At the end of the movie and watching the stories of each child I would say in my personal perspective of what good parenting is the child that grew up in Namibia had the best culture in which to grow up in. The child that grew up in Japan was the second best followed by the culture in Mongolia. The child that grew up in the Untied States would have been the worst.
While watching the movie and the different scenes where the producers decided to show a specific act a baby does the child from the United States was scarcely in many of the scenes. The baby that grew up in the American culture had the slowest development where as the other children learned things at an earlier time and progressed faster then Hattie. Though from the bare outlooks it would have been said that the American family should have had the best parenting because they went to all the doctors, read the books about how to be good parents and spent much quality time with their child. There was also a scene where Hattie and her dad went to a class and the parents and children where supposed to be signing and waving their hands, it reminded me of Mr. Marks talking about the music classes he takes his daughter to and how during those sessions he felt stupid but because they are supposed to help development and music appreciation they continue to go. But even all the things the parents had done, going on the kids were around the same age and should have been on the same average schedule, Hattie had the slowest development. She was the last to crawl and walk and also we never really saw her allowed to explore by herself with little toys and her speech development was later. While the other kids were starting to learn their different languages and movements Hattie was still only mumbling and incomprehensible.
The best culture I thought was the child that grew up in Namibia. There were many drastic differences between this culture and the other three. I would have to say that this culture has the most natural way of child birth and bringing up their children. There was no hospitals, no wires and medicines, nothing artificial. The mother also decided to breast feed her child. The main differences with culture it seemed is that there was no adult males in the community. There was also groups or in this movie a pair of two women who always were together and helped each other take care of their kids, the babies grew up in a community where the mother was the dominant figure but there were others who helped raise and take care of the baby and it was not to so much elders doing the watching it was other children who helped. The baby at an early age was allowed to explore and play with things on their own with out such a close and prison like attention from parents. If I remember correctly I believe the baby was one of the first to start crawling but to also stand and walk around. I choose this culture because it happened to be the most natural and there was a faster development but I also feel that there was another deeper connection not so much love cause every mother in the movie loved their child but there was (cant explain it) I guess in a way you could tell the baby was paying attention and learning.
Some of the common methods that the parents choose to use in their parenting decisions were used through out all of them though there were some who did one thing or another. Singing was a common method where the mothers would sing to their babies (though Hattie's parents did not sing to her). Another one was where the mothers would allow their children to room around their houses and explore. Another thing I noticed while the babies where just out of the hospital and in the early development stages, there were a little of little toys and strings and bells to occupy the babies attention. It reminded me of how I am with my cats. I play with my cats by getting them little toys with bells and catnip and they start to kick it around and meow at it, and I thought it was interesting that the same method we use for cats we use with babies. Then of course each household and baby had many interactions with animals. Most of the families had cats and often the baby and cat would be together and cuddle or play or else there was the animals that lived in the same area as the families did. I feel like most of these strategies were what helped their children to have an early development but also a good childhood. Although if you notice that most of the things listed the family from the United States used little to none of these methods.
I think it is important to realize what other cultures do because it can help people relax that in life we really arent all that different. And that if people are looking to raise a baby the best way, it helps to see what common methods are and to see what works so that they can incorpriate it into their own parenting.
Friday, June 4, 2010
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Parenting
I guess my answer will be a cliche. Children should grow up in loving and caring environments where they have the opportunity to grow up in an open space where they have the chance to think for themselves. I know for me it wasnt like the typical family I saw on TV, no big loving family that gets together every weekend, no family of three with a mom and a dad and possibly a sibling. I grew up with none of that but I have to say I wouldnt trade my family for the world. Not saying there were certain moments in my life where I would look around and see kids playing with their dad and think to myself, hmm I wish I had one or to come home to a sibling where it wasnt me by myself. But my family was great and what I mean by family is my mom, me and my cats. And for the longest time I grandparents. We would go every weekend and my grandfather used to own a restaurant so I always loved the food he made. That was my family since the rest of the family never hung out at my grandparents and I would only see them during the holidays. So I grew up with my mom, single parent who did put me in day care since she had to work. None of that was bad. I met new people and learned new things and because of that, I have always been open to new things and meeting new people cause they have so much to teach us. Also because my mother was a single hard working parent I admired her Independence and hard work. And even though she worked she never let that get in the way of our time together. We always had so much fun going places and exploring.
Im not so sure what a family should be since mine has always been consistent of just my mom and me. I know the saying it takes a village to raise a child but my mom did fine on her own. Though i do believe in raising a child there needs to be some community. A child needs love, care and attention, and those things come from many different people since there are many different forms. And this way a child is not only gaining one persons insights but many perspectives on life and the world and are able to form a opinion about life on their own.
The first article was interesting because though it doesn't work on her kids, in schools, teachers use the same strategy on students and the students do not even notice it is happening to them. They go along with it and have it in their heads that they are empowered and have control and make decisions about their lives even though, they still were given those options, they did not choose anything but what was given to them. So the strategy in my opinion shows this to children and opens their eyes to the fact that in reality they do not have a choice, no free will since the parent is still in charge and monitoring the options given. But one of the children instead of choosing the two options given to her, choose something completely different and in the hand was handed it.
I have mixed feelings about the Ferber method. I feel like that is wrong of a parent to leave their kid crying and to let them just cry themselves out. It would be horrible for me to sit and listen to my child cry and cry until it knows no one is coming for it. But I feel in a bigger perspective of this, the concept that the child and baby will learn from it is an important skill that most grown adults still need to grow used to. And that is there is no hand holding in life, no one walks around with you holdign your hand and making sure your ok and doing all the right things. More then not, you'll be there doing it yourself.
Im not so sure what a family should be since mine has always been consistent of just my mom and me. I know the saying it takes a village to raise a child but my mom did fine on her own. Though i do believe in raising a child there needs to be some community. A child needs love, care and attention, and those things come from many different people since there are many different forms. And this way a child is not only gaining one persons insights but many perspectives on life and the world and are able to form a opinion about life on their own.
The first article was interesting because though it doesn't work on her kids, in schools, teachers use the same strategy on students and the students do not even notice it is happening to them. They go along with it and have it in their heads that they are empowered and have control and make decisions about their lives even though, they still were given those options, they did not choose anything but what was given to them. So the strategy in my opinion shows this to children and opens their eyes to the fact that in reality they do not have a choice, no free will since the parent is still in charge and monitoring the options given. But one of the children instead of choosing the two options given to her, choose something completely different and in the hand was handed it.
I have mixed feelings about the Ferber method. I feel like that is wrong of a parent to leave their kid crying and to let them just cry themselves out. It would be horrible for me to sit and listen to my child cry and cry until it knows no one is coming for it. But I feel in a bigger perspective of this, the concept that the child and baby will learn from it is an important skill that most grown adults still need to grow used to. And that is there is no hand holding in life, no one walks around with you holdign your hand and making sure your ok and doing all the right things. More then not, you'll be there doing it yourself.
Interview and Survey Questions
Interview Questions:
1. How often do you fight with your friends in a week?
2. What things do you do to stop the fighting? What do you do to prevent fighting?
3. How many times do you feel happy with your friends? What are you usually doing to be happy?
4. What do you do when you feel the mood turn negative in a friendship?
5. What advice would you give to someone who cant get out of a negative relationship?
Andy:
How often do you fight with your friends in a week?
At least once a week I would say
What things do you do to stop the fighting? What do you do to prevent fighting?
Well depending on who it is, I would take on different approaches. If it's someone that I care about, and that I would like to be on a good note with, I would confront them about the issue that caused for the fighting. However, if it's a friend who would lean more towards acquaintance, I would just avoid them, or ignore them.
How many times do you feel happy with your friends? What are you usually doing to be happy?
I would say 50-50. Half the time I would feel happy being around people, and the other half, I would want to just go home and not have to deal with them. But out of the times that I'm actually happy being with my friends is when we just hang around, talking, and sharing our thoughts. This tend to involve three or less people. But there are also times where I'm happy with a bunch of people; it seems that that's only possible when handball is present.
What do you do when you feel the mood turn negative in a friendship?
Usually I would go down with the mood of the group. But i guess what I do, physically is walk away. Just trying to get away from everyone
What advice would you give to someone who cant get out of a negative relationship?
Adam:
How often do you fight with your friends in a week?
Not at all
What things do you do to stop the fighting? What do you do to prevent fighting?
I don't see a need in violence, so if there is a conflict we can talk it out, understanding both sides
How many times do you feel happy with your friends? What are you usually doing to be happy?
I feel happy most of the time, unless something unexpected comes up. And we are having fun, just talking or doing something together
What do you do when you feel the mood turn negative in a friendship?
Try to resolve it, or when its out of my hands, i wait or find new friends
What advice would you give to someone who cant get out of a negative relationship?
Well if they really wanted to still be in that relationship, then I'd tell them to wait and try to convince that person, but honestly if they were in a negative relationship I'd tell them to move on.
Carrie:
How often do you fight with your friends in a week?
well arguments usually zero but I'd say 1 time per week i get upset
What things do you do to stop the fighting? What do you do to prevent fighting?
i try to stay optimistic and just get pass it without blowing things up . usually the tension slowly fades if it's a real problem though, i try to talk to the person
How many times do you feel happy with your friends? What are you usually doing to be happy?
well i can't really count happy moments. I'd say I'm usually happy with them 80 percent of the time. conversations, jokes, sharing stories, volleyball, eating
What do you do when you feel the mood turn negative in a friendship?
well i usually get upset too but the little stuff that gets me mad usually doesn't outweigh the friendship so i usually turn around and forgive them secretly and start having fun with them again
What advice would you give to someone who cant get out of a negative relationship?
either talk it through or get out of it. if they stick with it, it's only going to tear them down
Looking back on the last question, what advice would you give to someone who cant get out of a negative relationship, for the most part people's answer's was to fine new friends because it would not be worth it to yourself to stay in a relationship which drags you down. I feel like this would be the worst case scenario for my research topic, that if I find no good ways to increase positive feelings and only end up struggling with mostly negative and some positive that it would be in that persons best interest to leave the friendship. So I guess for my topic I would want to save it before it would get to that point.
Survey Question:
When one of my friends is down, it effects the whole group mood but also my own.
1. How often do you fight with your friends in a week?
2. What things do you do to stop the fighting? What do you do to prevent fighting?
3. How many times do you feel happy with your friends? What are you usually doing to be happy?
4. What do you do when you feel the mood turn negative in a friendship?
5. What advice would you give to someone who cant get out of a negative relationship?
Andy:
How often do you fight with your friends in a week?
At least once a week I would say
What things do you do to stop the fighting? What do you do to prevent fighting?
Well depending on who it is, I would take on different approaches. If it's someone that I care about, and that I would like to be on a good note with, I would confront them about the issue that caused for the fighting. However, if it's a friend who would lean more towards acquaintance, I would just avoid them, or ignore them.
How many times do you feel happy with your friends? What are you usually doing to be happy?
I would say 50-50. Half the time I would feel happy being around people, and the other half, I would want to just go home and not have to deal with them. But out of the times that I'm actually happy being with my friends is when we just hang around, talking, and sharing our thoughts. This tend to involve three or less people. But there are also times where I'm happy with a bunch of people; it seems that that's only possible when handball is present.
What do you do when you feel the mood turn negative in a friendship?
Usually I would go down with the mood of the group. But i guess what I do, physically is walk away. Just trying to get away from everyone
What advice would you give to someone who cant get out of a negative relationship?
Adam:
How often do you fight with your friends in a week?
Not at all
What things do you do to stop the fighting? What do you do to prevent fighting?
I don't see a need in violence, so if there is a conflict we can talk it out, understanding both sides
How many times do you feel happy with your friends? What are you usually doing to be happy?
I feel happy most of the time, unless something unexpected comes up. And we are having fun, just talking or doing something together
What do you do when you feel the mood turn negative in a friendship?
Try to resolve it, or when its out of my hands, i wait or find new friends
What advice would you give to someone who cant get out of a negative relationship?
Well if they really wanted to still be in that relationship, then I'd tell them to wait and try to convince that person, but honestly if they were in a negative relationship I'd tell them to move on.
Carrie:
How often do you fight with your friends in a week?
well arguments usually zero but I'd say 1 time per week i get upset
What things do you do to stop the fighting? What do you do to prevent fighting?
i try to stay optimistic and just get pass it without blowing things up . usually the tension slowly fades if it's a real problem though, i try to talk to the person
How many times do you feel happy with your friends? What are you usually doing to be happy?
well i can't really count happy moments. I'd say I'm usually happy with them 80 percent of the time. conversations, jokes, sharing stories, volleyball, eating
What do you do when you feel the mood turn negative in a friendship?
well i usually get upset too but the little stuff that gets me mad usually doesn't outweigh the friendship so i usually turn around and forgive them secretly and start having fun with them again
What advice would you give to someone who cant get out of a negative relationship?
either talk it through or get out of it. if they stick with it, it's only going to tear them down
Looking back on the last question, what advice would you give to someone who cant get out of a negative relationship, for the most part people's answer's was to fine new friends because it would not be worth it to yourself to stay in a relationship which drags you down. I feel like this would be the worst case scenario for my research topic, that if I find no good ways to increase positive feelings and only end up struggling with mostly negative and some positive that it would be in that persons best interest to leave the friendship. So I guess for my topic I would want to save it before it would get to that point.
Survey Question:
When one of my friends is down, it effects the whole group mood but also my own.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
54
Introverted (I) 63.33% Extroverted (E) 36.67%
Intuitive (N) 57.89% Sensing (S) 42.11%
Feeling (F) 66.67% Thinking (T) 33.33%
Judging (J) 59.38% Perceiving (P) 40.63%
INFJ
Looking at what other people got for some, I am surprised about how accurate it seems to pick up on how we behave and for others I feel like there were some mistakes when the test came to its conclusion of that persons personality. I don't really agree that if people have varied resulted then complications would arise or that they might not easily get along. I am an introverted person, quiet and likes to be out of the spot light yet two of my friends in my life have been extroverted, loud and center of attention. i can see how people would think both personalities would clash and problems would arise between the two but in my experience, no more problems have occurred then with any of my other friends. Though I must admit that my closer friendships have been with people of closer results to mine. I was not very surprised when my results came back. I actually took the survey later then i was supposed to so while in class and everyone was going over their results and comparing and guessing what other's was, I had looked at the sheet and tried to label myself. I had come down to two options and cant remember one but the other was INFJ which is the result I got after taking the survey. For the most part this test was successful in reading people's personalities. Though I feel we don't need a survey like this to figure out ourselves and other people's personalities. We also did this in class, we looked around the room and it was easy to spot the introverted and extroverted people. The harder ones to figure out were the other categories unless you knew the person or had a good sense of people and character.
Intuitive (N) 57.89% Sensing (S) 42.11%
Feeling (F) 66.67% Thinking (T) 33.33%
Judging (J) 59.38% Perceiving (P) 40.63%
INFJ
Looking at what other people got for some, I am surprised about how accurate it seems to pick up on how we behave and for others I feel like there were some mistakes when the test came to its conclusion of that persons personality. I don't really agree that if people have varied resulted then complications would arise or that they might not easily get along. I am an introverted person, quiet and likes to be out of the spot light yet two of my friends in my life have been extroverted, loud and center of attention. i can see how people would think both personalities would clash and problems would arise between the two but in my experience, no more problems have occurred then with any of my other friends. Though I must admit that my closer friendships have been with people of closer results to mine. I was not very surprised when my results came back. I actually took the survey later then i was supposed to so while in class and everyone was going over their results and comparing and guessing what other's was, I had looked at the sheet and tried to label myself. I had come down to two options and cant remember one but the other was INFJ which is the result I got after taking the survey. For the most part this test was successful in reading people's personalities. Though I feel we don't need a survey like this to figure out ourselves and other people's personalities. We also did this in class, we looked around the room and it was easy to spot the introverted and extroverted people. The harder ones to figure out were the other categories unless you knew the person or had a good sense of people and character.
Monday, May 10, 2010
55
Ideas on topics:
Do emotions drive our lives or rational thinking?
What sets the social rankings in friendships and significant others?
Why are we so scared to let people see the real us that we allow ourselves to be taken over by the persona we put forth?
Why do people have expectations? When do you stop expecting things from people?
When is enough enough?
why are people hypocrites?
Is friendship worth the emotional drama we feel for the little time we actually feel good to be in the company of others?
Yuxi:
Yu xi I think you have a very interesting question. Though you might want to get more specific or choose different words, like bonding for instance, you mean close bonding? or just bonding in general with friends we make from a day to day basis. I wonder if you would actually after researching this come to the conclusion it is for the individuals own gain or if it is something more intimate.
Revised question:
Are there proven strategies for increasing positive feelings and reducing negative drama in friendships?
Research:
Morton J. Mendelson and Aaron C. Kay. Positive Feelings in Friendship: Does Imbalance in the Relationship Matter? Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, Feb 2003; 20: 101 - 116. http://spr.sagepub.com/cgi/citemap?id=spspr;20/1/101
This website only gives a brief abstract to what the main article is talking about. Unfortunately the only way to look at the whole article is to purchase it so this all I will be going on. The abstract was somewhat confusing going into technical terms about an experiment they did with friendships. The results were varied and a result they came up with was that happiness and positive feelings were higher in friendships were the functions of the friendship were fulfilled.
Do emotions drive our lives or rational thinking?
What sets the social rankings in friendships and significant others?
Why are we so scared to let people see the real us that we allow ourselves to be taken over by the persona we put forth?
Why do people have expectations? When do you stop expecting things from people?
When is enough enough?
why are people hypocrites?
Is friendship worth the emotional drama we feel for the little time we actually feel good to be in the company of others?
Yuxi:
Yu xi I think you have a very interesting question. Though you might want to get more specific or choose different words, like bonding for instance, you mean close bonding? or just bonding in general with friends we make from a day to day basis. I wonder if you would actually after researching this come to the conclusion it is for the individuals own gain or if it is something more intimate.
Revised question:
Are there proven strategies for increasing positive feelings and reducing negative drama in friendships?
Research:
Morton J. Mendelson and Aaron C. Kay. Positive Feelings in Friendship: Does Imbalance in the Relationship Matter? Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, Feb 2003; 20: 101 - 116. http://spr.sagepub.com/cgi/citemap?id=spspr;20/1/101
This website only gives a brief abstract to what the main article is talking about. Unfortunately the only way to look at the whole article is to purchase it so this all I will be going on. The abstract was somewhat confusing going into technical terms about an experiment they did with friendships. The results were varied and a result they came up with was that happiness and positive feelings were higher in friendships were the functions of the friendship were fulfilled.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Survey Analysis
Thinking back on taking the survey, I felt like I needed to explain myself and give more of an answer then just a simple yes, no and maybe. This is because nothing is ever just 2 dimensional, there is always something more to it. Some questions opened up more questions rather then leaving you with a feeling like you know who you are better cause it's all there written and answered for you.
For the question, Your parent(s)/ guardian(s) know who you really are? I feel like I would ask Do any of us really know each other?
And I would wonder what other people answer for their questions. How much different are their perspectives on the same thing like friendship then yours. It would be interesting to find out you think one thing of a friendship then the other person involved. Like if you found out you listed them as your best friend but you hadn't made it on theirs. What then? How are you supposed to feel about that? What would you do about that? These questions will always be in the air since in reality we will never know what the other answered to the questions given.
The question, you feel happy by yourself? I feel like that can go both ways. Cause I know often I feel like I want to be alone and being alone is good and brings me peace of mind. But on the other hand, sometimes I get tired of being alone and wish that there was something to do so I wouldn't have to sit on my own.
For the question, other people like you? I feel like you could never really know that. This is because since in my theory we all wear masks and sometimes fake certain things about ourselves, that you be friends with someone but that doesnt mean you may actually like them. Or you think people like you but in reality everyone might secretly dislike you but they dont want to tell you.
Looking back on the results of the survey one thing stood out to me. And the conclusion that I came up with was that everyone lies. Everyone though the survey was anonymous and most people did it in the confines of their own space where people weren't looking, we still feel the need to protect ourselves and to layer ourselves with false answers. One look around school and how we interact with each other you can spot the lies that the results of the survey had said were true. The question,
For the question, Your parent(s)/ guardian(s) know who you really are? I feel like I would ask Do any of us really know each other?
And I would wonder what other people answer for their questions. How much different are their perspectives on the same thing like friendship then yours. It would be interesting to find out you think one thing of a friendship then the other person involved. Like if you found out you listed them as your best friend but you hadn't made it on theirs. What then? How are you supposed to feel about that? What would you do about that? These questions will always be in the air since in reality we will never know what the other answered to the questions given.
The question, you feel happy by yourself? I feel like that can go both ways. Cause I know often I feel like I want to be alone and being alone is good and brings me peace of mind. But on the other hand, sometimes I get tired of being alone and wish that there was something to do so I wouldn't have to sit on my own.
For the question, other people like you? I feel like you could never really know that. This is because since in my theory we all wear masks and sometimes fake certain things about ourselves, that you be friends with someone but that doesnt mean you may actually like them. Or you think people like you but in reality everyone might secretly dislike you but they dont want to tell you.
Looking back on the results of the survey one thing stood out to me. And the conclusion that I came up with was that everyone lies. Everyone though the survey was anonymous and most people did it in the confines of their own space where people weren't looking, we still feel the need to protect ourselves and to layer ourselves with false answers. One look around school and how we interact with each other you can spot the lies that the results of the survey had said were true. The question,
Initial theories of human relationships
I would like to start off with a comment that Vincent made in class. We had been talking about families and relationships between members. Then we were getting into the definition of what friendship means and what are friends. He made a very interesting comment where he said friends are a replacement family. I fully agree. Family in a way are people you have to live your life with, whether or not you actually like them or not. But with friends we have the ability to choose who we want to be our friends. And usually friends and people we get close with we consider out second family. They are picked to be replacements of certain family members we feel could be better or in some cases completely to escape our families at home. I find it interesting that as I grew up, it was mostly just my mother and I. It was the two of us doing everything together, yet when I got into school and started making friends, i didn't just have one or two close friends but I had semi fairly big groups. In some ways it seems I was making up for some lost company since at home, we didn't have a big family. Though at times I often find myself wanting alone time cause big groups can be tiring and I'm more comfortable with being alone.
Relationships, its hard to explain since it different for each individual. But I agree with those in class who said that most of the time we make friends because it fits our own agenda. And in certain cases if two people's agendas coincide, then they turn out to be good friends but as often as the case is, if the agendas go against each other then much tension will be surrounding them and they would probably not make the choice to be friends. Humans for the most part are very social creatures. We crave and want attention, we long for affirmation and the most important thing is we want to be belong to someone, we want to be apart of something (like a family, friendships) and in this way we can better define ourselves if we have a backing in our lives.
But even then certain lets say personalities are more dominant then others and usually you find them at the head of a group with many smaller followers. This way the group "leader" gets attention and the followers can feel accepted. Its not so hard to look around either on the street or in school or on the train and could identify those attention seekers. They stand in the middle of the crowd and their actions and words are screaming, "come look at me". In my opinion, these people lower their value as they try to present themselves to the world.
Love. I dont think there is no set definition of love. But I also feel that there are many types of love. People create relationships to try and get closer to having this feeling. To be loved and to love someone else. But I feel like with emotions like this, there is room for manipulation between partners. Love and hate are emotions that cloud people's judgments. We turn blind and cant think about reason. But I feel like in the world today, these types of emotions dont exist at least at this level. Too many kids and people throw the term around. It doesn't hold any significance.
Sometimes in life I get so fed up with people. Just too many times people have let me down and they expect that things can go on as before. Friends. We have to figure out how many chances they get, how many lies are enough, how many bad times there are where the good ones dont out shine them, etc. Friends are hard to manage. Especially if in there somewhere people are different answers to what friends are and their agendas. But that can be said with any of the people we interact with in our daily life. I always found it so amazing that, my cousin could go any where in the city and come back with tons of new friends. While most often the majority come back with the same amount as they had started. It has to do with her character and the vibes she sends out. I think on some level of our minds most people are empathetic and pick up on things like that and is why they are so open to her. Though it can also be how we see the world. I can walk anywhere in the city and I can come back frustrated and annoyed at how people act.
There could also have something to do with social rank. I noticed that most grownups think they are more valued and that since Im younger I have to show them respect. I could be walking down the street and if me and someone else are about to hit into each other, then they expect me to move. I mean at least some of them try to get out of the way but others just keep walking and expect you to move, like they are some kind of GOD who think the deserve for people to get out of their way. Then if you happen to be dodging them and still hit into them, they get all annoyed and will talk back to you.
People are hypocrites. They always hold expectations in their heads for other people yet when the roles are reversed those same rules don't apply to them.
For the amount of drama and feelings in relationships we have, why do people decide to put up with them just to have a few moments of happiness?
Can people truly connect with each other or are we all just alone in the world?
Relationships, its hard to explain since it different for each individual. But I agree with those in class who said that most of the time we make friends because it fits our own agenda. And in certain cases if two people's agendas coincide, then they turn out to be good friends but as often as the case is, if the agendas go against each other then much tension will be surrounding them and they would probably not make the choice to be friends. Humans for the most part are very social creatures. We crave and want attention, we long for affirmation and the most important thing is we want to be belong to someone, we want to be apart of something (like a family, friendships) and in this way we can better define ourselves if we have a backing in our lives.
But even then certain lets say personalities are more dominant then others and usually you find them at the head of a group with many smaller followers. This way the group "leader" gets attention and the followers can feel accepted. Its not so hard to look around either on the street or in school or on the train and could identify those attention seekers. They stand in the middle of the crowd and their actions and words are screaming, "come look at me". In my opinion, these people lower their value as they try to present themselves to the world.
Love. I dont think there is no set definition of love. But I also feel that there are many types of love. People create relationships to try and get closer to having this feeling. To be loved and to love someone else. But I feel like with emotions like this, there is room for manipulation between partners. Love and hate are emotions that cloud people's judgments. We turn blind and cant think about reason. But I feel like in the world today, these types of emotions dont exist at least at this level. Too many kids and people throw the term around. It doesn't hold any significance.
Sometimes in life I get so fed up with people. Just too many times people have let me down and they expect that things can go on as before. Friends. We have to figure out how many chances they get, how many lies are enough, how many bad times there are where the good ones dont out shine them, etc. Friends are hard to manage. Especially if in there somewhere people are different answers to what friends are and their agendas. But that can be said with any of the people we interact with in our daily life. I always found it so amazing that, my cousin could go any where in the city and come back with tons of new friends. While most often the majority come back with the same amount as they had started. It has to do with her character and the vibes she sends out. I think on some level of our minds most people are empathetic and pick up on things like that and is why they are so open to her. Though it can also be how we see the world. I can walk anywhere in the city and I can come back frustrated and annoyed at how people act.
There could also have something to do with social rank. I noticed that most grownups think they are more valued and that since Im younger I have to show them respect. I could be walking down the street and if me and someone else are about to hit into each other, then they expect me to move. I mean at least some of them try to get out of the way but others just keep walking and expect you to move, like they are some kind of GOD who think the deserve for people to get out of their way. Then if you happen to be dodging them and still hit into them, they get all annoyed and will talk back to you.
People are hypocrites. They always hold expectations in their heads for other people yet when the roles are reversed those same rules don't apply to them.
For the amount of drama and feelings in relationships we have, why do people decide to put up with them just to have a few moments of happiness?
Can people truly connect with each other or are we all just alone in the world?
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
School Domination
School is an institution that is very dominant in every child’s life. Kids spend the better part of their lives in school and doing school related activities. But in reality people are never really free of the lessons and attributes of school. School teaches kids to become mindless and obedient workers and that is very important in our society. Emerson once said that in our society “the virtue in most request is conformity”. This can be seen as one of the main underlying lessons schools teach. Schools may boast about how they teach kids to become free and critical thinkers who will be able to think for them selves and become their own self. In reality as these words are spoken, their actions are a completely different matter. Schools have methods in which kids are taught to not think for themselves but to be dependent on the teacher figure to relay information on to them and to be plots waiting to be cultivated. Schools create a façade in which students are brought into a false sense of security where it more easily hides the underlying theme of creating perfect robots to be controlled. The students never know it because they are more then happy to believe the mask the school has put up then to change their role and break out.
Maybe in some ways this is what the school wishes to succeed in, to have students not care to break out of something that is ultimately taking away their right to be independent. During some research John Gatto (winner of the New York City teacher award) figured out this math about how much time his students actually have to be themselves:
· Out of 168 hours in each week my children sleep 56. That leaves them 112 hours a week out of which to fashion a self.
· My children watch 55 hours of television a week according to recent reports. That leaves them 57 hours a week in which to grow up.
· My children attend school 30 hours a week, use about 6 hours getting ready, going and coming home, and spend an average of 7 hours a week in homework, a total of 45 hours.
During that time they are under constant surveillance, have no private time or private space, and are disciplined if they try to assert individuality in the use of time or space. That leaves 12 hours a week out of which to create a unique consciousness. Of course, my kids eat, and that takes some time–not much because they’ve lost the tradition of family dining, but if we allow 3 hours a week to evening meals we arrive at a net amount of private time for each child of 9 hours. (Teacher of the Year Acceptance Speech)
It is ridiculous that after conducting this research he came to the conclusion students only have 12 hours to create our selves a week. From a young age we are brought into these pens which confine us and are never really free until after 13 years of our lives to then only be put into more box's where we lose the right to be individuals and are rewarded to be more like robots following the same pattern. Gatto even says, "The truth is that schools don’t really teach anything except how to obey orders." This is true. For all the years in school, students are taught to listen to teachers and to obey orders. Often in schools there are bells to signify when a class is over and to stop work, there are hand gestures and songs when teachers want us to be quiet. We are being taught to follow specific patterns like when people train their dogs and like dogs we will carry these lessons with us for the rest of our lives, bells will always signify that something is over and something new should be worked on. This is what they want to prepare us for. In society it is much easier to work with people who are already familiar with following orders and to not question or speak out.
America, our nation is supposed to fulfill dreams and to be a beacon of freedom. Now for the younger generations it is only a machine to better shape us into "model" citizens so they can work us until we grow old and retire or die. Real life lessons and adventures only exist in dreams or pages of books, no longer are children "allowed" to run free and discover new things, instead they sit confined for 6 hours a day in cells being taught to obey and get rid of their independence. Students are only given information, which they must commit to memory and then recite later on, never grasping the full picture of anything. Keeping the ideology that we are indeed ignorant and that we need the teacher to educate us and pass their knowledge onto us is a trap where we do not see the power in ourselves to be something more, to actually learn more then what we are being taught and actually obtain something meaningful in our bleak lives. There is also the connection between the humanist and the way SOF deals with educating kids. Though often times at most I see both ways of teaching. In most cases there is no strict boundaries between teacher and student, one is no more knowledgeable then the other. Though as much in any case there is the sign of clear respect and role of teacher pupil. But nothing along the lines where the students are completely ignorant and the teacher is the savior who will teach them everything they need. Though in classes like math and science I often see the narrative way where we merely sit there and they deposit information into our brains to store and catalog for later.
John Freire wrote in his book that "the more completely they accept the passive role imposed on them, the more they tend simply to adapt to the world as it is and to the fragmented view of reality deposited in them." Students not only do not do anything about the fact that they have little room to be free to be themselves, they allow it to be done when every day a bit of their individuality is taken from them. This causes us to be the oppressed where the oppressors do not wish to see the world transformed or revealed to the students so they use education to keep these from us. This is because schools have made them quite adapt. Instead of breaking free and changing how things are, the students will merely adapt and change themselves to how the world is.
Even when students are finally allowed to return home or set free for the day, most children will run to the TV and watch shows for hours until their parents yell at them or they spend hours on home work. No one is allowed any free time. Weekends are merely facades where children wont complain about going to school every day with no breaks even though sometimes weekends are only spent on homework and school related activities. Though everyone can try to escape from the chains and cages, which entrap us, it is ultimately impossible to be completely free. There will always be cases in which the school’s teachings will find its way back to you, either through your own actions since is has been drilled into you or through another source. In the movie the Dead Poet’s Society, there was a teacher who tried to break his students out of their roles of obedient students and to open their eyes to the world around them. The teacher did many unconventional activities such as ripping pages out of textbooks, standing on the teacher’s desk and writing and reading poetry aloud for everyone to hear. The lessons he hoped to confer to his students were for them to strive to find their own voice and to look at things in different ways. Though while he was teaching them these ideas on transcendentalism, the school was the very opposite. They imposed and were strict about rules and following them. The school and the boy’s parents were the oppressor’s, oppressing on them their views on life and how things should be done. So many things were expected of the students and they never knew anything else but to follow along with what they were told. This all changed as they began to understand the lessons their new teacher was teaching them. One boy even disobeyed his father and went to act in a play. He took up his own interests and dreams in life and made them real. He created his own identity separate from what his parents and the school created. Although at the end he forsakes his identity and allowed his father to put chains on him. Though he did take matters into his own hands and killed himself as a way to escape. But couldn’t there have been other ways for him to be his own person, besides giving up and killing himself? Is that the fate that awaits all of us? Is there no hope to find a resolution? Is there only to swim with the stream and to make the best out of what you got, instead of trying to create something new?
There is no clear solution to being free of school’s oppression and domination. Though I do not see that many students will take the same road the kid in the Dead Poet’s Society did and kill themselves. Although in all likelihood, the students now are hardly aware of what is happening to them. But is it better to not know of what’s going on if there is no hope of escape? Won’t we be saving countless disappointments of hope when students find it is much harder to create a separate mind outside of what society wants of them? Maybe students have already discovered this fact and so have decided to “bound their eyes with one or another handkerchief, and attached themselves to some one of these communities of opinion.” (Emerson) School teaches students to adapt themselves to the ever presence and facts of life. Students will forever be constantly struggling with creating identities while trying to keep their identity separate from those around them. Conformity is the key concept every school wishes to imprint on their students. The schools do such a great job of it that because students have no separate identity outside of “student” it is easier to confer information and not be troubled about the importance of the facts of its meaning because the kids will not even dig any farther then what is given to them.
Monday, April 26, 2010
50-
John Gatto: Teacher of the Year Acceptance Speech
Gatto begins his speech with his concern of the school crisis. He connects the school crisis to our social crisis and says we have come to lose our identity. After conducting research Gatto figured out that his students only have 122 hours a week to fashion themselves. Most of the other time is consumed with school and school related activities plus the occasional TV watching. He continues to say "We live in networks, not communities, and everyone I know is lonely because of that." After 1850 when the compulsory method was introduced it has become much more wide spread. This has only taught the students to obey orders as well as decreasing literacy levels which never again after 1990 was above 91%. "Schools are intended to produce through the application of formulae, formulaic human beings whose behaviour can be predicted and controlled." It is not the fault of the teachers that students are producing such bad grades and behaviour problems, it is the system of education that has caused this difference in how education is being taught, where teachers are merely the messengers and the students the ones being delivered the package of not so much great knowledge but knowledge for society where individuality is taken out and conformity is taught as a good thing. Gatto argues that this concept of school has to be argued and redefined and fixed or merely broken where then students can be home schooled.
I find it ridiculous that after conducting this research he came to the conclusion we only have 12 hours to create our selves a week. After taking a closer look and adding stuff I know me and my classmates do, that 12 hours decreases severely. In society we have lost our childhood. From a young age we are brought into these pens which confine us and are never really free until after 13 years of our lives to then only be put into more box's where we lose the right to be individuals and are rewarded to be more like robots following the same pattern. Gatto even says "the truth is that schools don’t really teach anything except how to obey orders." This is true. For all the years in school, students are taught to listen to teachers and to obey orders. Often in schools there are bells to signify when a class is over and to stop work, there are hand gestures and songs when teachers want us to be quiet. We are being taught to follow specific patterns like when people train their dogs and like dogs we will carry these lessons with us for the rest of our lives, bells with always signify that something is over and something new should be worked on. This is what they want to prepare us for. In society it is much easier to work with people who are already familiar with following orders and to not question or speak out.
I agree fully that the two institutions that control children and young adults lives are television and school. But in reality you are to learn much more needed knowledge then that of regular and basic skills. Not saying i agree with this but this is what our society has set up. Real life lessons and adventures only exist in dreams or pages of books, no longer are children "allowed" to run free and discover new things, instead they sit confined for 6 hours a day in cells being taught to obey and get rid of their independence. Even when students are finally allowed to return home or set free from the day, most children will run to the TV and watch shows for hours until their parents yell at them or they spend hours on home work. No one is allowed any free time. Weekends are merely facades where children wont complain about going to school every day with no breaks even though sometimes weekends are only spent on home work and school related activities. Its kind of sad to hear all this. America, our nation is supposed to full fill dreams and be a beacon of freedom. Now for the younger generations it is only a machine to better shape us into "model" citizens so they can work us until we grow old and retire or die.
Paulo Freire: Pedagogy of the Oppressed
Freire criticizes the "banking" education where the teacher is merely reciting facts and the students only memorize it but do not take any thing significant away from it. They are not really learning to fully understand what is being taught to them they are only there so remember and recite the lessons taught to them. The students are nothing more then containers for the teachers to fill with knowledge. The teachers then become those with higher knowledge and the students are the ignorant people who must depend on the teacher to gain knowledge. The teacher then has a set purpose in life and is expected to fulfil it not only by the students but by the administrators who control the education. The oppressed with little thought for change will learn to adapt to their situation and can lead for them to be dominated later in life when they learn to not change the situation but to change to it. The humanist is another method to teaching where both teacher and student are more like equals and both have something to offer to help the other grow and learn.
This also connects to what Gatto was saying about students being mindless impassive people who are let out into the real world. "The more completely they accept the passive role imposed on them, the more they tend simply to adapt to the world as it is and to the fragmented view of reality deposited in them." In both arguments, the students are not taught to think for themselves, they are only given information which they must commit to memory and then recite later on, never grasping the full picture of anything. This causes us to be the oppressed where the oppressors do not wish to see the world transformed or revealed to the students so they use education to keep these from us. Keeping the ideology that we are indeed ignorant and that we need the teacher to educate us and pass their knowledge onto us is a trap where we do not see the power in ourselves to be something more, to actually learn more then what we are being taught and actually obtain something meaningful in our bleak lives. There is also the connection between the humanist and the way SOF deals with educating kids. Though often times at most I see both ways of teaching. In most cases there is no strict boundaries between teacher and student, one is no more knowledgeable then the other. Though as much in any case there is the sign of clear respect and role of teacher pupil. But nothing along the lines of the students are completely ignorant and the teacher is the savior who will teach them everything they need. Though in classes like math and science I often see the narrative way where we merely sit there and they deposit information into our brains to store and catalog for later.
Lisa Delpit: Power and Pedagogy
Delpit contrasts two reading programs where one took forty lessons to learn the same thing the other lesson did in only one sitting. Though the first method was proven to be well founded and excellent with certain kids for others it took them longer then the fist sit in to understand everything because at home they were not given any knowledge to better suit their understandings. Kids who had some more background with these types of ideas excelled fast since they brought some knowledge with them and the lesson only increased it further. But the kids with no previous background the second method which would consist of forty lessons was better where the kids could learn from the beginning. Both methods are good but depending on the student it will work for them or against them. The culture of power is also brought up where kids of minority and of color and poor are taught different codes and those differ from those the dominant culture of power have. She insists that the appropriate education can only be found when those of the same community come together to talk about the changes that need to be made instead of middle class whites making the decisions.
It's a little interesting to read from Delpit's perspective. I'm not really sure if I'm reading from her opinion and views but it seems to me that unlike the other two previous guys, she has the idea that it is indeed the teacher who is full of knowledge and it is their job to share it with the less fortunate it (the student). Though she comes into an idea that the other two did not address. Culture of Power. That when students come to school, they should not just be learning about basic facts but about the codes for them to be able to thrive in the culture of power that is most dominant in our society. Though she comes off as a little bit racist, I just get from her that people of color and those who are poor are lower then the rest and do not know what is best for them since they come from a different road map of life. I'm not arguing that this is in all way wrong, I mean if you look at our society its the cold hard truth, but I guess my vibe is she truly believes they are lower and she is here with good ideas to raise them above it. She is the savior for the minorities and those who are poor and of color. Although going into her 5 aspects of power were very similar to those of the other two's articles and summed up nicely the key points in the view on education concerning power. And in life students and young adults have none.
Mr. Fanning:
Fanning has many goals for the high school at SOF. He wants the seniors to graduate, he wants his students to become "critical thinkers" and in order to accomplish both he wants students to create goals at the beginning of the year, and it doesn't have to be school related. The teachers are there to help the students achieve their goals and through working towards them, relationships are made where the teachers can easily connect to their students and can understand them better so they can help in more ways. Being a former teacher, he knows that education is very important and to be able to do good in life one must get the best kind of education. And not just sitting there mindlessly copying down facts from the board but to be able to think for yourselves and to be able to be critical thinkers who create new ideas all on their own. He doesn't want factory working students, he wants us to be free thinkers and be creative and independent and that's what SOF is there for. To help students create themselves and to not only to submit to other peoples authority of power.
I agree that SOF is one of the best places to allow us to do all the things he wants to see us do. But I also agree that in life its hard to outrun the mechanics of how education is in our society. He may not see it, but there are little traces here and there where kids forsake their independence and their drive to find themselves and create but instead open their minds to allow someone to pour information in their heads. As I walk down the halls, there is a mix of both kinds of students and those in the middle clearly not on either side. But whats happening to education and to students not much younger then I is frightening. I feel that we were lucky to be able to learn the things we did and to have the teachers who cared enough to help us grow and to nurture us and not only feed us facts. We are getting out just in time for the change in how things are done. Maybe a little dramatic but and not saying this is specifically SOF, but schools can only really go down hill. Education is getting less funding, teachers are being fired, students are cramed into bigger class sizes, music and art departments are being shut down. I mean our education system is a mess and all the previous people on this blog know whats coming and have the right ideas but they themselves have no solid and clear outcome or ways to save any of it.
Gatto begins his speech with his concern of the school crisis. He connects the school crisis to our social crisis and says we have come to lose our identity. After conducting research Gatto figured out that his students only have 122 hours a week to fashion themselves. Most of the other time is consumed with school and school related activities plus the occasional TV watching. He continues to say "We live in networks, not communities, and everyone I know is lonely because of that." After 1850 when the compulsory method was introduced it has become much more wide spread. This has only taught the students to obey orders as well as decreasing literacy levels which never again after 1990 was above 91%. "Schools are intended to produce through the application of formulae, formulaic human beings whose behaviour can be predicted and controlled." It is not the fault of the teachers that students are producing such bad grades and behaviour problems, it is the system of education that has caused this difference in how education is being taught, where teachers are merely the messengers and the students the ones being delivered the package of not so much great knowledge but knowledge for society where individuality is taken out and conformity is taught as a good thing. Gatto argues that this concept of school has to be argued and redefined and fixed or merely broken where then students can be home schooled.
I find it ridiculous that after conducting this research he came to the conclusion we only have 12 hours to create our selves a week. After taking a closer look and adding stuff I know me and my classmates do, that 12 hours decreases severely. In society we have lost our childhood. From a young age we are brought into these pens which confine us and are never really free until after 13 years of our lives to then only be put into more box's where we lose the right to be individuals and are rewarded to be more like robots following the same pattern. Gatto even says "the truth is that schools don’t really teach anything except how to obey orders." This is true. For all the years in school, students are taught to listen to teachers and to obey orders. Often in schools there are bells to signify when a class is over and to stop work, there are hand gestures and songs when teachers want us to be quiet. We are being taught to follow specific patterns like when people train their dogs and like dogs we will carry these lessons with us for the rest of our lives, bells with always signify that something is over and something new should be worked on. This is what they want to prepare us for. In society it is much easier to work with people who are already familiar with following orders and to not question or speak out.
I agree fully that the two institutions that control children and young adults lives are television and school. But in reality you are to learn much more needed knowledge then that of regular and basic skills. Not saying i agree with this but this is what our society has set up. Real life lessons and adventures only exist in dreams or pages of books, no longer are children "allowed" to run free and discover new things, instead they sit confined for 6 hours a day in cells being taught to obey and get rid of their independence. Even when students are finally allowed to return home or set free from the day, most children will run to the TV and watch shows for hours until their parents yell at them or they spend hours on home work. No one is allowed any free time. Weekends are merely facades where children wont complain about going to school every day with no breaks even though sometimes weekends are only spent on home work and school related activities. Its kind of sad to hear all this. America, our nation is supposed to full fill dreams and be a beacon of freedom. Now for the younger generations it is only a machine to better shape us into "model" citizens so they can work us until we grow old and retire or die.
Paulo Freire: Pedagogy of the Oppressed
Freire criticizes the "banking" education where the teacher is merely reciting facts and the students only memorize it but do not take any thing significant away from it. They are not really learning to fully understand what is being taught to them they are only there so remember and recite the lessons taught to them. The students are nothing more then containers for the teachers to fill with knowledge. The teachers then become those with higher knowledge and the students are the ignorant people who must depend on the teacher to gain knowledge. The teacher then has a set purpose in life and is expected to fulfil it not only by the students but by the administrators who control the education. The oppressed with little thought for change will learn to adapt to their situation and can lead for them to be dominated later in life when they learn to not change the situation but to change to it. The humanist is another method to teaching where both teacher and student are more like equals and both have something to offer to help the other grow and learn.
This also connects to what Gatto was saying about students being mindless impassive people who are let out into the real world. "The more completely they accept the passive role imposed on them, the more they tend simply to adapt to the world as it is and to the fragmented view of reality deposited in them." In both arguments, the students are not taught to think for themselves, they are only given information which they must commit to memory and then recite later on, never grasping the full picture of anything. This causes us to be the oppressed where the oppressors do not wish to see the world transformed or revealed to the students so they use education to keep these from us. Keeping the ideology that we are indeed ignorant and that we need the teacher to educate us and pass their knowledge onto us is a trap where we do not see the power in ourselves to be something more, to actually learn more then what we are being taught and actually obtain something meaningful in our bleak lives. There is also the connection between the humanist and the way SOF deals with educating kids. Though often times at most I see both ways of teaching. In most cases there is no strict boundaries between teacher and student, one is no more knowledgeable then the other. Though as much in any case there is the sign of clear respect and role of teacher pupil. But nothing along the lines of the students are completely ignorant and the teacher is the savior who will teach them everything they need. Though in classes like math and science I often see the narrative way where we merely sit there and they deposit information into our brains to store and catalog for later.
Lisa Delpit: Power and Pedagogy
Delpit contrasts two reading programs where one took forty lessons to learn the same thing the other lesson did in only one sitting. Though the first method was proven to be well founded and excellent with certain kids for others it took them longer then the fist sit in to understand everything because at home they were not given any knowledge to better suit their understandings. Kids who had some more background with these types of ideas excelled fast since they brought some knowledge with them and the lesson only increased it further. But the kids with no previous background the second method which would consist of forty lessons was better where the kids could learn from the beginning. Both methods are good but depending on the student it will work for them or against them. The culture of power is also brought up where kids of minority and of color and poor are taught different codes and those differ from those the dominant culture of power have. She insists that the appropriate education can only be found when those of the same community come together to talk about the changes that need to be made instead of middle class whites making the decisions.
It's a little interesting to read from Delpit's perspective. I'm not really sure if I'm reading from her opinion and views but it seems to me that unlike the other two previous guys, she has the idea that it is indeed the teacher who is full of knowledge and it is their job to share it with the less fortunate it (the student). Though she comes into an idea that the other two did not address. Culture of Power. That when students come to school, they should not just be learning about basic facts but about the codes for them to be able to thrive in the culture of power that is most dominant in our society. Though she comes off as a little bit racist, I just get from her that people of color and those who are poor are lower then the rest and do not know what is best for them since they come from a different road map of life. I'm not arguing that this is in all way wrong, I mean if you look at our society its the cold hard truth, but I guess my vibe is she truly believes they are lower and she is here with good ideas to raise them above it. She is the savior for the minorities and those who are poor and of color. Although going into her 5 aspects of power were very similar to those of the other two's articles and summed up nicely the key points in the view on education concerning power. And in life students and young adults have none.
Mr. Fanning:
Fanning has many goals for the high school at SOF. He wants the seniors to graduate, he wants his students to become "critical thinkers" and in order to accomplish both he wants students to create goals at the beginning of the year, and it doesn't have to be school related. The teachers are there to help the students achieve their goals and through working towards them, relationships are made where the teachers can easily connect to their students and can understand them better so they can help in more ways. Being a former teacher, he knows that education is very important and to be able to do good in life one must get the best kind of education. And not just sitting there mindlessly copying down facts from the board but to be able to think for yourselves and to be able to be critical thinkers who create new ideas all on their own. He doesn't want factory working students, he wants us to be free thinkers and be creative and independent and that's what SOF is there for. To help students create themselves and to not only to submit to other peoples authority of power.
I agree that SOF is one of the best places to allow us to do all the things he wants to see us do. But I also agree that in life its hard to outrun the mechanics of how education is in our society. He may not see it, but there are little traces here and there where kids forsake their independence and their drive to find themselves and create but instead open their minds to allow someone to pour information in their heads. As I walk down the halls, there is a mix of both kinds of students and those in the middle clearly not on either side. But whats happening to education and to students not much younger then I is frightening. I feel that we were lucky to be able to learn the things we did and to have the teachers who cared enough to help us grow and to nurture us and not only feed us facts. We are getting out just in time for the change in how things are done. Maybe a little dramatic but and not saying this is specifically SOF, but schools can only really go down hill. Education is getting less funding, teachers are being fired, students are cramed into bigger class sizes, music and art departments are being shut down. I mean our education system is a mess and all the previous people on this blog know whats coming and have the right ideas but they themselves have no solid and clear outcome or ways to save any of it.
49- films
Our section did not get to finish our film due to the fact that certain main characters were absent. Although we did not finish, the message was uncommon in the teacher/ savior unit because the teacher in our film really didn't save anyone. The students (protagonists) took their future and learning into their own hands since the teacher would not help them. The teacher was a jerk who played favorites and messed with the protagonists not caring that they were failing his class. He thought that they were failures and there was nothing for him to do to change it. Alex the protagonist, became very pissed and continuously walked out of class. After a confrontation in the lunch room with Casey (the favored student) Alex decides to take matters into her own hands and to actually form a study group with her friends to pass the up coming test. The teacher is very surprised to find that Alex and her friends have passed and is convinced they cheated so he made them retake the test. After the second time they passed the principle comes and congratulates the students and tells them how lucky and how grateful they should
be to have such an excellent teacher. Alex and her friends decide not to correct him and just walk away.
The odd thing was this probably would have been a really good video, especially since it was different. The teacher really had no part in effecting the lives of Alex's group. Instead they finally got their act together thanks to Casey who talks to them about how they don't have their lives in order. She was a snob but still had the resulting effect of causing a change which is usually the part the teacher plays. But we only actually completed one scene. Then some clips here and there. In the play I was the teacher's pet Casey. In the scene we did I was supposed to correct Alex's mistake and I stood her up (not sure right term) making my self seem so much better then her especially since the teacher favored me. The teacher besides hassling Alex always points out her lack of knowledge and shows it to the class by making her put up answers on the board that he knows she did not get right. This is where I would come in and correct it. But the basic key fact is that students do not always need to be saved by someone of higher authority like a teacher. Alex took it into her own hands to become so much better then what she was.
The tone through out the play changed as the protagonist changed her opinion on herself and how she wanted her life to go. In the beginning it was more aggressive and always constant fights between her and the teacher. Then towards the middle it was more calmed down since Alex decided not to be brought into the teachers of joy of making her feel stupid. Then at the end there was happiness and achievement since Alex passed the test and confounded the teacher. And I think it pleased her to know that he never changes by taking her achievement onto his own self teaching. Nothing in him changed and she would allow it to stay like that. She could move on and not be effected by him anymore but to know that the one who really learned something about life was herself and her teacher was still stuck in the same disillusion as when the video started.
Through out the different videos we have seen about the teacher/ savior theme and how we perceive schools in our culture there are many differences and similarities between them. In the films it was clear that the teacher was the saviour and that the students were in such bad shape they didn't think they needed to be saved but soon warmed up to the teacher and came to resolutions where the students are able to raise above any challenge. Now in life we see little of this actually happening. Yes the teacher might think they are superior and are there for the benefit of saving the students from themselves. But when does this ever result in every single one of the students being saved and where the teacher actually knows anything to help them. In my experience you can not save everyone no matter how hard you try. You can think to yourself "o if i only did this or this", or "if I keep trying, I know I will help". Sorry but the world doesn't work that way. Not saying there arent teachers out there that dont help students. I know in SOF at least most of the teachers want to actually help and learn from us. There is a real community between the teachers and students like those in the movie. But unlike the movie there is no concrete problem where the teacher can save the students and its a happy ending. It just so happens that the teachers touch some of their students lives and they are better off for it while with others they tried but the student decided to turn their back on it. So in conclusion there is no real significant savior role in the lives of students at schools. No matter how much the teacher thinks so.
be to have such an excellent teacher. Alex and her friends decide not to correct him and just walk away.
The odd thing was this probably would have been a really good video, especially since it was different. The teacher really had no part in effecting the lives of Alex's group. Instead they finally got their act together thanks to Casey who talks to them about how they don't have their lives in order. She was a snob but still had the resulting effect of causing a change which is usually the part the teacher plays. But we only actually completed one scene. Then some clips here and there. In the play I was the teacher's pet Casey. In the scene we did I was supposed to correct Alex's mistake and I stood her up (not sure right term) making my self seem so much better then her especially since the teacher favored me. The teacher besides hassling Alex always points out her lack of knowledge and shows it to the class by making her put up answers on the board that he knows she did not get right. This is where I would come in and correct it. But the basic key fact is that students do not always need to be saved by someone of higher authority like a teacher. Alex took it into her own hands to become so much better then what she was.
The tone through out the play changed as the protagonist changed her opinion on herself and how she wanted her life to go. In the beginning it was more aggressive and always constant fights between her and the teacher. Then towards the middle it was more calmed down since Alex decided not to be brought into the teachers of joy of making her feel stupid. Then at the end there was happiness and achievement since Alex passed the test and confounded the teacher. And I think it pleased her to know that he never changes by taking her achievement onto his own self teaching. Nothing in him changed and she would allow it to stay like that. She could move on and not be effected by him anymore but to know that the one who really learned something about life was herself and her teacher was still stuck in the same disillusion as when the video started.
Through out the different videos we have seen about the teacher/ savior theme and how we perceive schools in our culture there are many differences and similarities between them. In the films it was clear that the teacher was the saviour and that the students were in such bad shape they didn't think they needed to be saved but soon warmed up to the teacher and came to resolutions where the students are able to raise above any challenge. Now in life we see little of this actually happening. Yes the teacher might think they are superior and are there for the benefit of saving the students from themselves. But when does this ever result in every single one of the students being saved and where the teacher actually knows anything to help them. In my experience you can not save everyone no matter how hard you try. You can think to yourself "o if i only did this or this", or "if I keep trying, I know I will help". Sorry but the world doesn't work that way. Not saying there arent teachers out there that dont help students. I know in SOF at least most of the teachers want to actually help and learn from us. There is a real community between the teachers and students like those in the movie. But unlike the movie there is no concrete problem where the teacher can save the students and its a happy ending. It just so happens that the teachers touch some of their students lives and they are better off for it while with others they tried but the student decided to turn their back on it. So in conclusion there is no real significant savior role in the lives of students at schools. No matter how much the teacher thinks so.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Treatment for Savior/ Teacher movie
scene 1
Camera pans over the front of the school where kids are just hanging out in groups then goes across the street (far off then zooms in) to the students (seniors) that are across the street hanging out but have more of an i dont care attitude. FInally someone tells the groups of kids on both sides to leave and they all go in a huff towards the school, mumbling that school is a drag.
Scene 2
Cut to the class room where the students are scattered around the room, some sitting in chairs while others are on desks or just standing against the wall. Most of the kids pay no mind when the door opens and a hippie looking english teacher walks in. He walks up to the front of the class room and calls for everyone's attention. Just as he is about to take attendance, two kids come in holding hands. The whole class room buzzs and is making loud kissy noises at the couple. The girl walks to her seat feeling embarrassed while the guy walks to his friends and gets high fives. The teacher coughs and tries to get the kids back into focus. He then proceeds to give an overview of what his class will be like and as he goes on the kids remain silent but pay little attention to him. As he is about to give a quiz to see what the students know, the fire alarm goes off and the kids make a hasty get away feeling relieved for once the stupid firedrill came in handy.
Scene 3
The camera follows the teacher into the small "teacher lounge" which just happens to be in the back of the supplies and office spaces. He pours himself a cup of coffee and takes a sip. He makes a face as he forces it down. Thinking to himself, (is this the best decision that I made?) He pours the coffee out and jumps with a start at a female voice.( Hey, Someone should have warned you about the coffee. Its the worst possible thing, everyone usually just goes to the corner store and gets it there). She gives him a smile as she makes her way over to a chair. He follows her over and he starts to go over what he hopes to get from his class. At the end of his speech she laughs and tells him that the kids that are in his class arent capable of learning or hoping to understand any of what materials he wants to teach. He thinks to himself (now i know this was a mistake coming here. Out of all the things I could have picked I had to pick teaching) He thanks the teacher and gets up to leave.
Scene 4
Camera cuts into the class room where the teacher is trying new methods to reach out to his students. The chairs are in a circle and everyone seems a little more comfortable with the open environment. He begins to talk to the students that starting today the room design will stay this way and that after readings the class will have open discussions on everyones views. Half the class moans while the others are betting on how long this teacher will last. The camera pans into one section of the circle where there are a group sitting and they seem glad for this change in teaching and look forward to the new term. Though after a couple of glares from the rest of the class, they all busy themselves with whatever is closest to them.
Camera pans over the front of the school where kids are just hanging out in groups then goes across the street (far off then zooms in) to the students (seniors) that are across the street hanging out but have more of an i dont care attitude. FInally someone tells the groups of kids on both sides to leave and they all go in a huff towards the school, mumbling that school is a drag.
Scene 2
Cut to the class room where the students are scattered around the room, some sitting in chairs while others are on desks or just standing against the wall. Most of the kids pay no mind when the door opens and a hippie looking english teacher walks in. He walks up to the front of the class room and calls for everyone's attention. Just as he is about to take attendance, two kids come in holding hands. The whole class room buzzs and is making loud kissy noises at the couple. The girl walks to her seat feeling embarrassed while the guy walks to his friends and gets high fives. The teacher coughs and tries to get the kids back into focus. He then proceeds to give an overview of what his class will be like and as he goes on the kids remain silent but pay little attention to him. As he is about to give a quiz to see what the students know, the fire alarm goes off and the kids make a hasty get away feeling relieved for once the stupid firedrill came in handy.
Scene 3
The camera follows the teacher into the small "teacher lounge" which just happens to be in the back of the supplies and office spaces. He pours himself a cup of coffee and takes a sip. He makes a face as he forces it down. Thinking to himself, (is this the best decision that I made?) He pours the coffee out and jumps with a start at a female voice.( Hey, Someone should have warned you about the coffee. Its the worst possible thing, everyone usually just goes to the corner store and gets it there). She gives him a smile as she makes her way over to a chair. He follows her over and he starts to go over what he hopes to get from his class. At the end of his speech she laughs and tells him that the kids that are in his class arent capable of learning or hoping to understand any of what materials he wants to teach. He thinks to himself (now i know this was a mistake coming here. Out of all the things I could have picked I had to pick teaching) He thanks the teacher and gets up to leave.
Scene 4
Camera cuts into the class room where the teacher is trying new methods to reach out to his students. The chairs are in a circle and everyone seems a little more comfortable with the open environment. He begins to talk to the students that starting today the room design will stay this way and that after readings the class will have open discussions on everyones views. Half the class moans while the others are betting on how long this teacher will last. The camera pans into one section of the circle where there are a group sitting and they seem glad for this change in teaching and look forward to the new term. Though after a couple of glares from the rest of the class, they all busy themselves with whatever is closest to them.
Friday, April 9, 2010
Class film preparation 1
- the class room and teaching should perhaps not only be held in the class room but in the park, or somewhere else, like field trips out side of the standard school setting (breaking out of boxes thing)
- I dont think the teacher should actually be the one to save the students, for the most part it isn't always true and not everyone is capable of being saved
- teacher and students can grow together, each helping the other out (community rather then the higher authoritative figure)
- probably needs a problem where everyone or mostly everyone gets around it (maybe the principle or someone steps in and tries to control the class)
- I agree with Henry, not just one class, should be a couple since most teachers have more then one class and yea they can save one but what about the others (something along those lines)
- I dont think the teacher should actually be the one to save the students, for the most part it isn't always true and not everyone is capable of being saved
- teacher and students can grow together, each helping the other out (community rather then the higher authoritative figure)
- probably needs a problem where everyone or mostly everyone gets around it (maybe the principle or someone steps in and tries to control the class)
- I agree with Henry, not just one class, should be a couple since most teachers have more then one class and yea they can save one but what about the others (something along those lines)
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
45, More big thoughts on school
Hirsch and Sizer have many opposing views on education. There is also the simple fact that the focus's are completely two different grade levels. Hirsch focuses on elementary schools while Sizer has his attention on high school. Hirsch believes that "Students should be able to read and know basic number facts by the end of the first grade," while Sizer argues, "Students should leave school as well-informed skeptics, able to ask good questions as a matter of habit". Hirsch began his work as a literary interpreter and began to think about students and books comprehension to read. After giving a test he came up with the "concept of cultural literacy- the idea that reading comprehension requires not just formal decoding skills but also wide-ranging background knowledge". He came up with the conclusion that schools and teachers must teach their students a set curriculum to allow them better understanding of subjects in texts. He also "founded the Core Knowledge Foundation in 1986. While Sizer was best known as the father of the Essential Schools movement, which he founded in 1984. The movement’s umbrella organization, the Coalition of Essential Schools, spans a diverse array of public and private schools united by their adherence to a set of common principles". The idea was that teachers are mere coach's and mentors. In comparison I would say to Hirsch there is the idea of core classes with strict learning materials that go against electives and a more neutral way of constructing what students will learn.
Being at School of the Future for 7 years now and looking back now that I am ready to graduate I can see many of the points and ideas Sizer has put into this school collating with his Coalition of Essential Schools main principles. I think for the most part during my middle school years the habits of mind were drilled into our minds and were a very big part in how we learned the materials from all core subjects. Though I must admit after 3 years of it, it did grow tiring to have it repeated over and over again. But during those years it did prove to me that they made not just myself but other students think deeper and in different ways to things we might not have other wise. It was a great experience which and method to have kids think outside of the box and learning that most other schools do not even have any or that they have more then our 7 its interesting to me how the school or who ever came with just 7, connections, significance, evidence, POV, alternatives, (cant remember the other 2). Once in high school there was not just less talk of the habits of mind there wasn't any unless you count the exhibition process in which we have to do every year so we can graduate. I am not sure if the school actually helped me use my mind well though i think it was a good start. I do believe it wasn't just the courses, core classes and the habits of mind, I think it also had to do with how the teacher taught the class and their attitude toward helping us think out side and more intellectual. But now that I have seen and understood that there are so many more ways to view something, and never just one solid interpretation has helped me keep an open mind in which I can become a better learner. It may just be my dislike for math and numbers but I often held the idea that both math and science would actually be hard subjects to teach and create lesson plans that are for the now and do not only prepare us for skills we will need in the future. So while the english and history classes are more along the line of Sizer's goals the other two, math and science are under the ideas of Hirsch. Though I think Ms. Baker was one of the only math teachers who had come the most close to Sizer's ideas rather then just preparing us for the future while Mr. Tsui this year is always saying how the stuff we are learning will help us in college and later in our lives. There are times though were Tsui or Zitolo have noted the importance of critical thinking and not just seeing everything as black and white like when we learned about Knights and Knaves. There were mathematical ways to figure it out but there was also ways where you just had to look at the problem and figure it out with critical thinking.
My own education for the past 7 years has fallen under the umbrella of Sizer with a little sprinkle here and there of Hirsch. Experiencing them both I feel they are both important in my life with my education. Learning about how to be a critical thinker and how to live our own lives is very important and if not for our society I would say it should be the main concept because really to get through life you need to see things out side of the box and be adapt to thinking more in depth. Though our society does run like that it also runs with power and money hungry people that will stop at nothing to get their way to the top. And to one day join them in the sea we need skills that prepare us for the future and not just ones that help us with ourselves. If no one really learned how to get by in society, it would be tough when we become adults and try to keep a float with everyone else. So in my reasoning both is important though I do like the Immanent part of the education far more interesting since it connects to my life so much more. Which is probably way I never had the taste for math and science, both are interesting subjects to say the least but what will they do for me? Later they will probably useful but now, its only getting through it to get good grades. I think if it was more fun and connected to student's lives more it would be at the forefront of everyones interests.
Being at School of the Future for 7 years now and looking back now that I am ready to graduate I can see many of the points and ideas Sizer has put into this school collating with his Coalition of Essential Schools main principles. I think for the most part during my middle school years the habits of mind were drilled into our minds and were a very big part in how we learned the materials from all core subjects. Though I must admit after 3 years of it, it did grow tiring to have it repeated over and over again. But during those years it did prove to me that they made not just myself but other students think deeper and in different ways to things we might not have other wise. It was a great experience which and method to have kids think outside of the box and learning that most other schools do not even have any or that they have more then our 7 its interesting to me how the school or who ever came with just 7, connections, significance, evidence, POV, alternatives, (cant remember the other 2). Once in high school there was not just less talk of the habits of mind there wasn't any unless you count the exhibition process in which we have to do every year so we can graduate. I am not sure if the school actually helped me use my mind well though i think it was a good start. I do believe it wasn't just the courses, core classes and the habits of mind, I think it also had to do with how the teacher taught the class and their attitude toward helping us think out side and more intellectual. But now that I have seen and understood that there are so many more ways to view something, and never just one solid interpretation has helped me keep an open mind in which I can become a better learner. It may just be my dislike for math and numbers but I often held the idea that both math and science would actually be hard subjects to teach and create lesson plans that are for the now and do not only prepare us for skills we will need in the future. So while the english and history classes are more along the line of Sizer's goals the other two, math and science are under the ideas of Hirsch. Though I think Ms. Baker was one of the only math teachers who had come the most close to Sizer's ideas rather then just preparing us for the future while Mr. Tsui this year is always saying how the stuff we are learning will help us in college and later in our lives. There are times though were Tsui or Zitolo have noted the importance of critical thinking and not just seeing everything as black and white like when we learned about Knights and Knaves. There were mathematical ways to figure it out but there was also ways where you just had to look at the problem and figure it out with critical thinking.
My own education for the past 7 years has fallen under the umbrella of Sizer with a little sprinkle here and there of Hirsch. Experiencing them both I feel they are both important in my life with my education. Learning about how to be a critical thinker and how to live our own lives is very important and if not for our society I would say it should be the main concept because really to get through life you need to see things out side of the box and be adapt to thinking more in depth. Though our society does run like that it also runs with power and money hungry people that will stop at nothing to get their way to the top. And to one day join them in the sea we need skills that prepare us for the future and not just ones that help us with ourselves. If no one really learned how to get by in society, it would be tough when we become adults and try to keep a float with everyone else. So in my reasoning both is important though I do like the Immanent part of the education far more interesting since it connects to my life so much more. Which is probably way I never had the taste for math and science, both are interesting subjects to say the least but what will they do for me? Later they will probably useful but now, its only getting through it to get good grades. I think if it was more fun and connected to student's lives more it would be at the forefront of everyones interests.
Monday, March 8, 2010
I have many mixed views on Thomas L. Friedman's piece in the New York Times. Many people are out of jobs and Many companies are either closing or looking for workers that are outside of America. The problem Friedman says is that we are slipping with things that make most countries competitive. If we added in "I.T. infrastructure, economic performance and so on" more job opportunities will be created and once jobs and such settle down, our economy will start to heal itself. In my opinion more and more of infrastructure is a bad thing. We have so much of it already but we are not using it to the full potential. If we create more and more our world will become more and more industrialized and I fear our environment will pay for it. It is already in danger of being polluted, and cut down, and etc. And most of the cases it " just slowly enough so the crisis never seems acute enough to take urgent action." I dont really see school as being the solution for all of this. Schools will better educate students and we learn everything the government wants us to. Perhaps if school's get better there will be some hope for schools to better get the kids to do what they want them to and what they expect them to. But even with school, many students would still be doing and learning what they choose.
I think schools do have the potential to be better and that they should. Education is important for many reasons that people have listed and many reasons that it isnt. For some it is a place to stay off the street, for others its a place to have their first steps of being successful. Schools are all of these. They are what ever the student, teacher, parent and officials want it to be. Though I think there should be more freedom within a school. I feel like that if more and more people put their opinion in schools and how they want it to be, students will only become more and more like the tools of the government. Grownups are always saying that students and children are the future of our society. They hold so many expectations and want so much for us that they push more and more for certain things to be learned. The only trouble with this is that the whole economy is screwing up the schools. Schools are closing down, teachers are out of jobs, student metro cards will soon be gotten rid of and this will cause more and more students to drop out of schools for ones closer to them. if we are truly the future of our nation and whatnot, then the government and officials should take better care of the schools.
I think we can always count on schools to teach us something. But not just the regular curriculum but also important life lessons. Children are always going to be pushed or pulled by the people around them. There will always be influences from every direction, parents expect certain things, other family member too, teachers, grownups, other students. At home its much more of the parents influencing the students with their views and beliefs. I am not saying in school that this wont happen, Im saying there will be so many more views and beliefs that the child is exposed to so much more that they can open their mind and decide what they believe in and view. School gives kids this option. But more and more I feel certain schools arent thinking about the students but what they want out of them. Even Obama goes into discussing what is asked of us. What responsibilities each role has in terms of schools. He doesnt mention what is in the students needs as children to learn and do. Yes we are students but we are still kids and we cant be expected to act like adults and learn everything and act like little robots. We are human and these needs such as wanting to play outside, more creativity, gym time, music, and such can not be taken from us. Schools have the responsibility to the students to play to their needs. Not just to sit there and learn what they are told to. The best teachers I had were ones that actually made the courses interesting by relating them to things we are interested in. It may be false to lure kids in with this but if it gets them to learn then why not especialy if after a while they actually want to learn.
I think schools do have the potential to be better and that they should. Education is important for many reasons that people have listed and many reasons that it isnt. For some it is a place to stay off the street, for others its a place to have their first steps of being successful. Schools are all of these. They are what ever the student, teacher, parent and officials want it to be. Though I think there should be more freedom within a school. I feel like that if more and more people put their opinion in schools and how they want it to be, students will only become more and more like the tools of the government. Grownups are always saying that students and children are the future of our society. They hold so many expectations and want so much for us that they push more and more for certain things to be learned. The only trouble with this is that the whole economy is screwing up the schools. Schools are closing down, teachers are out of jobs, student metro cards will soon be gotten rid of and this will cause more and more students to drop out of schools for ones closer to them. if we are truly the future of our nation and whatnot, then the government and officials should take better care of the schools.
I think we can always count on schools to teach us something. But not just the regular curriculum but also important life lessons. Children are always going to be pushed or pulled by the people around them. There will always be influences from every direction, parents expect certain things, other family member too, teachers, grownups, other students. At home its much more of the parents influencing the students with their views and beliefs. I am not saying in school that this wont happen, Im saying there will be so many more views and beliefs that the child is exposed to so much more that they can open their mind and decide what they believe in and view. School gives kids this option. But more and more I feel certain schools arent thinking about the students but what they want out of them. Even Obama goes into discussing what is asked of us. What responsibilities each role has in terms of schools. He doesnt mention what is in the students needs as children to learn and do. Yes we are students but we are still kids and we cant be expected to act like adults and learn everything and act like little robots. We are human and these needs such as wanting to play outside, more creativity, gym time, music, and such can not be taken from us. Schools have the responsibility to the students to play to their needs. Not just to sit there and learn what they are told to. The best teachers I had were ones that actually made the courses interesting by relating them to things we are interested in. It may be false to lure kids in with this but if it gets them to learn then why not especialy if after a while they actually want to learn.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Journaling about school
I think my earliest memories of school was going to the petting zoo with my class and we had so much fun getting to pet the chickens and cows. I remember having my best friend with me, cause we lived in the same building and we went to the same school, so for the first day it was great cause we both already knew each other. I also remember getting to know Yan, who was very shy but I went over to her anyway and after that we were the best of friends. Unfortunately most of my memories of school are not so much the things I had learned but the people I met. Although I do remember one thing from science where we were learning about plants and we would always do this fun activity to keep the stages of photosynthesis in mind. I also remember during my 3rd grade year we had a class pet and all the other classes were jealous. We got to name him Sebastian and even got to pick him out. O I remember when U got into middle school a lot of my friends would say that they had dance class at their school or something and I never had that but we did have cooking. One time, chef's came to our school and taught us how to cook and make salads and we actually held a restaurant in our lunch room and waited on our parents. I think now more then before I am actually enjoying what I am learning but I do miss all the creative classes I used to have in elementary school like acting, music, art, gym. We even had a huge play ground and basket ball courts where after lunch we had time to play in. I used to miss that the most when I got into middle school.
The first memory of middle school was everyone meeting up in the gym and we did all these fun activities to get to know each other. There were only 3 people from my old school but I remember everyone else had tons of people they knew. And that as the year went by those people dropped out of SOF. So I basically started over fresh with new people. Now looking back on it, its funny to me how many people we go through along the way. So many different friends that aren't there anymore. But that sometimes thats what has to happen for the new ones to come in. I think well for me as i got older school wasnt just about learning anymore, it was also about being with friends.
The first memory of middle school was everyone meeting up in the gym and we did all these fun activities to get to know each other. There were only 3 people from my old school but I remember everyone else had tons of people they knew. And that as the year went by those people dropped out of SOF. So I basically started over fresh with new people. Now looking back on it, its funny to me how many people we go through along the way. So many different friends that aren't there anymore. But that sometimes thats what has to happen for the new ones to come in. I think well for me as i got older school wasnt just about learning anymore, it was also about being with friends.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
42: extra insights after research
Do school's help in the development of social skills better then that of home schooling? It is in fact the opposite way around. Many have always argued that kids that are home schooled are deprived of mixing in with kids their own age which makes them socially awkward around many other people. But it is in fact found that regular schooling is the one that is bad for kids social skills being around kids their same age.
The social aspect of school for me is important in my own life. I think for the most part if it were not for school I would not have the many friends that I do today. It has helped me meet new people and has taught me many things. For me being shy has always seemed like a disadvantage because I did not talk a lot and some times am over looked. But being around my friends and watching them (oddly I have a lot of loud friends) I dont always seem to nervous talking with other people. This was my first thoughts going into my project but after researching it I felt like I got a better understanding of my views on the topic even if some of them remained the same. I was figured that kids who were home schooled, had missed out on a lot because they werent always around many kids and must seem lonely. I learned though that it is the opposite. Home schooled kids are actually more adequate to socialize not just with other kids their age but adults because they have learned respect. Often times you always hear kids talking back to their teachers in school or not respecting them, by always talking and disrupting the class. This effects the other students learning and makes it hard to figure out whats the right thing to do and act. There will always be more peer pressure on kids that go to school, because they have so many influences and the need to fit in far outways anything else. Home schooled kids are freed from these pressures. They don't have to worry about not fitting in and impressing other people. they also dont have to worry about other kids bothering their learning. They also I bet, get out more and see the world then kids that go to school. They grow and learn in much more of an open environment then we do. These outings and visits help them interact with many new people. I think i agree with this, but my understanding of home schooling will always on the side that regular school is not so much better but at least for me the more comfortable match. I think with home schooling I would always wish I go to school and got to hang with people and make friends with kids my own age. I think either or, the kid would want the other not really knowing which one would be better.
Both school and home schooling are great ways for kids to learn both social skills and other many lessons. But I think the same questions we got about school would still fall under home schooling. Is home schooling the best? What gets taught at home? Should the kids get to pick? Some of the same we asked about regular school.
The social aspect of school for me is important in my own life. I think for the most part if it were not for school I would not have the many friends that I do today. It has helped me meet new people and has taught me many things. For me being shy has always seemed like a disadvantage because I did not talk a lot and some times am over looked. But being around my friends and watching them (oddly I have a lot of loud friends) I dont always seem to nervous talking with other people. This was my first thoughts going into my project but after researching it I felt like I got a better understanding of my views on the topic even if some of them remained the same. I was figured that kids who were home schooled, had missed out on a lot because they werent always around many kids and must seem lonely. I learned though that it is the opposite. Home schooled kids are actually more adequate to socialize not just with other kids their age but adults because they have learned respect. Often times you always hear kids talking back to their teachers in school or not respecting them, by always talking and disrupting the class. This effects the other students learning and makes it hard to figure out whats the right thing to do and act. There will always be more peer pressure on kids that go to school, because they have so many influences and the need to fit in far outways anything else. Home schooled kids are freed from these pressures. They don't have to worry about not fitting in and impressing other people. they also dont have to worry about other kids bothering their learning. They also I bet, get out more and see the world then kids that go to school. They grow and learn in much more of an open environment then we do. These outings and visits help them interact with many new people. I think i agree with this, but my understanding of home schooling will always on the side that regular school is not so much better but at least for me the more comfortable match. I think with home schooling I would always wish I go to school and got to hang with people and make friends with kids my own age. I think either or, the kid would want the other not really knowing which one would be better.
Both school and home schooling are great ways for kids to learn both social skills and other many lessons. But I think the same questions we got about school would still fall under home schooling. Is home schooling the best? What gets taught at home? Should the kids get to pick? Some of the same we asked about regular school.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Reasearch on schools
White, David Aaron. "Teen Views: Why is school important?" http://www.helium.com/items/1500101-why-is-school-important
This article is a written essay on one teens view on why school is important. He knows that school is such a drag going into how "It's annoying, it's boring". But then he argues the fact that if your parents are forcing you to go then it must be important. The first real argument given was the fact that knowledge is power. It helps you a great deal in life, from learning the different subjects in school helps you become more successful. The second argument is the fact that it helps you get into college, but then he also gives the answer to why college. He says that is to become more successful in life and getting a job to provide for yourself and your family. The other big thing about school he argues is besides the education it is a great way to create a social life. Most of the people you meet at school you will know and some will even become your friends and from their you have the opportunity to keep them though out your life. He also goes int the point that Henry had made, school gives you something to do during the day.
This article is probably not as professional as other sources you can find but I figure that it is in the point of view of a teenager, someone who has experienced all of what we are going through and has first hand knowledge. He can better relate to young readers who go to school rather then some older people who write long articles and essays about this topic. Not saying that the essay would not be full of knowledge it would just be kind of distant then what this article has written.
Barell, John. "Critical Issues: Working Toward Student Self-Direction and Personal Efficacy as Educational Goals" http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/learning/lr200.htm
This critical issue summary begins to deal with the problem that learning has become much in the way of dependency, where the students are dependent on the teachers to learn something. Students have begun to have "passivity and a "tell me what to do and think" attitude". One point that is talked about is the characteristics of students who are responsible for their own learning. One characteristic is that a student is able to direct and manage change that as people we are responsible for our own lives. Teachers figured that to help students create skills like these they would provide opportunities where students can try to figure out their own learning. But it is still governed by the teachers. They over see the learning and direct kids into the direction of becoming independent where they can answer questions on their own. specific ways to do this is for the students to create goals and to create ways to achieve these goals. Some problems foreseen was that teachers may not be so willing to share control. Most of the time the students are learning from the teacher, where as with these methods, learning is shared both ways, the student also gets to teach.
This summary is a little more formal then the first one. It cites all it's information and is written so its easy to follow. There are also teachers and professors who have given their experiences and known facts in this article. Though in this case it is not solely based on opinion like the first one. There have actually been studies and many links to more facts and ideas about the methods given. It is also an interesting article and has many interesting ideas. While I was reading this, I also noticed many common factors in how SOF deals with teaching things.
"Why does School exist?" http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_does_school_exist
This article answers the question why does school exist? It goes into the very basic answer of because it helps you be successful. It also gives a little history about how in the past you worked a lot and you didnt have as many skills so your parents would hope someone would teach you, rather then going to school and learning a whole lot.
This passage is short and not quite as detailed. But it does bring up a point many would not have thought of when talking about what it used to be like. The answer is also very basic and you can get it from the first couple of lines, but it is new information and different examples from the first one. It is also a light read, which is better then all those long articles that hardly have a point or just ramble on and you get confused by the end.
"Social aspects of home education" http://home-ed.info/socialising.htm
This article outlines home schooling. In a very brief introduction, the article talks about how home schooled kids are better academically then kids that go to regular school. Then it proceeds to answer to questions that address socializing, Do home educated students have trouble socializing? and What do we mean by social skills? Then proceed to answer the questions in two paragraphs each. It argues that kids at home school though many people would disagree are quite adaptable with socializing just like the many students that go to schools.
This article is good but somewhat brief. It does not go into specific examples and long arguments for the answers to the two questions. But it does propose good sufficient answers that are just as good as long and detailed ones are. It is also an easy read because it is not too long. But I would call this source an opener, you would use it to search out ideas to research on a much bigger scale to find other more longer sources that may have more detailed reasoning.
ROBERTSON, CAMPBELL. "Judge Grants Asylum To German Home Schoolers ." New York Times 28 feb 2010, Print.
This article talks about a German family who came to America after seeking asylum for home schooling. It goes into the fact that Germany does not allow anyone to be home schooled and talks about the different reasons to why they think so and why regular school is more important and better for students. The family heard about another family that had come to America seeking asylum from the German Government who has rules and regulations on home schooling. The parents also discuss why they decided to go to America and start home schooling.
This article is the longest out of all the others but stuff gives the same amount of information. There is also a lot more evidence in this article then people's opinions in the others. It is also interesting to see the views on the parents and the German Government about home schooling. There was also a section in there that mentioned the social aspects of school and how in this sense it was actually a bad thing. This is the first source to mention that home schooling does not deprive the student of anything and rather schooling is more of a problem for kids social skills.
Shaw, Isabel. "Social Skills and Home schooling: Myths and Facts". http://school.familyeducation.com/home-schooling/human-relations/56224.html
This article focus' on the debate many people seem to have over the question does home schooling effect a kids social skills. The articles view is that home schooling does no such thing and goes into pointing out what is wrong about the myth of home schooling which is that home schooled kids are isolated for the whole day that they learn. It goes into some more points about how in fact regular school is actually not the best place for a kid. Then it lists some research that has been done and what it proves. At the end it gives sources to parents who are considering home schooling that can help them make the best decision.
This source is also very good. Unlike the New York Times who briefly mentions my focus point, this is all about the battle going on. Though it basically is a longer version of what had been said in the Times article. But it provides actually studies which is great and has more good points going against the schools which has been said but goes into detail about home schooling itself and why it goes against the myth that kids are isolated and that they actually learn and socialize better.
This article is a written essay on one teens view on why school is important. He knows that school is such a drag going into how "It's annoying, it's boring". But then he argues the fact that if your parents are forcing you to go then it must be important. The first real argument given was the fact that knowledge is power. It helps you a great deal in life, from learning the different subjects in school helps you become more successful. The second argument is the fact that it helps you get into college, but then he also gives the answer to why college. He says that is to become more successful in life and getting a job to provide for yourself and your family. The other big thing about school he argues is besides the education it is a great way to create a social life. Most of the people you meet at school you will know and some will even become your friends and from their you have the opportunity to keep them though out your life. He also goes int the point that Henry had made, school gives you something to do during the day.
This article is probably not as professional as other sources you can find but I figure that it is in the point of view of a teenager, someone who has experienced all of what we are going through and has first hand knowledge. He can better relate to young readers who go to school rather then some older people who write long articles and essays about this topic. Not saying that the essay would not be full of knowledge it would just be kind of distant then what this article has written.
Barell, John. "Critical Issues: Working Toward Student Self-Direction and Personal Efficacy as Educational Goals" http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/learning/lr200.htm
This critical issue summary begins to deal with the problem that learning has become much in the way of dependency, where the students are dependent on the teachers to learn something. Students have begun to have "passivity and a "tell me what to do and think" attitude". One point that is talked about is the characteristics of students who are responsible for their own learning. One characteristic is that a student is able to direct and manage change that as people we are responsible for our own lives. Teachers figured that to help students create skills like these they would provide opportunities where students can try to figure out their own learning. But it is still governed by the teachers. They over see the learning and direct kids into the direction of becoming independent where they can answer questions on their own. specific ways to do this is for the students to create goals and to create ways to achieve these goals. Some problems foreseen was that teachers may not be so willing to share control. Most of the time the students are learning from the teacher, where as with these methods, learning is shared both ways, the student also gets to teach.
This summary is a little more formal then the first one. It cites all it's information and is written so its easy to follow. There are also teachers and professors who have given their experiences and known facts in this article. Though in this case it is not solely based on opinion like the first one. There have actually been studies and many links to more facts and ideas about the methods given. It is also an interesting article and has many interesting ideas. While I was reading this, I also noticed many common factors in how SOF deals with teaching things.
"Why does School exist?" http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_does_school_exist
This article answers the question why does school exist? It goes into the very basic answer of because it helps you be successful. It also gives a little history about how in the past you worked a lot and you didnt have as many skills so your parents would hope someone would teach you, rather then going to school and learning a whole lot.
This passage is short and not quite as detailed. But it does bring up a point many would not have thought of when talking about what it used to be like. The answer is also very basic and you can get it from the first couple of lines, but it is new information and different examples from the first one. It is also a light read, which is better then all those long articles that hardly have a point or just ramble on and you get confused by the end.
"Social aspects of home education" http://home-ed.info/socialising.htm
This article outlines home schooling. In a very brief introduction, the article talks about how home schooled kids are better academically then kids that go to regular school. Then it proceeds to answer to questions that address socializing, Do home educated students have trouble socializing? and What do we mean by social skills? Then proceed to answer the questions in two paragraphs each. It argues that kids at home school though many people would disagree are quite adaptable with socializing just like the many students that go to schools.
This article is good but somewhat brief. It does not go into specific examples and long arguments for the answers to the two questions. But it does propose good sufficient answers that are just as good as long and detailed ones are. It is also an easy read because it is not too long. But I would call this source an opener, you would use it to search out ideas to research on a much bigger scale to find other more longer sources that may have more detailed reasoning.
ROBERTSON, CAMPBELL. "Judge Grants Asylum To German Home Schoolers ." New York Times 28 feb 2010, Print.
This article talks about a German family who came to America after seeking asylum for home schooling. It goes into the fact that Germany does not allow anyone to be home schooled and talks about the different reasons to why they think so and why regular school is more important and better for students. The family heard about another family that had come to America seeking asylum from the German Government who has rules and regulations on home schooling. The parents also discuss why they decided to go to America and start home schooling.
This article is the longest out of all the others but stuff gives the same amount of information. There is also a lot more evidence in this article then people's opinions in the others. It is also interesting to see the views on the parents and the German Government about home schooling. There was also a section in there that mentioned the social aspects of school and how in this sense it was actually a bad thing. This is the first source to mention that home schooling does not deprive the student of anything and rather schooling is more of a problem for kids social skills.
Shaw, Isabel. "Social Skills and Home schooling: Myths and Facts". http://school.familyeducation.com/home-schooling/human-relations/56224.html
This article focus' on the debate many people seem to have over the question does home schooling effect a kids social skills. The articles view is that home schooling does no such thing and goes into pointing out what is wrong about the myth of home schooling which is that home schooled kids are isolated for the whole day that they learn. It goes into some more points about how in fact regular school is actually not the best place for a kid. Then it lists some research that has been done and what it proves. At the end it gives sources to parents who are considering home schooling that can help them make the best decision.
This source is also very good. Unlike the New York Times who briefly mentions my focus point, this is all about the battle going on. Though it basically is a longer version of what had been said in the Times article. But it provides actually studies which is great and has more good points going against the schools which has been said but goes into detail about home schooling itself and why it goes against the myth that kids are isolated and that they actually learn and socialize better.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
School interviews and synthesis
Interview with my mom:
What major ways has education contributed to your life now and do you think they are important?
Well, I think it has broadened my thinking. It has given me skills that I use on the job. It has given me a love of learning which I think is important, always. It is all important because it has helped me get a good job and a wonderful career in HR. My new career now, teaching at the garden. But I think more importantly it has helped me be more broad minded and aware of whats going on the world and how things effect my life personally that might be global issues like the environment, politics, etc. i think just overall a good education helps you decide what your values are and what's important to you in life and what kind of life you want to lead.
How do you feel with having no control over anything in school and having everything decided for you, from your schedule to what you learn?
I feel that, I don't think that is an appropriate way to teach. I'm more of an inquiry based learner and teacher where students direct themselves towards the kind of things they would like to learn and what they are curious about. I think teachers should provide the infrastructure and guidance but learning has to be self motivated.
Can you create an argument for or against the idea that school is like a machine which conquers and puppeteers a population?
Well, I don't believe that school in the pure sense is a machine which conquers and puppeteers a population. I think it can be abused to those ends like the third Reich in Germany that taught students values they should uphold for the good of the government. However, generally I think that education is to better civilization. it's a sharing of ideas and skills to ensure that we continue to be the best we can be. Education should be about each of us being curious and learning and sharing.
When you were in school how was the social aspect? and in your life today do you still see the same behaviors from people?
In school I think that those that had common interests drifted together to socialize. the dynamic is very social in High school and to be cool and it's risky to go out of those social groups. So for me in school i socialized with my sports team and those students that i felt comfortable with. i knew all the other students because it was a small high school and it was an all girls school. I'd say there were smart kids groups and cool kids and generally all the groups socialized separately. I do remember some tough nasty girls that most of us steered clear of. during college i worked and lived at home. i didn't socialize with my fellow college students at all. i had neighborhood friends i hung out with.
as a working adult, i had groups of friends.... friends from work, old friends and friends i met thru different groups. sometimes the groups would cross, but i generally kept them separate. At work which i think is a lot like school in that there were coworkers that were favored by the boss, those that could be very cut throat that you had to watch your back, the political people who always seemed to know what to do and knew what was going on behind the scenes. Generally, I gravitated toward those people i could trust, had a mutual respect for and collaborated well with.
How has your views about school changed since you went?
well when i was in school, it was dreadful. so much memorizing, boring lessons. i really didn't like school at all and i hated to read. but by 8th grade it all of a sudden got social and interesting. high school was better because i was involved in different clubs and teams and it seemed to make the learning more enjoyable. college was even better because i got to choose the courses i was interested in. but all in all now i think that most educational institutions have a better handle on how to inspire kids and adults to get the most out of learning. so much more hands on and enjoyable now than when i was in school.
Interview with Kevin (Mom's Friend)
What major ways has education contributed to your life now and do you think they are important?
The obvious contribution would be knowledge - but just as important would be social skills and confidence. The ability to relate to all sorts of people and a confident attitude in the workplace has been invaluable in my profession.
How do you feel with having no control over anything in school and having everything decided for you, from your schedule to what you learn?
I wouldn't have taken much interest in deciding my schedule or the courses I took. As a matter of fact, I did much better as a student in grammar school and high school - when I had no choice in either. When I did have the ability to decide for myself in college - it didn't work out for me at all. I was someone who needed things laid out for me.
Can you create an argument for or against the idea that school is like a machine which conquers and puppeteers a population?
I think it was a bit different when I attended school. I was a product of a Catholic school education in the early 60's. For the most part, you weren't taught to think for yourself, but to "toe the company line", so to speak. The more you DIDN'T stand out - the better. There were a few teachers who definitely encouraged the individual to emerge, but for the most part it was better to just sort of fit in. Nowadays, from what I see - education and the attitude of the teachers encourages individuality in a way I never experienced.
When you were in school how was the social aspect? and in your life today do you still see the same behaviors from people?
When I was in school there were definitely different "groups" - the popular kids, the not so popular, the athletes, etc. During school, we didn't have much of a choice who we attended class with, but we spent most of our after school hours within our respective groups - and that was pretty much our entire social life. I don't think this translates to the workplace - you really have to work and socialize with many people who you probably wouldn't if it weren't for the job. As far as I can see with kids
in school today, the "clique" thing still remains - probably always will.
How has your views about school changed since you went?
As a parent, you realize that education is incredibly important - and do whatever you can to make sure your child gets the best possible. When I went to school, I don't think our parents really spent as much time worrying about our education - just that we went to class, got decent grades ... and after high school either got a job or went to the cheapest college we could find. That was CERTAINLY not my attitude with my son's education - nor with most parents that I know. I think most of us now understand the importance of a good education and what kind of life in can lead too.
Interview with myself:
What major ways has education contributed to your life now and do you think they are important?
Education as my mother has said has given me excellent thinking abilities. School is the perfect environment to broaden people's minds. But I do realize that it is not always the case. School has both the potential to help thinking and to hamper with it. I think that most of the classes gave me a general education with knowledge that I would use in my life. But Andy's class really stimulates thinking. Not only that you actually get taught about life and the things you learn and discover for yourself you will keep with you throughout your entire life. Now I think that is important. People should learn about hoe the world works and from that create ideas about it on your own and not believe the ones people try to give you.
How do you feel with having no control over anything in school and having everything decided for you, from your schedule to what you learn?
Often at times I am torn between two answers. I think it is bad that students do not have the opportunity to choose topics of interest to them and actually learn something that they are interested in. But this also has a fault. Who is to say when we are old enough to make these decisions for ourselves and who is to say that the subject matter we choose will actually be beneficial to our learning and growing up in the world. I think there are certain aspects of school which should be decided by others though it pains me to say it. Teachers and higher ups are there for a reason and that is to create courses that will help us as we grow older. I think it is up to the teachers to give leniency to their students and learn what the students are interested in. In terms of my interest like art and just being creative and active I feel like the school system has failed. As we grow older and move up in school, there is less time given to art and gym and more for those core classes.
Can you create an argument for or against the idea that school is like a machine which conquers and puppeteers a population?
Even though I like this question I would say it may be the hardest for me to answer. Not that I do not have an answer it is just hard to formulate it all into an argument. Well I would say that school is a machine which uses students as putty and shapes them into "civilized" citizens. School is like a breeding ground. Students come to learn and the school sets certain curriculum for them. These subjects and topics are pre-approved. Something like our government. It spits out lies every now and then and school is a way where they can easily fit them in with out any of us knowing the difference. Free thinking is approved but how often are we actually thinking for ourselves and coming to new ideas.
Part B:
I found what my mother said was interesting how a "good education helps you decide what your values are and what's important to you in life and what kind of life you want to lead". I figure most of what she said is true. But I think it is not only based on a good education, school is so much more. I find that the people you meet in school such as your teachers and class mates help you figure what your values are. These people also help in finding what's important to you and to know what kind of life you want to live. There are so many options and we all come into school thinking about a certain career that we would love to be in. And truthfully i doubt most of us will wind up in that job or if even by the end of the day we still want to be it. School subjects help us decide what we like to learn and in doing so create a good field for us to know what other options are out there.
What major ways has education contributed to your life now and do you think they are important?
Well, I think it has broadened my thinking. It has given me skills that I use on the job. It has given me a love of learning which I think is important, always. It is all important because it has helped me get a good job and a wonderful career in HR. My new career now, teaching at the garden. But I think more importantly it has helped me be more broad minded and aware of whats going on the world and how things effect my life personally that might be global issues like the environment, politics, etc. i think just overall a good education helps you decide what your values are and what's important to you in life and what kind of life you want to lead.
How do you feel with having no control over anything in school and having everything decided for you, from your schedule to what you learn?
I feel that, I don't think that is an appropriate way to teach. I'm more of an inquiry based learner and teacher where students direct themselves towards the kind of things they would like to learn and what they are curious about. I think teachers should provide the infrastructure and guidance but learning has to be self motivated.
Can you create an argument for or against the idea that school is like a machine which conquers and puppeteers a population?
Well, I don't believe that school in the pure sense is a machine which conquers and puppeteers a population. I think it can be abused to those ends like the third Reich in Germany that taught students values they should uphold for the good of the government. However, generally I think that education is to better civilization. it's a sharing of ideas and skills to ensure that we continue to be the best we can be. Education should be about each of us being curious and learning and sharing.
When you were in school how was the social aspect? and in your life today do you still see the same behaviors from people?
In school I think that those that had common interests drifted together to socialize. the dynamic is very social in High school and to be cool and it's risky to go out of those social groups. So for me in school i socialized with my sports team and those students that i felt comfortable with. i knew all the other students because it was a small high school and it was an all girls school. I'd say there were smart kids groups and cool kids and generally all the groups socialized separately. I do remember some tough nasty girls that most of us steered clear of. during college i worked and lived at home. i didn't socialize with my fellow college students at all. i had neighborhood friends i hung out with.
as a working adult, i had groups of friends.... friends from work, old friends and friends i met thru different groups. sometimes the groups would cross, but i generally kept them separate. At work which i think is a lot like school in that there were coworkers that were favored by the boss, those that could be very cut throat that you had to watch your back, the political people who always seemed to know what to do and knew what was going on behind the scenes. Generally, I gravitated toward those people i could trust, had a mutual respect for and collaborated well with.
How has your views about school changed since you went?
well when i was in school, it was dreadful. so much memorizing, boring lessons. i really didn't like school at all and i hated to read. but by 8th grade it all of a sudden got social and interesting. high school was better because i was involved in different clubs and teams and it seemed to make the learning more enjoyable. college was even better because i got to choose the courses i was interested in. but all in all now i think that most educational institutions have a better handle on how to inspire kids and adults to get the most out of learning. so much more hands on and enjoyable now than when i was in school.
Interview with Kevin (Mom's Friend)
What major ways has education contributed to your life now and do you think they are important?
The obvious contribution would be knowledge - but just as important would be social skills and confidence. The ability to relate to all sorts of people and a confident attitude in the workplace has been invaluable in my profession.
How do you feel with having no control over anything in school and having everything decided for you, from your schedule to what you learn?
I wouldn't have taken much interest in deciding my schedule or the courses I took. As a matter of fact, I did much better as a student in grammar school and high school - when I had no choice in either. When I did have the ability to decide for myself in college - it didn't work out for me at all. I was someone who needed things laid out for me.
Can you create an argument for or against the idea that school is like a machine which conquers and puppeteers a population?
I think it was a bit different when I attended school. I was a product of a Catholic school education in the early 60's. For the most part, you weren't taught to think for yourself, but to "toe the company line", so to speak. The more you DIDN'T stand out - the better. There were a few teachers who definitely encouraged the individual to emerge, but for the most part it was better to just sort of fit in. Nowadays, from what I see - education and the attitude of the teachers encourages individuality in a way I never experienced.
When you were in school how was the social aspect? and in your life today do you still see the same behaviors from people?
When I was in school there were definitely different "groups" - the popular kids, the not so popular, the athletes, etc. During school, we didn't have much of a choice who we attended class with, but we spent most of our after school hours within our respective groups - and that was pretty much our entire social life. I don't think this translates to the workplace - you really have to work and socialize with many people who you probably wouldn't if it weren't for the job. As far as I can see with kids
in school today, the "clique" thing still remains - probably always will.
How has your views about school changed since you went?
As a parent, you realize that education is incredibly important - and do whatever you can to make sure your child gets the best possible. When I went to school, I don't think our parents really spent as much time worrying about our education - just that we went to class, got decent grades ... and after high school either got a job or went to the cheapest college we could find. That was CERTAINLY not my attitude with my son's education - nor with most parents that I know. I think most of us now understand the importance of a good education and what kind of life in can lead too.
Interview with myself:
What major ways has education contributed to your life now and do you think they are important?
Education as my mother has said has given me excellent thinking abilities. School is the perfect environment to broaden people's minds. But I do realize that it is not always the case. School has both the potential to help thinking and to hamper with it. I think that most of the classes gave me a general education with knowledge that I would use in my life. But Andy's class really stimulates thinking. Not only that you actually get taught about life and the things you learn and discover for yourself you will keep with you throughout your entire life. Now I think that is important. People should learn about hoe the world works and from that create ideas about it on your own and not believe the ones people try to give you.
How do you feel with having no control over anything in school and having everything decided for you, from your schedule to what you learn?
Often at times I am torn between two answers. I think it is bad that students do not have the opportunity to choose topics of interest to them and actually learn something that they are interested in. But this also has a fault. Who is to say when we are old enough to make these decisions for ourselves and who is to say that the subject matter we choose will actually be beneficial to our learning and growing up in the world. I think there are certain aspects of school which should be decided by others though it pains me to say it. Teachers and higher ups are there for a reason and that is to create courses that will help us as we grow older. I think it is up to the teachers to give leniency to their students and learn what the students are interested in. In terms of my interest like art and just being creative and active I feel like the school system has failed. As we grow older and move up in school, there is less time given to art and gym and more for those core classes.
Can you create an argument for or against the idea that school is like a machine which conquers and puppeteers a population?
Even though I like this question I would say it may be the hardest for me to answer. Not that I do not have an answer it is just hard to formulate it all into an argument. Well I would say that school is a machine which uses students as putty and shapes them into "civilized" citizens. School is like a breeding ground. Students come to learn and the school sets certain curriculum for them. These subjects and topics are pre-approved. Something like our government. It spits out lies every now and then and school is a way where they can easily fit them in with out any of us knowing the difference. Free thinking is approved but how often are we actually thinking for ourselves and coming to new ideas.
Part B:
I found what my mother said was interesting how a "good education helps you decide what your values are and what's important to you in life and what kind of life you want to lead". I figure most of what she said is true. But I think it is not only based on a good education, school is so much more. I find that the people you meet in school such as your teachers and class mates help you figure what your values are. These people also help in finding what's important to you and to know what kind of life you want to live. There are so many options and we all come into school thinking about a certain career that we would love to be in. And truthfully i doubt most of us will wind up in that job or if even by the end of the day we still want to be it. School subjects help us decide what we like to learn and in doing so create a good field for us to know what other options are out there.
Monday, February 8, 2010
First thoughts on school
Questions:
1) How do schools control/ discipline students? Are the students even aware that they are being controlled?
2) Do school's actually help develop our thinking or does it hinder it? (somewhat rephrased from what Carrie said)
3) Why is it that students create personal masks and roles while in social scenes such as school?
Experiences:
1) Actually getting to know the teachers after school is over and having a good time because of common interests. Hanging out after school in the teachers rooms and playing cards, talking, ect.
2) Having part of your mind on school and whats going on in the classes and what we are learning but the other half focusing on social aspects, like friend dramas. It's kind of hard balancing the two together, usually for me one wins over the other unless I have a good handle on it.
3) Actually learning and enjoying school. Usually its boring and everyone is tired and we just copy off the board onto our notebooks without really learning anything. But there are times where the class' get interactive and its enjoyable to learn and the students actually learn something. This year in science is very fun because the course is more interactive and we actually get to be hands on, Andy's class is also good because we often to go the roof, break out of the class room setting and sit as equals in a circle sharing our ideas.
Ideas:
During Friday's class Beatrice had a good theory about how high school is like a big kid day care center. I find this very interesting, in a way connecting to Rachel's idea that school is like a breeding ground. "The government uses schools to civilize us"(Rachel). Most of our lives we either in schools or office buildings. All a way to keep us as they want us. They send us to school where we learn a set curriculum and they hope we go into office jobs. Forever living in a box and being pent up like animals. This would not be the first idea you would think of when you think of school. You would usually think of a place that gives you a great chance at a good education. Yet there is not much choice in it. School for children and young adults is not optional going back to Rachel's idea. School stops kids from running wild in the streets. Though if there wasn't any school, many kids would not know what to do. There is not much for kids to do in the real world. We can not get jobs, we can not live on our own with out a source of income. Playing video games and spending times with friends may seem like a very good idea but after a while doing that day after day will get boring.
I remember one day I was upset because I was fighting with one of my friends. I came into school upset and through most of the day I could not concentrate with other things. I also noticed subjects like math and science made my mood worse because when I didnt't get something it got me more frustrated. I guess the funny thing was recently it was happening more often because once we solved a problem another one came back up, it was like we were going in circles. School did no pose much of a distraction because we often saw each others in the hall way and it was either she was ignoring me or I was ignoring her. But english class and history class were nice because it was a break from writing off the board and actually get to talk about ideas and less formal in a way.
1) How do schools control/ discipline students? Are the students even aware that they are being controlled?
2) Do school's actually help develop our thinking or does it hinder it? (somewhat rephrased from what Carrie said)
3) Why is it that students create personal masks and roles while in social scenes such as school?
Experiences:
1) Actually getting to know the teachers after school is over and having a good time because of common interests. Hanging out after school in the teachers rooms and playing cards, talking, ect.
2) Having part of your mind on school and whats going on in the classes and what we are learning but the other half focusing on social aspects, like friend dramas. It's kind of hard balancing the two together, usually for me one wins over the other unless I have a good handle on it.
3) Actually learning and enjoying school. Usually its boring and everyone is tired and we just copy off the board onto our notebooks without really learning anything. But there are times where the class' get interactive and its enjoyable to learn and the students actually learn something. This year in science is very fun because the course is more interactive and we actually get to be hands on, Andy's class is also good because we often to go the roof, break out of the class room setting and sit as equals in a circle sharing our ideas.
Ideas:
During Friday's class Beatrice had a good theory about how high school is like a big kid day care center. I find this very interesting, in a way connecting to Rachel's idea that school is like a breeding ground. "The government uses schools to civilize us"(Rachel). Most of our lives we either in schools or office buildings. All a way to keep us as they want us. They send us to school where we learn a set curriculum and they hope we go into office jobs. Forever living in a box and being pent up like animals. This would not be the first idea you would think of when you think of school. You would usually think of a place that gives you a great chance at a good education. Yet there is not much choice in it. School for children and young adults is not optional going back to Rachel's idea. School stops kids from running wild in the streets. Though if there wasn't any school, many kids would not know what to do. There is not much for kids to do in the real world. We can not get jobs, we can not live on our own with out a source of income. Playing video games and spending times with friends may seem like a very good idea but after a while doing that day after day will get boring.
I remember one day I was upset because I was fighting with one of my friends. I came into school upset and through most of the day I could not concentrate with other things. I also noticed subjects like math and science made my mood worse because when I didnt't get something it got me more frustrated. I guess the funny thing was recently it was happening more often because once we solved a problem another one came back up, it was like we were going in circles. School did no pose much of a distraction because we often saw each others in the hall way and it was either she was ignoring me or I was ignoring her. But english class and history class were nice because it was a break from writing off the board and actually get to talk about ideas and less formal in a way.
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Cool Video
The Cool Fool from Sandy G. on Vimeo.
1. I think based on our video we have no set definition of cool and the video turned out to be more of a way to find out what is cool. We search for it with out giving much of a concrete definition. There are certain instances in our video where there are the cool moments and also some of it where we show what is not cool. Such as in the cafeteria, Andy walked by and no one noticed him and when we put the loser sign on him. But During gym he was cool when right before Rachel's interview he walks away from the ball and it so happens that both John and Adam follow his lead. I would want people to take from our video that there is no definition of cool and trying to go out and find it and try to be it is a waste of time. During our search we had a whole lot of fun and I think thats the thing most people miss with their lives when they try to follow a script and be cool.
2. First of all let me tell you when we started this video we would have never thought that what we wound up with was what we were going to get. In the beginning we were going to do 2 scenarios where the main character is cool and you get to see how people perceive him and why they think he is cool and then the same scene but in this one the main character is uncool with again commentary from the same people and how they thought he was uncool. In the video we kept the commentary but it turned out the scenes we had pictured did not work out as we wanted so instead we had two completely different scenes but the same idea, in one there was a cool person and in the other there is an uncool person. I think the bloopers are the best part of the video. They are like behind the scenes but they also connect with cool, and our attempt to find cool.
3. I think making art is very cool. I love to make art and I love to see what other people can do when they do the many different forms of art. Its such a beautiful way to express ourselves and to express how we see the world. I wish the schools would have art and music and other ways that we can express ourselves as classes instead of having it just as an elective where you may not possibly get in.
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Final draft
Cool is a mask we wrap around ourselves that hides our true self so that it is easier to fool people that we fit in. It is a charade that gets played over and over again. And the person is always hoping that they will not be discovered, that the audience will sit and watch and not try to rip apart the facade created by the performer to reveal the many characters. We have become products of ourselves. We choose to transform our selves into this image of cool. The only trouble is that cool is forever changing and means something different to each group and person. The definition is as forever changing as the wind. So to keep up with the constant shift, many roles and acts are played through out our lifetime. “And one man in his time plays many parts, his acts being seven ages” (Shakespeare). But why do we need these masks? Why bother trying to be cool and to fit certain aspects of what society wants us to be? This can be contributed to the fact that we try to cover up the hole we feel inside of us. We are all a little bit empty inside and instead of acknowledging this fact we try to fill the void (our lives) with meaningless attributes. People plays roles to fit in, fitting in to become cool, cool gets us attention and all play as distractions from what is really missing in our lives.
Is being cool different then being independent? Often times when you think of someone who is cool they have the latest and newest stuff, which is popular and thus making him/ her cool. So in another way it can also be said that being cool is just another way of conforming. But today there are many people who change themselves just to fit that persona of being cool and often not trying to be cool is revered as being cool. Now the definition of cool in the dictionary is "fashionable and attractive at the time; often skilled or socially adept". To get this persona, people not only put on acts but change their physical appearances. Many people always change their style to fit in and be cool. One such method is hair. There are so many “cool” hairstyles and certain codes for each gender and group. “Hair is a powerful symbol of individuality and group identity. Hair is physical, therefore personal although personal it is public”(Anthony Synnot). The article Hair- Shame and Glory also talks about the theory of hair.
The theory of hair can be called the theory of opposites.
1. opposite sexes have opposite hair
2. head hair and body hair are opposite
3. opposite ideologies have opposite hair
For men it is more popular and cool to have short hair where for women longer hair is better and seen as sexier. Head vs. body hair is also different between genders, for women more hair on her head and less hair on her body are seen as cool where as men have less hair on their head and more on their body. Hair is the most easily thing to change about yourself. It’s not permanent and can easily grow back to change when a new style is cooler then the old one.
Recently getting a tattoo has become a popular thing to do. It’s an unspoken cool. Today there aren't just the regular ink and needles it has even grown to henna tattoos. It’s become so popular down at the beach and board walks to see henna places set up and tons of girls giggling around all the designs to choose which one they would like. It’s an alternative to the regular tattoo. The big thing about henna is that its natural dye. Its not chemically made and wont affect the body too much. "Henna has been used to adorn young women's bodies as part of social and holiday celebrations". Brides also wear henna; it is supposed to bring luck and joy. Many traditions involve henna and we have turned it into something our culture uses to make a profit off.
Most parents today would not allow their children to get a tattoo. My friend Jacara has decided to get a tattoo when she turns 18. I think the reason behind it is because when we turn 18 we are legal adults and her mother could not argue or tell her not to get it. Or at least she would not have to listen. But she said she wants a thin circle on her wrist which represented a cycle, something never ending. It seems meaningful to her and I have noticed her attraction to them in the past but I was surprised to hear she was actually going through with it. When we are young we want things that will make us cool. Getting a tattoo is a way in which we own our own body; we choose what to put onto it. Though as those kids grow older they start to regret ever getting one. The only ones that I can see as a mistake are when boyfriends or girlfriends get the name of their significant other and when it turns out they were wrong for each other and break up, they're left with a constant reminder. But there are also the tattoos of lost loved ones, picture and names. These show a persons past and history. These attributes of reminders are to help the person feel less lonely, they are not alone because they will always carry the memories of loved ones.
We all act in plays, putting in shadow our real life story. Perhaps tattoos are a way to show our story without actually breaking out of the role we set up for ourselves. Tattoos are usually meaningful to a person and have great significance. They want to never forget so they decide to keep it with them at all times. Mr. Fanning has many tattoos that cover both his arms. He says they were his armor when he first got it, but over the years they became less like his armor and more like his map of life. Those tattoos showed his life story, where he has been, who he was so that he can always keep it with him.
"All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: They have their exits and their entrances;..."( Shakespeare). People take up roles that are specific with other people and certain experiences. It’s all a game in a sense. People don't question it as long as you fit the "role" and make sure to not point out the manner in which they make themselves seem cool but to perhaps make subtle comments about it that boast their ego. Everyone is playing a role, for the better part of their lives. Other people may not be characters but they are certainly following roles to make themselves cool.
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
The ways we go about our lives truly make them meaningless. All these ways we make ourselves seem better are nothing but lies that we are cloaking ourselves in. These lies seep into the soul where with most of them we excuse our behavior as "we do it cause we want to". Now you cannot completely argue that some people are not in it for the association/ label. They do it for themselves and do not really care what people think of them. How does changing into the cool affect them as people? Our society or social groups put a lot on being cool and many kids and even grownups have been pulled into the frenzy of trying to be cool.
Emptiness is a feeling in which many people will experience in their lives. It is not something that can easily be defined. Some often describe it as a black hole, where the void is filled with our own darkness. It is a sense that comes from our illusion of missing something we feel we need. There are often times people disregard the hole and find meaningless ways to cover or fill the hole so it does not sallow us whole. Emptiness is never in one part of the body but encompasses the whole being. It is a destructive emotion in which clouds the senses. It is no more attainable through our emotions then it is to say we are happy, two of the very same emotions on opposite scales of the spectrum. Emptiness swallows all else and leaves nothing but a feeling of having something missing. There is no happiness or anger, its just one sense that can be connected to being lonely. When you are lonely it is the same as emptiness. There's nothing there, you’re all alone with no one near you and it can be the same as emptiness. Although emptiness can be seen as one emotionless pit. Most people do not directly face the problem. They leave the hole in the back of their mind behind closed doors, and after a while they become afraid of what might have been created in the time they left it there.
Zeno founded stoicism in Athens. Stoicism considers destructive emotions to be the result of errors in judgment. They believe that a sage ("moral and intellectual perfection") would not experience these emotions. Stoics belief was that it is highly important to maintain a will in accord with nature. Stoics view that only a sage is free from such emotions and trivial ways of life. This philosophy helps develop self-control over destructive emotions. "The philosophy holds that becoming a clear and unbiased thinker allows one to understand the universal reason". Unlike many people think Stoic does not teach to abandon all emotions but to transform them into reason so one can find inner calm and clear judgment.
"Following Socrates, the Stoics held that unhappiness and evil are the results of human ignorance of the reason in nature. If someone is unkind, it is because they are unaware of their own universal reason, which would lead to the conclusion of kindness. If they are unhappy, it is because they have forgotten how nature actually functions — unhappiness is having one's unrealistic expectations of reality go unfulfilled. The solution to evil and unhappiness then, is the practice of Stoic philosophy — to examine one's own judgments and behavior and determine where they have diverged from the universal reason of nature."
Stoicism can be connected with the book The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho. In the book Coelho held some of the same philosophies as Stoicism. They both believed in the universal language and the fact that everything was connected. There was also the soul of the world in which the young boy Santiago was able to understand by the end of his journey. This can connect with their argument of nature. Nature plays a big part in being free in the sense of not being controlled by our emotions. Santiago on his journey meets many people along with a King, a Crystal merchant, an Englishman, and the Alchemist. They all play a role in helping the boy discover his personal legend. The king helps him on his journey by explaining that he must follow his personal legend and that everything will help him accomplish his true goal. After being robbed he works in the crystal shop and decides to go back home. But after talking to the store owner about his decision the boy realizes that he is even closer to his legend and that there was nothing really stopping him from going. The Englishman and the Alchemist helped the boy realize that he had the power all along to get to his goal and that he could already read the soul of the world. After the book I wondered if it was some people's personal legend to never find there's but instead to be stones on the path of someone’s quest to find theirs. Emptiness was present but the boy after reading the soul of the world and listening to his heart was able to over come it. Just like the Stoics believed you needed to overcome such emotions with reason to find clear judgment and inner calm. Both the boy succeeded in.
Another book which plays into this sense of emptiness and explores many existential themes but also Stoicism is The Stranger by Albert Camus. Though unlike the boy in The Alchemist, Meursualt did not find his inner peace in the same way. Meursualt's life was fully of emptiness and he came off to others as uncaring and indifferent. This causes him to be disliked by many people and the reason why he was convicted of the murder of the Arab. Though during the trial, his mothers death was brought up and the lack of grief from him. They could not understand how a son could have no reaction to his mother’s death. This can be seen as the biggest factor in why they thought Meursualt was guilty of the crime even though both incidents were totally separate. At the end Meursault finally explodes into a whirlwind of emotion. He starts screaming out and tries to understand the world and his emotions. When he is done and everything is quiet again he realizes that he was right all along, the world was as cold and as uncaring as he so why should he have lived any differently then he had. Coming up with his resolution, Meursualt is finally at peace and is content with his death not afraid of his end.
Many teens feel empty. They feel that they need to be cool so that they can get attention and be liked by people. This way, they will do anything to become cool and one way is to buy products that will let them achieve that status. Most of the money teens acquire is from guilt money; parents can't spend time with them so they give them money to go shop (fill the void with materialistic items). There are even more teenagers then their baby boomer parents. These teens control 150 billion dollars and many corporations are happy to give them a market in which they can buy their products. Corporations are "colonizing" teens and one even said, "teens are like Africa". We are the main business in which many corporations feed off of us. Some have even got into hiring people to find out what's cool but even find out what is going to be cool so they can rush it into the stores and create cool before it was even popular the only problem is that as soon as you discover something that is cool, its dead. Sprite even did this by trying to do anti-ads to appeal to teens that feel like corporations are just trying to sell them things. Sprite said, "Hip-hop became the vehicle for us" when talking about staying popular with teenagers. Many corporations are feeding on what we think is cool and are selling it back to us. By giving teens a say in what we think is cool and should be the new consumer product they are hooking us by giving us power. We have the illusion of control but we are really just being fooled by forgetting that our free choice was just the other one that was presented.
Teens witness 3,000 discrete advertisements a day. They also have a lot of money in their pockets and are more then willing to spend, which is every corporations dream. Many naive teenagers ready and waiting to find things that they can buy. Corporations knowing this find ways to appeal to this generation. One main way corporations get teenagers to buy products is that there advertisements circle around the most important thing in every teens life, cool. Every teen wants to be cool but of course it’s not cool to go and actively say yea I want to be cool, it has to be on the sly. Corporations give them this chance as they sell things that they think will become cool so that kids go out and start buying them making the product itself cool.
So why should we care that the corporations are using us and that our overall sense of wanting to feel important is driving us to spend? Most teenagers don't care and the even greater majority probably is not even aware of anything that is going on in corporate spending and consumer goods. All they care about is making sure that there overall desire of wanting to be cool and feeling important is met. Often times its not and in accordance to this, many teenagers go out and buy products that they think will get them the attention in which they would not have otherwise. Corporations are feeding on this weakness and teens are more then willing to let them as long as they get something back in the process. Not saying it would not be hard to one less teen that is not influenced by advertisements they see in their everyday life. You can not avoid this part of our culture but knowing that it's there is a big step in which teens can focus on to stop their overall drive to be cool and spend money. (Merchants of cool)
Cool consists of either many minor or major changes in a person’s life, whether it is physical or just how they act. As there are many variations of cool these definitions have many more places where they fit in such as certain groups may think something is cool while other groups may agree and other groups will disagree. Growing up in our society and living in many different groups such as family, friends, school, work, etc. there are many variations that one person may have on what is cool. Being cool is to fit in. If you want to be in a particular group or you want your friends to give you attention and you want them to think you're cool then you will most likely give into their perception of cool is. Forsaking any other moral training you might have learned and embodying the new cool. Most of the time the group cool and society's cool go hand in hand. Society has always been behind the shadows when giving us subliminal messages on what is cool and how we should act to be cool. Of course there are many versions that get put out according to all the marketing teams competing for our business. But often times our maps are written by the very same hand that runs everything from the back. We may know this and often think that perhaps this road may not be the very best and when we compare maps and they are similar or not the same but we want them to match up we go out of our way and disregard the old maps to try to fit in better with our peers and our culture.
But how can we choose something different for us if everything has already been mapped out for us? Is it so easy to just throw way your map and get a new one, or do we need to find hidden roads which slowly but surely lead us into a different path that will wind up being better for us or what is said in a different culture. So often we confuse these footpaths and swear they lead in directions they really don't go to. Whether it’s for the girl who wants a tattoo because her best friend has one or it’s for the boy who wants expensive shoes to fit in with his friends. We trick our maps to lead in these directions or forge our own roads to lead us into the conclusion we want. And often these tiny expeditions are because we have set out to become cool. And often the very idea of cool is those who have set out to create new maps for themselves. It’s something new and unexpected. No one really thinks to question the ideas that have been dominant for over centuries. But those who do and go out and create new maps are looked up to as someone who takes risks and that appeals to the cool variation of being a rebel. But often times we ourselves would look on in wonderment but never think twice about the hand we are dealt. We go on with our lives and often check to make sure it leads to where we want to go but other then that we leave it well alone.
Jakob said “that we identify people as cool because we project our insecurities on to them”. We set someone up as cool and make it our goal in life to become just like them, that figment of cool in the spot light for the time that it is allowed. So we start to map out the lines and the parts of our plays. Putting into the shadow our own emptiness and reasons why we have deemed said person cool and the crazy notion that we need to become like them. We all want to be something in life, and those ideas come from where we have been in life and who has been in it with us. We create god like beings who are what we want to become, but know we could never really be. During the time we went outside to interview people on the street, Rachel and I asked a college student what his definition of cool was and he said "it is a manufactured desire". We are built with this desire to be cool and to identify certain things cool. But the question comes, if our real selves become those roles, or if our real self is the one who wants those masks and roles we play. Perhaps ultimately our true self starts to get lost in the sea of characters and is just another mask on the wall and we never notice it gone because its been put right next to emptiness, and after awhile neither one is needed to live a “meaningful” life in terms of our society. Maybe cool is people’s savior. We actually need it to get by in life because if it were not for cool we would all have to actually focus on our emptiness and confront it. That would make for some pretty negative lives where all we would be doing is thinking about what is missing in our lives. Cool provides an easier way to live. Keep empty in the back and cover up your real self to try and achieve those aspects of cool.
Works Cited
Frontline: The Merchants of Cool. PBS Online, 2001. Web. 7 Feb. 2005
Fanning, John. “Personal/Political – Tattoo Talk”. Social Studies Class. School of the Future. Room 605.
Interviewees. “What is Cool?” Street Survey. 02 December 2009.
Shakespeare "As you Like It" and "Macbeth"
Is being cool different then being independent? Often times when you think of someone who is cool they have the latest and newest stuff, which is popular and thus making him/ her cool. So in another way it can also be said that being cool is just another way of conforming. But today there are many people who change themselves just to fit that persona of being cool and often not trying to be cool is revered as being cool. Now the definition of cool in the dictionary is "fashionable and attractive at the time; often skilled or socially adept". To get this persona, people not only put on acts but change their physical appearances. Many people always change their style to fit in and be cool. One such method is hair. There are so many “cool” hairstyles and certain codes for each gender and group. “Hair is a powerful symbol of individuality and group identity. Hair is physical, therefore personal although personal it is public”(Anthony Synnot). The article Hair- Shame and Glory also talks about the theory of hair.
The theory of hair can be called the theory of opposites.
1. opposite sexes have opposite hair
2. head hair and body hair are opposite
3. opposite ideologies have opposite hair
For men it is more popular and cool to have short hair where for women longer hair is better and seen as sexier. Head vs. body hair is also different between genders, for women more hair on her head and less hair on her body are seen as cool where as men have less hair on their head and more on their body. Hair is the most easily thing to change about yourself. It’s not permanent and can easily grow back to change when a new style is cooler then the old one.
Recently getting a tattoo has become a popular thing to do. It’s an unspoken cool. Today there aren't just the regular ink and needles it has even grown to henna tattoos. It’s become so popular down at the beach and board walks to see henna places set up and tons of girls giggling around all the designs to choose which one they would like. It’s an alternative to the regular tattoo. The big thing about henna is that its natural dye. Its not chemically made and wont affect the body too much. "Henna has been used to adorn young women's bodies as part of social and holiday celebrations". Brides also wear henna; it is supposed to bring luck and joy. Many traditions involve henna and we have turned it into something our culture uses to make a profit off.
Most parents today would not allow their children to get a tattoo. My friend Jacara has decided to get a tattoo when she turns 18. I think the reason behind it is because when we turn 18 we are legal adults and her mother could not argue or tell her not to get it. Or at least she would not have to listen. But she said she wants a thin circle on her wrist which represented a cycle, something never ending. It seems meaningful to her and I have noticed her attraction to them in the past but I was surprised to hear she was actually going through with it. When we are young we want things that will make us cool. Getting a tattoo is a way in which we own our own body; we choose what to put onto it. Though as those kids grow older they start to regret ever getting one. The only ones that I can see as a mistake are when boyfriends or girlfriends get the name of their significant other and when it turns out they were wrong for each other and break up, they're left with a constant reminder. But there are also the tattoos of lost loved ones, picture and names. These show a persons past and history. These attributes of reminders are to help the person feel less lonely, they are not alone because they will always carry the memories of loved ones.
We all act in plays, putting in shadow our real life story. Perhaps tattoos are a way to show our story without actually breaking out of the role we set up for ourselves. Tattoos are usually meaningful to a person and have great significance. They want to never forget so they decide to keep it with them at all times. Mr. Fanning has many tattoos that cover both his arms. He says they were his armor when he first got it, but over the years they became less like his armor and more like his map of life. Those tattoos showed his life story, where he has been, who he was so that he can always keep it with him.
"All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players: They have their exits and their entrances;..."( Shakespeare). People take up roles that are specific with other people and certain experiences. It’s all a game in a sense. People don't question it as long as you fit the "role" and make sure to not point out the manner in which they make themselves seem cool but to perhaps make subtle comments about it that boast their ego. Everyone is playing a role, for the better part of their lives. Other people may not be characters but they are certainly following roles to make themselves cool.
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
The ways we go about our lives truly make them meaningless. All these ways we make ourselves seem better are nothing but lies that we are cloaking ourselves in. These lies seep into the soul where with most of them we excuse our behavior as "we do it cause we want to". Now you cannot completely argue that some people are not in it for the association/ label. They do it for themselves and do not really care what people think of them. How does changing into the cool affect them as people? Our society or social groups put a lot on being cool and many kids and even grownups have been pulled into the frenzy of trying to be cool.
Emptiness is a feeling in which many people will experience in their lives. It is not something that can easily be defined. Some often describe it as a black hole, where the void is filled with our own darkness. It is a sense that comes from our illusion of missing something we feel we need. There are often times people disregard the hole and find meaningless ways to cover or fill the hole so it does not sallow us whole. Emptiness is never in one part of the body but encompasses the whole being. It is a destructive emotion in which clouds the senses. It is no more attainable through our emotions then it is to say we are happy, two of the very same emotions on opposite scales of the spectrum. Emptiness swallows all else and leaves nothing but a feeling of having something missing. There is no happiness or anger, its just one sense that can be connected to being lonely. When you are lonely it is the same as emptiness. There's nothing there, you’re all alone with no one near you and it can be the same as emptiness. Although emptiness can be seen as one emotionless pit. Most people do not directly face the problem. They leave the hole in the back of their mind behind closed doors, and after a while they become afraid of what might have been created in the time they left it there.
Zeno founded stoicism in Athens. Stoicism considers destructive emotions to be the result of errors in judgment. They believe that a sage ("moral and intellectual perfection") would not experience these emotions. Stoics belief was that it is highly important to maintain a will in accord with nature. Stoics view that only a sage is free from such emotions and trivial ways of life. This philosophy helps develop self-control over destructive emotions. "The philosophy holds that becoming a clear and unbiased thinker allows one to understand the universal reason". Unlike many people think Stoic does not teach to abandon all emotions but to transform them into reason so one can find inner calm and clear judgment.
"Following Socrates, the Stoics held that unhappiness and evil are the results of human ignorance of the reason in nature. If someone is unkind, it is because they are unaware of their own universal reason, which would lead to the conclusion of kindness. If they are unhappy, it is because they have forgotten how nature actually functions — unhappiness is having one's unrealistic expectations of reality go unfulfilled. The solution to evil and unhappiness then, is the practice of Stoic philosophy — to examine one's own judgments and behavior and determine where they have diverged from the universal reason of nature."
Stoicism can be connected with the book The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho. In the book Coelho held some of the same philosophies as Stoicism. They both believed in the universal language and the fact that everything was connected. There was also the soul of the world in which the young boy Santiago was able to understand by the end of his journey. This can connect with their argument of nature. Nature plays a big part in being free in the sense of not being controlled by our emotions. Santiago on his journey meets many people along with a King, a Crystal merchant, an Englishman, and the Alchemist. They all play a role in helping the boy discover his personal legend. The king helps him on his journey by explaining that he must follow his personal legend and that everything will help him accomplish his true goal. After being robbed he works in the crystal shop and decides to go back home. But after talking to the store owner about his decision the boy realizes that he is even closer to his legend and that there was nothing really stopping him from going. The Englishman and the Alchemist helped the boy realize that he had the power all along to get to his goal and that he could already read the soul of the world. After the book I wondered if it was some people's personal legend to never find there's but instead to be stones on the path of someone’s quest to find theirs. Emptiness was present but the boy after reading the soul of the world and listening to his heart was able to over come it. Just like the Stoics believed you needed to overcome such emotions with reason to find clear judgment and inner calm. Both the boy succeeded in.
Another book which plays into this sense of emptiness and explores many existential themes but also Stoicism is The Stranger by Albert Camus. Though unlike the boy in The Alchemist, Meursualt did not find his inner peace in the same way. Meursualt's life was fully of emptiness and he came off to others as uncaring and indifferent. This causes him to be disliked by many people and the reason why he was convicted of the murder of the Arab. Though during the trial, his mothers death was brought up and the lack of grief from him. They could not understand how a son could have no reaction to his mother’s death. This can be seen as the biggest factor in why they thought Meursualt was guilty of the crime even though both incidents were totally separate. At the end Meursault finally explodes into a whirlwind of emotion. He starts screaming out and tries to understand the world and his emotions. When he is done and everything is quiet again he realizes that he was right all along, the world was as cold and as uncaring as he so why should he have lived any differently then he had. Coming up with his resolution, Meursualt is finally at peace and is content with his death not afraid of his end.
Many teens feel empty. They feel that they need to be cool so that they can get attention and be liked by people. This way, they will do anything to become cool and one way is to buy products that will let them achieve that status. Most of the money teens acquire is from guilt money; parents can't spend time with them so they give them money to go shop (fill the void with materialistic items). There are even more teenagers then their baby boomer parents. These teens control 150 billion dollars and many corporations are happy to give them a market in which they can buy their products. Corporations are "colonizing" teens and one even said, "teens are like Africa". We are the main business in which many corporations feed off of us. Some have even got into hiring people to find out what's cool but even find out what is going to be cool so they can rush it into the stores and create cool before it was even popular the only problem is that as soon as you discover something that is cool, its dead. Sprite even did this by trying to do anti-ads to appeal to teens that feel like corporations are just trying to sell them things. Sprite said, "Hip-hop became the vehicle for us" when talking about staying popular with teenagers. Many corporations are feeding on what we think is cool and are selling it back to us. By giving teens a say in what we think is cool and should be the new consumer product they are hooking us by giving us power. We have the illusion of control but we are really just being fooled by forgetting that our free choice was just the other one that was presented.
Teens witness 3,000 discrete advertisements a day. They also have a lot of money in their pockets and are more then willing to spend, which is every corporations dream. Many naive teenagers ready and waiting to find things that they can buy. Corporations knowing this find ways to appeal to this generation. One main way corporations get teenagers to buy products is that there advertisements circle around the most important thing in every teens life, cool. Every teen wants to be cool but of course it’s not cool to go and actively say yea I want to be cool, it has to be on the sly. Corporations give them this chance as they sell things that they think will become cool so that kids go out and start buying them making the product itself cool.
So why should we care that the corporations are using us and that our overall sense of wanting to feel important is driving us to spend? Most teenagers don't care and the even greater majority probably is not even aware of anything that is going on in corporate spending and consumer goods. All they care about is making sure that there overall desire of wanting to be cool and feeling important is met. Often times its not and in accordance to this, many teenagers go out and buy products that they think will get them the attention in which they would not have otherwise. Corporations are feeding on this weakness and teens are more then willing to let them as long as they get something back in the process. Not saying it would not be hard to one less teen that is not influenced by advertisements they see in their everyday life. You can not avoid this part of our culture but knowing that it's there is a big step in which teens can focus on to stop their overall drive to be cool and spend money. (Merchants of cool)
Cool consists of either many minor or major changes in a person’s life, whether it is physical or just how they act. As there are many variations of cool these definitions have many more places where they fit in such as certain groups may think something is cool while other groups may agree and other groups will disagree. Growing up in our society and living in many different groups such as family, friends, school, work, etc. there are many variations that one person may have on what is cool. Being cool is to fit in. If you want to be in a particular group or you want your friends to give you attention and you want them to think you're cool then you will most likely give into their perception of cool is. Forsaking any other moral training you might have learned and embodying the new cool. Most of the time the group cool and society's cool go hand in hand. Society has always been behind the shadows when giving us subliminal messages on what is cool and how we should act to be cool. Of course there are many versions that get put out according to all the marketing teams competing for our business. But often times our maps are written by the very same hand that runs everything from the back. We may know this and often think that perhaps this road may not be the very best and when we compare maps and they are similar or not the same but we want them to match up we go out of our way and disregard the old maps to try to fit in better with our peers and our culture.
But how can we choose something different for us if everything has already been mapped out for us? Is it so easy to just throw way your map and get a new one, or do we need to find hidden roads which slowly but surely lead us into a different path that will wind up being better for us or what is said in a different culture. So often we confuse these footpaths and swear they lead in directions they really don't go to. Whether it’s for the girl who wants a tattoo because her best friend has one or it’s for the boy who wants expensive shoes to fit in with his friends. We trick our maps to lead in these directions or forge our own roads to lead us into the conclusion we want. And often these tiny expeditions are because we have set out to become cool. And often the very idea of cool is those who have set out to create new maps for themselves. It’s something new and unexpected. No one really thinks to question the ideas that have been dominant for over centuries. But those who do and go out and create new maps are looked up to as someone who takes risks and that appeals to the cool variation of being a rebel. But often times we ourselves would look on in wonderment but never think twice about the hand we are dealt. We go on with our lives and often check to make sure it leads to where we want to go but other then that we leave it well alone.
Jakob said “that we identify people as cool because we project our insecurities on to them”. We set someone up as cool and make it our goal in life to become just like them, that figment of cool in the spot light for the time that it is allowed. So we start to map out the lines and the parts of our plays. Putting into the shadow our own emptiness and reasons why we have deemed said person cool and the crazy notion that we need to become like them. We all want to be something in life, and those ideas come from where we have been in life and who has been in it with us. We create god like beings who are what we want to become, but know we could never really be. During the time we went outside to interview people on the street, Rachel and I asked a college student what his definition of cool was and he said "it is a manufactured desire". We are built with this desire to be cool and to identify certain things cool. But the question comes, if our real selves become those roles, or if our real self is the one who wants those masks and roles we play. Perhaps ultimately our true self starts to get lost in the sea of characters and is just another mask on the wall and we never notice it gone because its been put right next to emptiness, and after awhile neither one is needed to live a “meaningful” life in terms of our society. Maybe cool is people’s savior. We actually need it to get by in life because if it were not for cool we would all have to actually focus on our emptiness and confront it. That would make for some pretty negative lives where all we would be doing is thinking about what is missing in our lives. Cool provides an easier way to live. Keep empty in the back and cover up your real self to try and achieve those aspects of cool.
Works Cited
Frontline: The Merchants of Cool. PBS Online, 2001. Web. 7 Feb. 2005
Fanning, John. “Personal/Political – Tattoo Talk”. Social Studies Class. School of the Future. Room 605.
Interviewees. “What is Cool?” Street Survey. 02 December 2009.
Shakespeare "As you Like It" and "Macbeth"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)