Christmas

Christmas is a beautiful time of year. Everyone feels the obligation to be a bit nicer and thinks about the people they love. If they’re religious they probably think about Jesus, and the values he represents. All of these are great influences on a person’s character. The bad part is the financial strain and stress. Oh and the CONSTANT Christmas carols that follow you. Is it worth it?

                Yes. The spirit and the family connections are beautiful. I love giving. I really do. I love the look on the person’s face when they open up my present, especially the ones who absolutely love what I get them. It makes me happier than receiving gifts, which is fun too, especially when you get something completely awesome you didn’t expect.  So to all of you Christmas supporters, smile, tis the season to enjoy yourself. Merry Christmas.

Stress, stress, STRESS!!

      College. AP. Part-time job. Friends. Holidays. Homework. Homework. Homework. Test. Test. Test. No money. No game plan. Sports. Volunteering. Clubs (the school kind). HELP!~
       This is the reality of the average teen, living under a blanket of pure stress. Free time is a thing of the past, because that paper isn't going to write itself. Honestly, I wonder if they shouldn't have psychiatrists seeing people over the lunch hour. It's really ridiculous. There's so much pressure to go to college and be successful that some students don't even make it to college. If you can't handle the burden you won't succeed. I can't wait to have only a job! I'll have free time again, and no more homework, oh it'll be Heaven. Sure, there's a huge load of responsibilities, but at least I don't have to care about what some dead guy says anymore. Don't get me wrong, I like learning, or at least, I tell myself that. But the workload and stress of school are unbearable. I spend most of my waking hours doing something school related, which seriously limits my ability to become famous.
         How can I become famous if I don't have time to practice my art? I used to draw during class, but now I can't because if I don't pay attention I will surely fail; mostly because I don't have time to study. If it's not due the next day I won't do it, not because I'm lazy, but because I just don't have time. Although there is this annoying habit I have...hmmm...what's it called again? Oh yeah! Sleep. Yeah...takes up quite a bit of time really.
       On a slightly more serious note, I'm definitely not the only one who feels this way.
(http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6221872) Many of us don't have a serious mental disorder from the stress, but we're not doing our health any favors. We gain weight, we get even less sleep than the approximate four hours we're allotted (we'll if you're in AP anyway), and we have regular mental breakdowns. Maybe I'm biased, but this is not ok! School is about LEARNING, not filling out forms and praying you'll get a good enough job to afford that expensive school you wanted to go to.
      I'm sick of watching my friends cry, and I'm pretty sick of crying myself. The stress is bad enough until you reach Christmas time. The roads are awful and most of us have to drive on them. There's presents to be bought, which is expensive, so you have to work more (because you can't afford to miss out on a single opportunity to raise money for that huge bill coming up), not to mention get all of your homework done in between that. Oh, and most families have several holidays, and not just Xmas. So instead of being the most "wonderful time of the year" it's the most stressful. Once again: HELP!
       I've thought about it, and the main problem is this: AP Classes. I think we should ditch the idea entirely. They are NOT like college and they DO NOT really help students learn anything! What good is a test geared class really? College classes do NOT meet everyday, so when you're assigning the same amount of homework a college kid would get, you're not thinking about how much more TIME the college kid gets. And another thing, yes college tests are hard, but they are not as intense as AP. I have relatives who have just recently graduated and they cannot believe my workload from only TWO AP classes. So...why take AP? Well, for one, your school pressures you into it. They send you letters and telephone you in the summer, encouraging you to take them. They hand out special awards so the poor overstressed kids can feel like it was worth it. They give you the it'll prepare you for the next level excuse and they make the other classes PATHETICALLY non-challenging, and thus, boring. The problem is, they all give you a huge workload. Now, most of my classes I WAS warned, so I was expecting this, but the poor Sophomores aren't! Somebody needs to tell them what they're really signing up for.
    That isn't to say challenging yourself is bad, but putting yourself in a ridiculously difficult environment that isn't like most college courses are. The tests they want us to take are absolutely ludicrous, and they act like they are going to shave our college bill by a ton, which I swear, they won't. You might be able to skip one single semester, but it's not going to save you as much money as you're going to spend trying to take the test, between workbooks, material costs (papers, pencils, and computer ink), buying more medicine to fight stress-born illness, and the cost of taking the test.
   Why can't students learn in a stress free environment and still feel challenged? Can't something be done to make this less of an emotional turmoil?

Police Problems

     It's slowly getting more and more ridiculous. Police exist to protect the people from criminals above all else. They are not a source of revenue for the city and they are not a Triple A service either. So why is it, when a family's Christmas is stolen and the father has located the thieves with a cellphone satellite that they can do nothing? (http://kgan.com/shared/newsroom/top_stories/videos/kgan_vid_4260.shtml)
     I read this article yesterday and it only made me sick. He KNEW where the perpetrator was and the police still couldn't respond due to weather related calls and being understaffed.
    So tell me this: Why are the police understaffed? The city is making tons of revenue off of their ridiculous speed trap cameras ($75 for going 3 miles above the speed limit!)(http://www.photoenforced.com/) and they can't at least hire more cops?   
       Well no, they've got to build a new supercenter to attract tourists instead, which hardly seems feasible. Who would want to go to a city with speed cameras and stop light cameras right and left? I'd rather not; supercenter or no. Iowa City is far more worth the visit, and no speed cameras to nail their tourists with.
        So citizens are less safe because obviously they don't have enough cops, citizens are being robbed of their money for under five miles an hour above the speed limit, and citizens are being molested because they may have hidden bombs in their panties. Lovely. What a great country this is sometimes. Makes me wonder if I actually should buy a gun.

Medieval Times

    I have been reading The Sorcerer's Companion which is a historical background on Harry Potter terms and subjects. The most interesting thing I discovered upon perusing the book is the many types of Divination, and how similar they are. For example, Geomancy and Hydromancy are very similar. Geomancy interprets the way that soil is thrown and Hydromancy does the same basic thing, only with water. The certain ways that things are placed are always the keys to foretelling the future apparently during the Medieval era. Personally, I would vest more faith in the way the planets are aligned, because there may at the very least be something to changes in magnetic fields that could attribute to a person's mood, or at least, the change in weather might. For example, if it is overcast I am more likely to be dreary because it's not sunny and bright. I just don't hold much stock in predictions or fortunes I guess. Most of them are so vague that they have to come true. For example, "your good graces will pay off in the near future." Well of course they will! If you are gracious to someone they are bound to treat you better, it's common sense. Now, if it said "your good graces will pay off at four o'clock next Tuesday" I might be more convinced.
    The inaccuracy of predicting the future has nothing to do with how amusing and pleasing it is to do so. Attempting to read tea leaves or palms is fun. Especially if your prediction does come true. It is as much fun as buying a horseshoe or rubbing Buddha's belly. Even though many of use don't believe in these kinds of things, it is still fun to play and see if they come true.

Education: A Response to An Anarchist View

http://worthamass.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/education-an-anarchist-view/

     Recently, on  Worth A Mass, Anna posted her thoughts on our education system.
She is quoted saying:

"I consider myself to be an expert on this topic. I have walked through the halls of public schools, taken my fair share of standardized tests. I have felt the frustrations and limitations of public education. I have experienced it first hand and seen it all. In this sense, there is no one better to evaluate our education system than myself and my peers. I cannot understand why the views of students are so rarely considered when it comes to our education. It affects us more than anyone else and yet we aren’t apart of the way it is shaped."

      As much as I agree with listening to educators and psychologist's interpretations of our education system, students views should be considered. After all, the most valued opinions in business are that of the customers, because the customers are the reason the business exists. Shouldn't the same be said for students? I think, given the honest chance to voice their opinion on how things should be done, most students would give their two cents in a mature and truly analytical way. In fact, my two cents are something like this:

      I have mentioned before that I did not think that standardized tests really proved that something was learned, and I stand by that, but having something like them may be the most practical way for some students to impress upon us that they have learned something. On the other hand, a concept map may be the best way for another student. Everyone learns differently, and more should be done to address this. Especially in subjects required to graduate. Teachers have a very different teaching style from one another, and there should be a system, if only a light one, that gives students preparing to take a class some idea of how the class is run. A syllabus is a good way to start; only include typically used methods for teaching for the class, for example, in my language arts class, last trimester, we used the following pattern:

Here is the author you will read pieces from and their background information
Here is the pieces you will read and annotate, then write a response to.
Now we will discuss the pieces you've read. 

In fact, my language arts class provided a handbook on what class would be like and what kinds of assignments would be handed out, etc. Something of this nature would be beneficial to give to students beforehand when they are applying for classes. 

Speaking of applying for classes I have a complaint. The method my school uses is damn near idiotic. Their lives would be much easier if someone would program their system to let US build our schedules which could be sent for review to the Counselors, who would give the schedule a yay or nay. Students could select what classes for which hours and the program would automatically prevent them from entering a course that is full for that hour, so the student may rearrange their schedule until they have one that will work. The most pertinent students would naturally get first pick.  But I digress.

My real point is, I should have more say in what I am signing up for, a better idea of what I'm signing up for, and the power to sign up for it myself. Also, I should be able to submit feedback about any course I like to the school, and be promised that my complaint or suggestion would be considered. 

Another aspect of Anna's post that I found compelling was her mention of Reed College:

"My view of what education should be is somewhat of an anarchist idea. Do away with grades. The most useless classes I have taken have earned me A’s. Instead of the grade system that doesn’t show anything about what we’ve learned, I propose a teacher evaluation. Reed College does this. Professors give written evaluations of what the student has learned and how they may improve. It is more thorough than a grade can ever be. We can truly see what our strengths and weaknesses are. We can be evaluated for what we’ve learned rather than what we know. Tests and quizzes aren’t always the best evaluators of learning."
     I would love to experiment with this sort of education because I feel that the pressure of earning a grade belittles the actual education in the sense that the only improvement the students become interested in is better marks; not self betterment. I want to learn things to improve my perception of the world, and to better understand. I do not wish to be ignorant, but I do not wish to be an encyclopedia either. I do not like being told what to think; I prefer to reason things out on my own. I want to have an understanding of nearly everything, not in a factual sense but in a reasoned sense, and educated opinion sense.

   Most of my real education either comes from my family or myself. I think about and analyze things, including what I've been given to learn, or my family teaches me about survival and tips for being a citizen. My father has been teaching me how to drive on the ice, but I've been analyzing the Vietnam War and the War on Terror myself.

What educators are forgetting is this: Education begins and ends with the student. In the end, it is they who decide whether or not they learn, or have learned, and if it suits their purposes, they will find a way to learn things, even if the way presented isn't the way for them.

Gay Marriage: A Sad Case of Denial of Human Rights

Gay marriage has been an issue for a couple years now and there is much debate as to whether or not it should be legal for gay couples to be married. There shouldn’t even be a debate! It doesn’t matter what our religions have to argue against gay marriage because of the laws governing the separation of religion and state! I decided to read the Constitution and look for any point the Constitution directly says that marriage is one thing or that gay couples should not be allowed to be married. I found no such point but I did find this: “The Citizens of each state shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several states.”(the Constitution of the United States) Citizens are allowed to be married in the United States of America, if the gay couples are citizens of the United States of America, they are entitled to all of the rights and privileges of the several states. Therefore, they are entitled to marriage just like all other citizens of the United States of America.

Religion should be free to criticize gay marriage all they like. They can, by law, say what they like about it, and discourage gay couplings at all. That is allowable, if somewhat regrettable. This does not mean they should be allowed to harass gay couples or interfere with their weddings or any other of their affairs. After all they are citizens too; not to mention humans. This whole debate reminds me of another time we were questioning the humanity and equality of a group of people…oh yes! The Civil Rights Movement!

Folks, it is the same thing over again. Once again, we find ourselves questioning the basic human rights of our fellow Americans! This is wrong! Why can’t you see that? It may not be as bad as the Civil Rights Movement was because there is less violence involved with the issue but it’s the same basic concept over again. I am not gay, but I don’t consider gays any different from me other than a sexual preference. They go to school just like I do, they bleed the same color I do, and for goodness sakes, they deserve to be married, should they choose it, just like I do.  

Advertising

Shopping season is upon us, and with it, unfortunately, we see a rise in advertising as well. Some of the commercials make little to no sense to me. For example, those Levi jeans commercials…most of them have nothing to do with jeans. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cm7LBH7jUY&feature=related)

Also, lately there is a trend in scare tactics, using the possibility of injury to compel us to buy their product. (http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/browbeat/default.aspx) Yes some things require this tactic, but the amount it is actually used is ridiculous, don’t you think? It seems like I’m either going to be robbed, have my car destroyed, or kill somebody on a regular basis, in between my life style changes at Kaplan University. Honestly, not everyone wants to become an IT Manager or a nurse thank you.

The Kaplan commercials are annoying for several reasons, for one thing, they often use repetitive statements. “I don’t have a job because I don’t have skills, I don’t have skills because I didn’t go to school, I can’t go to school because I don’t have a job…” and so on and so forth.  And then, to make matters worse, they play this commercial every 15 minutes or so, and play another Kaplan commercial right after the previous one. Ridiculous! Honestly, it’s one of the main reasons I don’t watch much TV anymore…obnoxious advertisements like these.

My advice? Just don’t listen to any commercial, make your own call, and listen to the reviews if you really want advice on what to buy.

Nostalgia

Everyone grew up around something right? We were all either exposed to it or we discovered it on our own. For example, my mother played the Eagles around me when I was little, so I grew up listening to them. I found Pokémon on TV and fell in love with it almost immediately. Since then, I’ve found I don’t mind listening to the Eagles, and I still love to play the Pokémon games.

                However, the fact that I do doesn’t mean that the Eagles are a fantastic fountain of talent (at least, I don’t think they are) or that the Pokémon games have really changed over the years, it just means that I love them because I remember loving them as a kid. In my heart I still want to be the very best, I still wish I were a Hogwarts student, and I still check my closet for Narnia. The reason, however, is mostly based on this remembered fun associated with them.  This doesn’t make them bad; it just means that I have a bias toward them because of it.

                There are several of my friends who would argue to me that the first 150 Pokémon are the best, and that all of the other generations are no good at all and should have been forgotten. I don’t agree with them, because I believe that their answer is entirely based on nostalgia because their only argument is that the non-originals are non-originals. I can agree that as the generations continue they are a bit lacking in some respects, but I wouldn’t condemn all of them, merely cut some of the more ridiculous models out, including some from the originals. I think I would call it the ultimate generation when I was finished with it; but I digress.

                Francine Prose saw a similar scenario in books, claiming that adults choose mediocre novels from their childhoods as their top lists of literature, also claiming that nostalgia is the cause. (Prose, I Know Why the Caged Bird Cannot Read)

                So what is this tie then? Does nostalgia really play that big of a part in our choices of media and the like? It would seem so, and I think, as a people, we need to step back and look at why we really like a thing. It’s ok to like something for nostalgia, but in contests of true talent, that reason for liking a thing must be left out. Harry Potter, as enjoyable as it is, does not stand up to the might of J.R.R Tolkien, Terry Goodkind, or many other adult books for quality. It may stand on top of children’s books, but should not be judged in a contest for the best written adult literature. So please, think about why you like something before you declare it the best.

Testing

                "Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?" —Florence, S.C., Jan. 11, 2000

(http://politicalhumor.about.com/cs/georgewbush/a/top10bushisms.htm)

This question, so charmingly put by our former president George W. Bush, has been subject to debate lately by my classmates and me.  We’ve been questioning education as we know it; which led me to wonder, how exactly can you measure learning? Well of course, a long time ago,  when students were few to a master, it was obvious when the student had become skilled at whatever trade they were attempting to learn.

However, since then, learning has diversified into many subjects, some that the student may be stronger in than others. This has lead to standardized testing to prove that students have learned the subjects to a certain level at a certain point in their education. But is this a true measurement of what has been learned? Can a test actually measure what someone has learned?

I can pretty easily memorize terms and meanings, formulas and equations, but does that actually mean I’ve learned something? Does knowing the names of the presidents and their policies really prove I’ve learned something? Sure, I’ll fill in the right bubble on the answer sheet, but it doesn’t mean I’d think about the policies and apply them to politics today.

So how do we test students? Well Sir Ken Robinson pointed out that a new study had been done about divergent thinking, which is the ability to think up multiple solutions to a problem, now, as he pointed out, this test was conducted on a batch of kids beginning in Kindergarten where they scored at 98%, or genius, for divergent thinking. The same batch was tested again later, and found that their capacities for divergent thinking were dropping. Now, what is the difference between them then and them now? The answer is of course their education. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U&feature=player_embedded#!)I think that this study does point out a point of our education which is very limited, and could use to be implemented into the system. After all, this skill will be of much value to students as they are trying to solve problems in the real world. So perhaps instead of filling in bubbles about things our students should be writing papers about the things they are learning which would better demonstrate their understanding of the subject. For example, have you ever guessed on a question, and then narrowed down the answer because of another question on the test? It’s not cheating, and it is using your intellect to find the answer, but it still doesn’t prove that you actually know the material.

I think that essays and divergent thinking tests, such as how many ways can you use a stick, should be used to test students instead of standardized testing because only then, do I think, we can judge how much the students really know.

Politics

Lately, politics has been the big news here. Election day was yesterday, November 2^nd and we’ve seen a huge change in our House of Representatives. We’re faced with a gridlock; a Democratic president and a Republican House of Representatives. This could either be good or bad because either we’ll see nothing done or only the best things will get done.

Personally, I hate politics. I understand the importance, and I wouldn’t mind it from a strictly economical standpoint, but there’s a whole lot of other stuff that gets tossed in. Instead of getting things done we have to debate all of the moral aspects of things, and too much of it is based on how the politician will appear to the public. It’s not that the public isn’t important to politics, it is, but too much is spent on the politician’s appearance as a charitable individual with family values. The president is almost expected to attend community things and charity organizations which limits their time to work on solutions for our problems. Doesn’t that seem silly?

Political commercials too! I really hate political commercials because none of it is based on fact, all of it is just to slenderize an opponent or promote the literal image of another candidate. No one actually says anything about plans for the country, and if they do it’s very vague without any real plan of action. Take “I will cut taxes!” for example. Well we have a lot of different taxes like state taxes, property taxes, and income taxes. Or “We will cut government spending!” On what? The government spends a lot of money in different places. Defense spending and public projects are just a few examples.  They might just cut government spending by lowering benefits to the WIC program. Is it too much to ask for a little clarity in politics?

The endless moral debates revolving around the Constitution are a pain too. I know that we all may not support gay marriage, but it is not the government’s place to say that it is wrong or right. Does it actually hurt lives? No! No one is injured by the act of gays getting married unless they form riots outside the newlywed’s house. I don’t care who wants to protest them getting married, it is not the government’s place to say. So instead of wasting time arguing about gay marriage can we focus on the recession or maybe even the war? Please?

Also to attack some of our voters; don’t vote solely because you belong to one party or the other! Just because someone belongs to the Republican party doesn’t make them a wonderful person for the job. Consider what the policies of the person are before you vote for them.