mercy University didn’t seem like something that would appeal all that much to me.

Given by an accounting professor from Misericordia University in Dallas, Pennsylvania., the Oct. 30 speech in the Sisters of Mercy University Center at Mount Mercy University was entitled “Addressing Financial Mismanagement in Volunteer and Nonprofit Organizations.”

But past Knapp lectures had been good, and I enjoy making images at Mount Mercy events, so I decided to take a chance, roll the dice, see if lady luck was with me.

And she was. Unlike the ruinous gambling addictions that ensnare some who volunteer at nonprofit agencies, this particular game of chance came up aces.

Dr. Fred J. Croop did indeed cover financial controls that he sees as essential to preventing problems, but also told several real human stories touching on tragedy and ruined lives. He noted the scope of nonprofits in America, which collectively are quite large, and how key they are to small towns where the library foundation or volunteer fire department depends on fund raising to function.

speaker1

Dr. Fred Croop speaks in the University Center at MMU Oct. 30.

One point that gripped me about Dr. Croop’s talk was his portrayal of the perpetrators of the frauds. They aren’t evil, greedy hobgoblins, but real flawed humans who fall victim to temptation. He touched on many cases of theft from nonprofits—one of which involved a former student of his.

“I would have trusted him with my life,” Dr. Croop said. And yet, the person in question became addicted to gambling—legalized in Pennsylvania a decade ago—and the temptation proved too great. Which led to theft, discovery and shame.

Dr. Croop spoke of financial controls as not just a way for nonprofits to protect themselves and donors—but also as a way for them to protect their employees and volunteers who may otherwise be tempted to help themselves. Monthly reconciliations involving someone other than the treasurer, an insistence that employees take some vacation time, rotating financial duties, making sure duties are properly divided among non relatives and that boards are attentive—not all of the controls Dr. Croop advocates would be all that easy at all small nonprofit agencies, but fraud can be very costly and potential existentially threatening, so prevention seems worth it, to me.

I think small town Iowa is not all that different from the Pennsylvania towns Dr. Croop described. We too have government providing fewer services, causing more pressure on nonprofits. At the same time, population drops means the pool of volunteers to run these agencies is thinner. And gambling is a big industry in Iowa, too.

What a storm. Well, we had some weather the night he spoke, too. Dr. Croop, at least, said he was enchanted by the snow. Here in Iowa, where the month of October started with flowers and butterflies and proceeded rapidly to frost followed by several snowfalls, the white stuff is indeed pretty, but also causes some caustic reaction. As Dr. Croop was speaking, a Halloween Eve snow wafted down on the University Center.

The next morning, news reports said there was something like 40 traffic accidents in the Cedar Rapis area. Despite our life experience, we Iowans have to learn how to drive on snow every year. We have to be reminded to watch the weather and roadway.

And if we are involved in a nonprofit agency we have to watch the money to prevent financial storms that could slip us up badly.

Well thank you, Dr. Tracy Tunwall, chair of business, and Barbara Knapp, MMU trustee whose generosity fuels this annual lecture series. Despite my allergy to money and numbers (which explains the writing career), I found Dr. Croop to be equal parts scary, engaging, interesting and thoughtful.

And I am glad he liked the snow. It’s nice to be reminded that it’s pretty.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

1 Comment

Filed under Mount Mercy, politics

First Fall Series Presentation is a Feast for the Mind


a01

Dr. Anna Waterman, associate professor of biology, Mount Mercy University, talking about food.

Food changes everything. The way we live, where we live, how we live and the fact that we have “the man” to please and to defy—it all starts with food.

For the first several million years that our species walked on this planet, we foraged and hunted. We gathered the leaves and seeds and roots that we wanted to consume, and killed our fellow creatures and ate them.

It wasn’t an ideal life, but it was a life we were suited to. We already had fire—cooking predates our species and, along with the ability to make and use tools and weapons, is part of the legacy we get from our related hominid ancestors.

Then, about 12,000 years ago, starting in the fertile crescent of the Middle East but also independently developing in South America and China, humans began to fundamentally change the way we had lived.

logoThat fascinating history—how we are creatures of food and how our relationship to food changed everything about our lives—was the topic of Dr. Anna Waterman’s presentation “How the Agricultural Revolution Transformed Human Diet, Culture, and Society” that she gave Aug. 22 at Mount Mercy University. It was the first event in the 2019 Fall Faculty Series.

It is a bit weird to think that for most of the time we homo sapiens have been around, we shared this globe with other kinds of humans—literally other homo species besides ourselves. No more. Our spread worldwide happened before agriculture and “civilization,” and we either out-competed or eliminated our nearest relatives. (Dr. Waterman didn’t go into this point, but we also incorporated some of their DNA into ours—Neanderthal and Devonians, for example, didn’t all die out, some joined our clan).

People some 12,000 years ago began slowly to tend the plants that they like, and in what was wetter grasslands of the Middle East at that time, some of those grasses became selectively bred into cultivated grains. Those grains fueled dramatic changes in our diet—the invention of bread and beer as staples of what we eat and drink.

And with cultivated grains came larger populations, villages, hierarchies—eventually, nation states. Bosses. Work. Specialization. Organized religion. And, as formerly nomadic, now fixed peoples, we started to find that tending animals was more convenient than hunting them—chickens, pigs, cows, goats were bred from wild animals into the domestic creatures we care for and consume today.

Suddenly land wasn’t something you moved over and foraged on, it was property that was owned by some rich people. The concept of “stuff” was invented as we had fixed residences to store valued objects in.

In the blink of an eye, in the grand scheme of things, the globe was transformed. Today, there are still nomadic hunter gatherers in our human family, but they are rare, located in isolated pockets of land that typically are not that good for raising crops.

Where we can farm, we farm. Thus Iowa is carpeted with corn and soybeans from river to river, a dramatic change in the landscape from what it was 200 years ago. Our immigrant ancestors conquered the New World because residents already here did not have immunity to European diseases—caused, partly, by Europeans living in such proximity to their domesticated animal sources of protein.

Family size was dramatically changed. Nomads carry what they can, and usually can’t have more than one “carry” child at a time, so their norm was to breastfeed for three or four years, which was a form of birth control. With grain, you can make soft food that an 18-month-old can slurp down, so you can wean her and make another baby sooner. And if you’re farming, you tend to want more babies because those kids are farm labor.

The vast, varied ways that agriculture has shifted our environment, our social structures and our ways of life were interesting to hear Dr. Waterman speak about. The changes have had plusses and minuses. I’m not against having a computer to type this blog post on, nor being able to microwave my lunch.

But Dr. Waterman played an interesting game. “How many of you,” she noted, “could go out into your back yard and find stuff to eat?”

There are edible plants there, probably. If we were hunter-gatherers, we would know which roots to dig and which leaves to pluck. Today, our lives are divorced from our sources of food.

Not that I want to trade places with my great, great, great nomadic ancestor. They had cookies with this presentation Thursday night—something those ancestors never saw.

And afterwards, pizza with some brews. Beer and bread, man. They changed everything.

There are eight presentations in the fall series this year, come on down. The next presentation on Sept. 4, by Dr. Normal Linda Mattingly, will cover the history of school lunch programs.

Leave a comment

Filed under History, Mount Mercy, Science

Do God and Science Play the Same Game?


speaker2

Dr. Brad Gregory speaks in the Chapel of Mercy.

If you’re looking for Him, people of faith say He is around. Everywhere, in fact.

But science hasn’t found Him—and it won’t, according to one Catholic thinker.

Dr. Brad Gregory, professor of history at Notre Dame University, spoke Feb. 21 at the Chapel of Mercy, giving a talk he called “Religion vs. Science? Don’t Believe It.” It’s part of spring series called “Faith/Reason: Friends or Foes?” going on at Mount Mercy University.

The next event is March 7, when Dr. Bryan Cross, MMU assistant professor of philosophy, will lead a faculty panel discussion on Faith and Science, at 3:30 p.m. in Flaherty Community Room.

hands

A student takes notes.

Back to Thursday night. I’m not sure I can do Dr. Gregory justice, because I was late. In my defense, I was attending a granddaughter’s fifth grade rock and roll revue show, and my blue suede shoes weren’t available. But I also messed up—going to the wrong venue on campus before I checked on the location and learned the speech was to be in the chapel. Also, I took some notes (on the fifth-grade concert program) and accidentally left those notes in the chapel, so I’ll be flying blind in this blog post.

Like a scientist looking for God, I suppose.

A business professor was setting behind me, and at the end of the speech, I turned to him and asked about the highlights of what I had missed in the first 20 minutes.

“I think you got the gist of it,” he said.

I hope so. It was a mind-bending lecture—an English professor who was there the next day told me that if felt like a brain workout. Dr. Gregory said that Catholic thinking is consistent with some other major religions—Islam and Judaism—in believing in a transcendent God who is present but is not constrained by the same space and time as we experience life in.

speaker

Dr. Brad Gregory speaks.

He noted that, in the past, some thinkers attempted to find God in nature. And he did say that, for a Catholic, science is a way of understanding the universe and that understanding the universe is a way to understand God, but he also said that science and theology are disciplines that grapple with different questions using different methods—and while many scientists are led to skepticism about God because He’s not “there” in the scientific sense of being observable, that’s partly due to the way science frames questions. Science rests on the discovery of truth through what is observable.

But, Gregory said, a modern thinking person of faith doesn’t expect to find God in a microscope. Nature and God aren’t the same thing. Here is where it gets a bit sketchy for me, and I wish I had been there for the whole speech and took more notes. It was an interesting argument, one that I’m very much giving a Reader’s Digest version of, which is unfair to the presentation.

I have long felt that a religion that asks you to not believe in what you can observe and rationally prove is fatally flawed—Dr. Gregory is suggesting that expecting God to be pinned down by what you can observe is also fatally flawed. Hmmm. My brain pan, I’m afraid, may have started to overheat.

ducey

Dr. Mary Ducey of MMU calls a break before questions.

At least it’s nice to know the Roman Catholic Church learned some lessons from what Dr. Gregory called “the Galileo affair,” which is why the church itself did not take a position against evolution. Many Catholics and Catholic thinkers over the years may have, but not the church itself.

Dr. Gregory was even critical of the modern idea of “intelligent design.” Asked what he thought about that, he quipped that he “wished it would go away.” But then he said he was being flippant and gave a longer answer. He sees it as resting in the dark corners of what is not understood about evolution—but science may fill in those gaps, and resting one’s faith on the gaps means planting a foundation in sand.

Anyway, I don’t think his goal was to win over anybody to Catholicism, but rather to give an understanding of the basis of thinkers who don’t see a conflict between religion and science.

It was an interesting talk. I’m glad MMU is putting on this spring series, which seems an echo of the fall faculty series that I helped bring about.

More brain workouts to come!

Leave a comment

Filed under Mount Mercy, Science

My Favorite Student Blogs This Term


As I often do in media writing classes, I required some students to establish or update a blog this semester.

Some student blogs never really take off. Others become more personal to the student, and she or he ends up doing some interesting writing.

This semester, I thought three blogs in particular have content that appealed to me.

Lakin Goodman has turned her blog into more of a personal web site, complete with resume information. She has an interest in photography, and I would like her to use more of her images on the blog, but she does have things to say. She notes that she has no theme to the blog—but that’s not really a downside, to me.

Lakin

Chuck Uthe is a self-described nerd, writing about film and games. His reviews are not casual—they have some depth and background to them. I appreciate how reflective he is.

Chuck

Matt Trueblood says he has more caffeine than oxygen in his blood right now—and I hope he can recharge soon. But his writing is honest and has what another blogger once called “emotional nudity,” which is meant as a positive thing. His blog seems to be an honest peek into his psyche—which is an interesting place to be.

trueblood

I am sure I will continue this assignment in media writing classes. Now and then, a student who is introduced to blogging via the class will own it and continue their online efforts. Today, when students who wish to be communicators need to consider their online identity and the nexus of social media they can use to showcase and promote themselves, a blog gives them something to tweet about and share on Facebook. It also is a minor taste of web writing for students, which is a key skill.

The three that I am choosing to feature here (and it does not mean that other students have not done interesting work, this is a personal and ideosycratic look at blogs that just tickled my fancy) are all visually interesting, too–it’s a feature of this semester’s crop of student blogs that those who seemed to care the most about their writing also cared some about the presentation of that writing, which has not always been true.

I hope you check out and enjoy the writing that these students are doing!

Leave a comment

Filed under Blog, Journalism, Mount Mercy, Writing

Let Us Sustain This Conversation


 

kris

Dr. Kris Keuseman, associate professor of chemistry, speaks Nov. 19, 2018, during the final presentation in the 2018 Mount Mercy University Fall Faculty Series.

Plastics, it turns out, are a lot likes pasta. The polymers that make up plastics are long molecules, and, like spaghetti, sometimes parts of them can break off—which is one reason that plastic so permeates our environment now.

tracy

Dr. Tracy Tunwall, associate professor of business.

The 2018 Fall Faculty Series was about the central problem of our time—a conversation on the topic of sustainability. Called “Sustainability: Human/Nature & the Future of the Earth,” the series concluded with a presentation by Dr. Tracy Tunwall, associate professor of business; and Dr. Kris Keuseman, associate professor of chemistry.

Called “Addressing Consumerism: The Life-Cycle of Stuff,” it was a sobering final presentation Nov. 19, including video clips that helped describe the issue of what happens to all of our “stuff” when it’s thrown away.

This final presentation followed one earlier this month by Rachael Murtaugh, director of sustainability, on “Iowa Lands and Waters.”

Anyway, I thought it was very interesting in the final presentation to have a business person and a scientist speaking together. Dr. Tunwall has industry experience, while Dr. Keuseman can give you the molecular view.

Dr. Keuseman made it clear he’s not anti-plastic—it’s just that plastic has become the easily used medium to create products that don’t have to be disposable and could be made with other base materials that degrade more naturally.

As for Dr. Tunwall, she used several interesting video clips to illustrate how industry does and does not deal with waste. Most eye opening was a 60-Minutes segment that showed a “recycling” effort in Denver led to a environmental hell hole in Asia where impoverished workers are put at great risk using primitive methods to extract materials from old electronics.

human-nature-logo_0The Nov. 19 presentation brought to a close our fifth fall faculty series at Mount Mercy University. There were around 70 people there, which was nice. Our sequence of series began in 2014 when we talked about the cultural legacy of World War I. In 2015, we tackled the legacy of Vietnam. In 2016, the hot topic was immigration. In 2017, we had a series of presentations on our divided politics. And now our series on sustainability joins that list.

The 2018 series was somewhat smaller than past events, which is probably a good thing. We had some series that had more than 10 events. On the other, hand, some past series included outside speakers and student performances, which would be good to see again in the future, although I am not sure that there was a student performance piece that would go with this series. Maybe art on the topic?

Whatever. The Fall Faculty Series continues to be a valuable event at MMU. What should we do next?

In a PR class, I use a fictional series that I call “Red, White and Brown: Race and the American Experience.” I’m not sure that we would ever use “American Experience” in a series title—too close to the PBS show—but examining the state of race relations would, I think, be a good topic.

But it was also a very serious, very heavy topic. I think maybe MMU should aim to have some fun with the series.

rachel2

Rachael Murtaugh, director of sustainability at MMU, described Nov. 1 how much Iowa has changed and how little native Iowa is left.

What anniversaries are important in 2019 that might provide such a theme? It’s the 500th anniversary of the death of Leonardo DaVinci, although what that would mean for a series, I’m not sure. It’s the 75th -anniversary of D Day, but that will be the summer before the fall. It’s 50 years since 1969—when humans put their first footprints on the moon. Maybe DaVinci and the moon suggest something—the Renaissance sparked Earth exploration, and now we’re looking towards the heavens.

Yeah, not exactly screaming “fun.” Is there a sports or music theme that would work? And 2020 would seem like a natural to look at suffrage—voting rights—100 years after the 19th Amendment.

A 2019 Woodstock series? Sex, love, and rock and roll?

Well, we have some thinking to do and plans to make. Here are images of the Nov. 1 presentation and the Nov. 19 final event. For now, it’s nice to celebrate a series just completed as we consider the next adventure. Sustainability was a good theme—a large conversation that must continue. But that’s one of the nice things about this Fall Faculty Series idea—the large conversation it can help spark.

What ideas would you suggest for a 2019 series?

3 Comments

Filed under Environment, Mount Mercy, Science

The True Cost of A Shirt


shirt

Dr. Kate O’Neill holds up a shirt and asks an audience to guess its cost.

How much does a t-shirt really cost?

According to Dr. Kate O’Neill, associate professor of strategic leadership, too often we answer that question with the price of the shirt. She held up a shirt that she said retails for $9.97 at The Gap.

human-nature-logo_0But, in shipping, environmental disposal, carbon footprint—that shirt is an economic reality beyond its price. I’m not sure of the analysis that led to the figure, but O’Neill pegged the real cost of the shirt at 70 cents above its purchase price.

And that doesn’t sound like much, but we live in the a country of more than 300 million souls and each of us owns multiple t-shirts. The hidden cost of just one shirt for each of us amount to a $210 million hidden tax on society—the costs of land-filling the shirt, for example, are borne by all of us and not the maker nor consumer of the shirt.

kate

Dr. O’Neill speaks.

That was one illustration of the nature of the sustainability problem in economics O’Neill outlined in her talk “Global Social and Economic Sustainability: Supporting Environmental Practices” Oct. 22.

She spokes as part of the Mount Mercy University Fall Faculty Series “Sustainability: Human/Nature & the Future of the Earth.”

It’s an important series of talks that continues Nov. 1 when Rachael Murtaugh, director of sustainability and stewardship, speaks on “Iowa Lands and Water.”

I suspect part of O’Neill said may foreshadow the final presentation in the series Nov. 19, when Dr. Tracey Tunwall speaks on “Addressing Consumarism: The Life-Cycle of Stuff.”

One point O’Neill made, that I suspect Tunwall may come back to, is the idea of a “circular” economy that mimics nature. After all, nature doesn’t really have any waste products—what one biological entity leaves behind always becomes raw material for another biological entity. Nothing is wasted.

rachaleedited

Rachael Murtaugh, the next speaker in the series, listens to the talk.

That’s the true sustainability model O’Neill pointed to. And it was interesting to hear of an industrial community in, I think, Denmark that comes close to that ideal—with numerous manufacturers each utilizing the waste from some other facility.

It was an interesting night. As I left, I turned on my lights and enjoyed an almost full moon lighting the streets as I pedaled home. And I was thinking circular thoughts as the wheels went round and round.

More of my images on Facebook. Some members of the audience listening:

1 Comment

Filed under Environment, Mount Mercy

Living in Harmony, Recognizing Dignity


Dr Bryan Cross

Dr. Bryan Cross, assistant professor of religious studies at Mount Mercy University, speaks Sept. 18, 2018.

At the end of a sometimes discouraging presentation that had multiple examples of the damage humans have done to the Earth and ways in which people take advantage of each other, Dr. Bryan Cross, assistant professor of religious studies, offered a brighter view.

“If we think it’s too late, it will definitely be too late,” he said. “You have to do what you can. And I still have hope.”

Cross, a professor at Mount Mercy University, spoke during the Fall Faculty Series called “Sustanability: Human/Nature and the Future of the Earth.” His Sept. 18 forum, the second in the series, also happened during Mercy Week at MMU, when the university celebrates its Sisters of Mercy heritage—and the week this year is dedicated to concern for the Earth. The presentation was called “Pope Francis’ Laudato Sí: Harmony with the Natural Order and the Dignity of Creatures.”

shadow

Shadow of Dr. Bryan Cross.

speak

Dr. Bryan Cross explains a slide.

The presentation, using ideas from a book written by Pope Francis, began with some religious perspective on why it’s important to care for our planet. Partly, it’s recognition that nature has intrinsic value. And it’s also showing respect to other humans, too, including those who will come after us.

“I am my future generation’s keeper,” Cross said. Exploitation of other humans, viewing them only as utility, is part of the mindset that allows exploitation of other living things and the Earth itself—so the antidote is a recognition of dignity of others—other people, but other parts and pieces of this reality, too.

About 60 people attended, which is a pretty good turnout. The audience seemed caught up in the presentation, and there was lots of good discussion at the end. I thought I spoke a bit too much—a bad habit I tend to have—but it was still an enjoyable evening, if a little discomforting, too.

And I also felt that it set the bar pretty high for me. I speak next in the series, on Oct. 11 I will give a presentation called: “Hot Story: How the Media Struggles to Cover Climate Change.” Hope to see you there!

Leave a comment

Filed under Mount Mercy, Science