Procrastination.
by Alvaro
I have to write a piece on ...
Listening to a Tricky album I have not heard before. This is really good. It’s like the old Tricky, moody, dark, but somehow less angry.
OK, I want to write a piece on procrastination.
The green cursor taunts me. Green block just blinking. Each time it appears and disappears it is asking, “and then?”
So what is procrastination? Can I get a definition? Oxford, where are you? I will reach out... call out...
The net is slow. Oxford, why won’t you answer? It’s English, you can’t possibly be THAT busy....
Looking at Paddy’s pictures from England. Pictures of an Abby reveal an almost fractal look to its edges when looked at upwards from the street. This Abby designed by the firm of Mandelbrot-Julia and associates.
Procrastination. Right. Where’s that definition?
Pictures inside the Abby reveal chairs with large red leather cushions hanging on the back of the chair in front of you. The cushions are large and plump. Like punching bags. Is this how we wrestle with our demons here? Or do we just train to do so? A kind of Faith-Jit-Su that will help us fight the good fight.
The definition.
Should I be doing this right now? I feel like I’m a pachenko ball being pulled towards my goal by gravity, yet impeded by tangential thoughts, interrupting my journey. Does distraction play into procrastination? Is it a cause of just an accomplice? Am I just too distracted?
The definition. Right. The definition.
If I can ALT TAB past the photos to the browser I should be OK. And if not...
People in holiday pictures look either really happy or really stern. Why is that? Is that the difference between being connected and disconnected from your life back home? The line between simply being and being reflexive?
In contrast, pictures of sheep in the English country side are intriguing. The sheep either look at the camera as if to pose, or ignore the photographer altogether. Is that their happy versus stern? Then again, they are not holiday, so maybe it’s different.
The definition. Right. The Definition.
When did my browser close? Did it sense I was not coming back for the definition? Is it part of this nefarious plan to prevent from the definition? I’ll have to launch it again, and wait...
... launching...
... no harm in looking at more pictures then.
Do we standardize our looks for pictures? Why can’t our expressions be as diverse in pictures as they are in real life? Would home movies be different? We all don a mask of sorts for pictures. The context of the snapshot determines the mask we choose from the picture mask cupboard. Hmmm.... holiday... Stern or happy? Back at home, party... extreme smile with lots of teeth and gums, gregarious laughter, or intense ambivalent engagement?
The browser should have launched by now. I have a lot of RAM in this thing. Of course it has launched. I could have printed Romeo and Juliet by now.
The definition. Right. The definition.
OK. Finally. Procrastination. ORIGIN Latin procrastinare ‘defer till the morning’.
But wait. It IS morning. So maybe that’s it. Maybe I’m doing this one morning too early. But then I’d never get it done. Like those bar signs that say “Free beer tomorrow”. Tomorrow is always a day away from today. I wonder what Webster has to say about this.
Will I be able to ALT TAB past the pictures? I feel like I’m twelve, trying to sneak past my parent’s room late at night on my way to the basement, hoping to watch some really late night television.
Maybe the photo program won’t notice. Maybe it will be too caught up in its own magnificence. Yes, that’s it. “Look at me. Red eye? No problem. I’ll fix that focus and exposure for you. Crooked picture? Don’t worry about it. I am the director of the snapshots of your life. Just go out and capture what you want and we’ll fix it in post. I can do that. I am magnificent.”
It’s distracted. Yes, I think I can sneak past.
Another photo of an Abby. It has a television antenna centered within the square walls of its spire tower. What do they watch in there? Has Coronation Street influenced the ...
Phone is ringing. It’s my mother. Do I answer it? No. I can’t talk now. I’m very busy writing this piece. Though I do wonder what she wanted.
Maybe I should call.
She left a message. Very clever, she just says that she has something to ask me about. A mystery box left on the table, enticing me to explore the mysteries within. Will I open it?
Calling....
It was just some gossip. Fooled!
We chat for a bit. Catch up on current events. Then her clients show up to see a house. Aha! You had some time to kill. Now I know your ruse. But I fell for it.
Crafty Mother. Very crafty.
Eggs! Paddy has made me eggs. The universe conspires against me to get this definition. What is that about? Is there something I am not supposed to know about? Will I uncover some unknowable secret if I get to this definition? Will I pull back the curtain only to realize that the great and powerful OZ is just a little man on a step stool pushing buttons and fervently turning wheels and pushing levers?
Maybe I need to ALT TAB more quietly past my photographic gatekeeper. Webster, will you help? I must have that definition! Here I go... alt... tab..
Oh look, a cobblestone street. Potholes on cobblestone streets MUST be simpler to fix. All you need is a few bricks, and some stone dust and dirt or sand. What would a whole cobblestone city look like or feel like? No skateboarding I bet. Unless it became the impetus for monster tires on planks of wood. Kids moving about as if they were strange action statues being paraded about on wooden trays. The art comes to YOU in this scene, offering up a temporary repose from your busy day. No need to procrastinate the experiencing of art anymore. It will come to you in quick manageable doses.
Aha! Webster is on my side. My linguistic Ally in my definitive quest. A good squire, providing me with exactly what I need as I embark on my journey. A definition worthy of reflexive contemplation.
Procrastination. Etymology: Latin procrastinatus, past participle of procrastinare, from pro- forward + crastinus of tomorrow, from cras tomorrow. Date: 1588.
So did people not procrastinate before that? Or did they not yet have a name for that condition? Like A.D.D. in the 50’s. Surely people were wilfully distracted then, they just didn’t know what to call it yet. At least now we can externalize the condition. “Don’t blame me. There’s a name for this now. So it’s no longer my fault.”
Does a dog have a name before we give it one such as “killer” or “peaches” or just plain “Bob”? What would chickens call themselves? Is simply “being” a condition? Distraction seemingly is.
Oh look, procrastinate can be a transitive or intransitive verb. Is that why your are so good at what you do, you wily word of the English language?
Transitive verb : to put off intentionally and habitually. So you are not just a state, but also a way of life? Dodgy. Very dodgy indeed.
Intransitive verb : to put off intentionally the doing of something that should be done.
This is more like it. When you are intransitive I can take you or leave you any time I want.
When you are intransitive you are benign.
When you are transitive you are determined to subscribe me to a way of life in which tomorrow never comes for the things I must do today.
Intransitive procrastination, I choose you. I chose you without knowing, and lapped at the transitive shores of your existence. But now I turn back. I turn back to the rest of my day, for there are other things to be done.
But despair not. You are now part of my arsenal, and I know I can call upon you at will.
You. My intransitive instrument of postponement.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Where Did I come from?
As I watched Douglas Coupland's "Souvenirs of Canada" I felt a great sense of connectedness with Canadian icons like the stubby beer bottle, hockey, and the word "chimo". As I watched, my mind also went back to experiences in middle school and high school, sitting through biology films like "I am Joe's stomach". But as the film ended, and Doug recounts a story of his father in the Canadian wilderness, I am suddenly at a loss. What are my stories? What are my parent's stories?
Having been the product of a multiple divorced upbringing – I like to think of myself as more statistical than most in that particular category – the stories of my parents are fragmented and foreign. To compound these feelings of misplacement, I am a first generation immigrant to Canada from the bustling metropolis of Santiago Chile. So even the stories that I do have are geographically removed to a place that I vaguely remember. The last time I visited Chile was in 1987, and being 17, I must admit that my focus was narrowed to music, food, girls and drink... not necessarily in that order.
So, where did I come from? I don’t think I mean that in a geographical sense. While certain geographies do likely provide us with a certain genetic mix that is likely adapted to a certain locale, I think that our psychological abilities to adapt are more relevant than our genetic ones. Especially if one is living in a society that shares most of the modern amenities such as housing, running tap water, cable television, and a furnace. Maybe the better question to ask is “how did I get to be where I am today?” or better yet, “What are the experiences that have brought me to be who I am today?”
If it is our experiences that shape us, then our adaptations are likely greatly influenced by those experiences. We adapt to not touching steaming things on a stove because we likely experienced the pain of touching something on a hot stove at some point. We all learn from getting burned, or from watching others get burned. But not every lesson is a negative one. Sometimes we also bask in the afterglow of enlightenment as well.
I am as Canadian as hockey, cougar balloon boots, and Lawrence Gowan. But I’m also as Chilean as empanadas, plastic soccer balls, and Colo-Colo. So, where did I come from? I wonder if these are the feelings that other first generation immigrants experience when they reach a certain age, an age in which one starts to look for their roots in order to be a better anchor for the next generation.
I'm sure that the rooting stories are there, and I am quite confident that with a little coaxing I can convince my memory and my relatives to allow me access to tales long since concealed by time.
So I think I’ll start a recalling of my life thus far, perhaps in attempt to answer the question “Where did I come from?” – that seems like the better question after all. I’ll start with my own recollections first, then fill in the gaps from my family.
Next time… Me in the early 70’s.
Having been the product of a multiple divorced upbringing – I like to think of myself as more statistical than most in that particular category – the stories of my parents are fragmented and foreign. To compound these feelings of misplacement, I am a first generation immigrant to Canada from the bustling metropolis of Santiago Chile. So even the stories that I do have are geographically removed to a place that I vaguely remember. The last time I visited Chile was in 1987, and being 17, I must admit that my focus was narrowed to music, food, girls and drink... not necessarily in that order.
So, where did I come from? I don’t think I mean that in a geographical sense. While certain geographies do likely provide us with a certain genetic mix that is likely adapted to a certain locale, I think that our psychological abilities to adapt are more relevant than our genetic ones. Especially if one is living in a society that shares most of the modern amenities such as housing, running tap water, cable television, and a furnace. Maybe the better question to ask is “how did I get to be where I am today?” or better yet, “What are the experiences that have brought me to be who I am today?”
If it is our experiences that shape us, then our adaptations are likely greatly influenced by those experiences. We adapt to not touching steaming things on a stove because we likely experienced the pain of touching something on a hot stove at some point. We all learn from getting burned, or from watching others get burned. But not every lesson is a negative one. Sometimes we also bask in the afterglow of enlightenment as well.
I am as Canadian as hockey, cougar balloon boots, and Lawrence Gowan. But I’m also as Chilean as empanadas, plastic soccer balls, and Colo-Colo. So, where did I come from? I wonder if these are the feelings that other first generation immigrants experience when they reach a certain age, an age in which one starts to look for their roots in order to be a better anchor for the next generation.
I'm sure that the rooting stories are there, and I am quite confident that with a little coaxing I can convince my memory and my relatives to allow me access to tales long since concealed by time.
So I think I’ll start a recalling of my life thus far, perhaps in attempt to answer the question “Where did I come from?” – that seems like the better question after all. I’ll start with my own recollections first, then fill in the gaps from my family.
Next time… Me in the early 70’s.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
THE “STUFF OF LIFE” STEMS FROM HERE
There are very few issues these days that can compete with the war on terrorism – especially on the campaign platform. Stem cell research is definitely one of them. Should stem cell research be allowed to continue? Should stem cell research be allowed to reach its full potential? The answer to both is a resounding YES! Stem cell research that uses embryonic cells from blastocysts should receive public funding for as long as the cells are being used for therapeutic purposes and not for cloning of human beings. But, let us first answer the question, “what are stem cells and what is stem cell research?”
Human Stem Cells 101
Human stem cells are first seen in the earliest stages of human development. They are the building blocks for the human body and all its systems. Stem cells have the potential to become any cell in the body. As they reproduce, stem cells will either become specialized cells, forming tissue and organs, or continue being stem cells (and thus continuing to reproduce). If there is a “stuff of life”, biologically speaking, stem cells are it.
There are three types of stem cells: totipotent, pluripotent and multipotent. The totipotent stem cells have the full potential to become any cell in the body including all the cells necessary to make a fetus. These are the cells that would be used in human cloning. Pluripotent stem cells have the ability to become any cell in the human body, but they lack the ability to make an entire fetus. They are like a group of construction workers without a foreman. They essentially have the ability to make anything, but they lack the full vision of what they are making. Lastly, Multipotent stem cells are more specialized in their function. Therefore, they can become anything within a specified group. Think of them as specialized workers within an industry. They can perform any job within that industry but not outside of it.
When a human egg is fertilized, it splits into two layers of cells: an outer layer and an inner layer. The outer layer becomes the placenta, while the inner layer becomes the embryo. It is the cells in the inner layer that are harvested as the embryonic stem cells. These cells are typically of the pluripotent variety – especially during the very early stages of development. Once the stem cells are harvested, the embryo is destroyed. The stem cells are then arranged into “lines” that are then made available to researchers. It is easiest to think of the “lines” as the lineage that stems from a single embryo.
It is important to note that the embryos typically used for harvesting come from unused embryos surplused from In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) procedures. In IVF, doctors will typically create up to ten embryos in the event that the first few don’t work out. Once a woman is successfully impregnated, the surplus embryos are usually destroyed. That is, unless the parent(s) decide to donate the embryos to science for the purpose of embryonic stem cell research. As the embryo becomes more complex, the cells begin to specialize more and more in order to maximize their efficiency.
Multipotent stem cells are found in the bone marrow of living humans. In the bone marrow, these stem cells are responsible for the production of red and white blood cells. These cells can actually be transplanted from one person to another – provided there is a match in blood type and other factors – to aid in the curing of certain diseases and blood disorders. For example, leukemia and lymphoma.
The Goal of Stem Cell Research
The goal of stem cell research is to study the process of human development in hopes of gaining a better understanding of why we end up with certain deformities and illnesses such as cancer. Pluripotent stem cells could potentially be engineered to become cells or organs to replace defective or non-functioning ones in living people. In the future, there may not have to be long waits for transplant donors. In the short term, scientists are looking at using these stem cells to bridge transplanted tissue or organs, in order to decrease the possibility of the host body’s rejection of them.
The Socio-Political Points Of View
The points of view on stem cell research are most easily broken down into conservative and liberal points of view.
The conservative point of view stems from the belief in the sanctity of human life – regardless of how far along in development that life may be. The more extreme-right conservatives believe that by destroying the embryos, we are violating that embryos right to life. They view this as being akin to abortion. The less extreme conservatives, however, believe that we should be careful to not put the right to life before the right to live. As long as we are not “farming” embryos so that we can use them in stem cell research, the mid-line conservatives hold that “we are simply taking a potential life and turning into the saving of ‘living’ lives.”
Currently, from a legislative point of view, no public funding will go to stem cell research with new embryonic stem cells. Under the Clinton administration, stem cell research had much more support, and as a result, government funded the harvesting of approximately 60 lines of embryonic stem cells. The current administration put new restrictions on that research once it took office. President Bush believes that the life/death choice has already been made for those 60 “lines” and that they should not go to waste. He is very much against, however, the use of government funding to create any new ones. Interestingly enough, this legislation does not prevent private industry to fund any type of stem cell research.
Recently, the First Lady spoke out against the notion that embryonic stem cell research will offer a cure for illnesses such as Parkinson’s or cancer in the short term. To her credit, she makes a good point. It has been the practice of politicians to tout this issue as something that is on the brink of breakthrough. Scientists, on the other hand, speak not of the promise of what the research will offer in the long term. Instead, they concentrate on the potential that the research has to offer.
The Liberal Point of View
Scientists make a differentiation between the cloning of cells for therapeutic purposes from the cloning of cells for reproductive purposes (i.e. human cloning). In fact, for the most part, they are against human cloning. Their primary concern lies in the source of the funding for future stem cell research. If the majority of the research is privately funded, then the information becomes proprietary to the people funding it. This will more than likely delay any major findings since researchers will not be sharing any of their data with each other until a significant breakthrough is made. If the research were publicly funded, they would be mandated to publicize the results. In doing so, the knowledge base for stem cell research would be much broader, and thus potentially shortening the path to the answers they are all after.
While I agree that there is a need for infrastructure to ensure that stem cell research remains ethical, I believe that to not go ahead with stem cell research, is very naïve on our part. Even if we have not seen any great leaps forward in the research that has been done to date, the fact still remains that stem cells hold the potential for life, and the research that is done with them holds the potential for cures. Having had two parents go through different types of cancer, it would be nice to see a cure. Even though the ways to manage cancer have definitely improved, there is not yet a cure because we do not yet fully understand why it occurs. If stem cell research can allow us to look into the “inner-space” of physiological development, then I don't see why we shouldn't venture forth and explore this like we approach the exploration of our psyches, our oceans, or even outer space. It is time that we started to concern ourselves more with what makes us what we are, instead of worrying so much about who we are in relation to everything else we come in contact with. We should not be putting the right to live before the right to life. The stuff of life stems from here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Human Stem Cells 101
Human stem cells are first seen in the earliest stages of human development. They are the building blocks for the human body and all its systems. Stem cells have the potential to become any cell in the body. As they reproduce, stem cells will either become specialized cells, forming tissue and organs, or continue being stem cells (and thus continuing to reproduce). If there is a “stuff of life”, biologically speaking, stem cells are it.
There are three types of stem cells: totipotent, pluripotent and multipotent. The totipotent stem cells have the full potential to become any cell in the body including all the cells necessary to make a fetus. These are the cells that would be used in human cloning. Pluripotent stem cells have the ability to become any cell in the human body, but they lack the ability to make an entire fetus. They are like a group of construction workers without a foreman. They essentially have the ability to make anything, but they lack the full vision of what they are making. Lastly, Multipotent stem cells are more specialized in their function. Therefore, they can become anything within a specified group. Think of them as specialized workers within an industry. They can perform any job within that industry but not outside of it.
When a human egg is fertilized, it splits into two layers of cells: an outer layer and an inner layer. The outer layer becomes the placenta, while the inner layer becomes the embryo. It is the cells in the inner layer that are harvested as the embryonic stem cells. These cells are typically of the pluripotent variety – especially during the very early stages of development. Once the stem cells are harvested, the embryo is destroyed. The stem cells are then arranged into “lines” that are then made available to researchers. It is easiest to think of the “lines” as the lineage that stems from a single embryo.
It is important to note that the embryos typically used for harvesting come from unused embryos surplused from In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) procedures. In IVF, doctors will typically create up to ten embryos in the event that the first few don’t work out. Once a woman is successfully impregnated, the surplus embryos are usually destroyed. That is, unless the parent(s) decide to donate the embryos to science for the purpose of embryonic stem cell research. As the embryo becomes more complex, the cells begin to specialize more and more in order to maximize their efficiency.
Multipotent stem cells are found in the bone marrow of living humans. In the bone marrow, these stem cells are responsible for the production of red and white blood cells. These cells can actually be transplanted from one person to another – provided there is a match in blood type and other factors – to aid in the curing of certain diseases and blood disorders. For example, leukemia and lymphoma.
The Goal of Stem Cell Research
The goal of stem cell research is to study the process of human development in hopes of gaining a better understanding of why we end up with certain deformities and illnesses such as cancer. Pluripotent stem cells could potentially be engineered to become cells or organs to replace defective or non-functioning ones in living people. In the future, there may not have to be long waits for transplant donors. In the short term, scientists are looking at using these stem cells to bridge transplanted tissue or organs, in order to decrease the possibility of the host body’s rejection of them.
The Socio-Political Points Of View
The points of view on stem cell research are most easily broken down into conservative and liberal points of view.
The conservative point of view stems from the belief in the sanctity of human life – regardless of how far along in development that life may be. The more extreme-right conservatives believe that by destroying the embryos, we are violating that embryos right to life. They view this as being akin to abortion. The less extreme conservatives, however, believe that we should be careful to not put the right to life before the right to live. As long as we are not “farming” embryos so that we can use them in stem cell research, the mid-line conservatives hold that “we are simply taking a potential life and turning into the saving of ‘living’ lives.”
Currently, from a legislative point of view, no public funding will go to stem cell research with new embryonic stem cells. Under the Clinton administration, stem cell research had much more support, and as a result, government funded the harvesting of approximately 60 lines of embryonic stem cells. The current administration put new restrictions on that research once it took office. President Bush believes that the life/death choice has already been made for those 60 “lines” and that they should not go to waste. He is very much against, however, the use of government funding to create any new ones. Interestingly enough, this legislation does not prevent private industry to fund any type of stem cell research.
Recently, the First Lady spoke out against the notion that embryonic stem cell research will offer a cure for illnesses such as Parkinson’s or cancer in the short term. To her credit, she makes a good point. It has been the practice of politicians to tout this issue as something that is on the brink of breakthrough. Scientists, on the other hand, speak not of the promise of what the research will offer in the long term. Instead, they concentrate on the potential that the research has to offer.
The Liberal Point of View
Scientists make a differentiation between the cloning of cells for therapeutic purposes from the cloning of cells for reproductive purposes (i.e. human cloning). In fact, for the most part, they are against human cloning. Their primary concern lies in the source of the funding for future stem cell research. If the majority of the research is privately funded, then the information becomes proprietary to the people funding it. This will more than likely delay any major findings since researchers will not be sharing any of their data with each other until a significant breakthrough is made. If the research were publicly funded, they would be mandated to publicize the results. In doing so, the knowledge base for stem cell research would be much broader, and thus potentially shortening the path to the answers they are all after.
While I agree that there is a need for infrastructure to ensure that stem cell research remains ethical, I believe that to not go ahead with stem cell research, is very naïve on our part. Even if we have not seen any great leaps forward in the research that has been done to date, the fact still remains that stem cells hold the potential for life, and the research that is done with them holds the potential for cures. Having had two parents go through different types of cancer, it would be nice to see a cure. Even though the ways to manage cancer have definitely improved, there is not yet a cure because we do not yet fully understand why it occurs. If stem cell research can allow us to look into the “inner-space” of physiological development, then I don't see why we shouldn't venture forth and explore this like we approach the exploration of our psyches, our oceans, or even outer space. It is time that we started to concern ourselves more with what makes us what we are, instead of worrying so much about who we are in relation to everything else we come in contact with. We should not be putting the right to live before the right to life. The stuff of life stems from here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND
"Now, I’ve heard them say, well, tests, we’re testing too much. If you don’t like to take a test, too bad. Because we need to know, we need to know whether you’re learning."
These are the words of President George W. Bush while speaking in Boston, Massachusetts, shortly after signing the "No Child Left Behind" Act (NCLB) in 2001. The NCLB is a proponent of standardized testing for K-12 children in the United States. It also introduces the concept of accountability for schools – with some pretty severe repercussions for schools that fail to deliver acceptable test results. Naturally, the schools feel that in order to remain compliant, they are better off to prepare students for the tests rather than teach them a curriculum that will cover what is on the tests. A standard, by definition, is a lowest common denominator. So, instead of teaching children in a diverse and nurturing manner, we are fine-tuning them to comply with the bare minimum. This commitment to mediocrity is not what you would expect from the world’s foremost super-power. Buckle up ladies and gentlemen; it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
Let us begin, like all good tales, at the beginning – or at least as far back as is relevant to the point. In April of 1983, a report called "A Nation At Risk; The Imperative for Educational Reform", put out by the U.S. Education Department, raised some very serious flags in regards to the quality of education being given to children in the United States. The report was quick to point out how children in the school system were lacking in some of the basic skills. The report went on to state that these kids are already behind the children in other nations. In 1989, President George Bush Sr. drafted a law that was later signed by President Clinton; it was called Goals 2000. It moved towards educational standards in 13 subject areas. Not without irony, congress rejected the notion of having the law’s implementation overseen by the federal government. They had little interest in administrating this initiative.
In January 2002, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act came into law. The Act had seemingly noble objectives; by 2014, all the school children in the U.S. were to attain 100% proficiency in mathematics and reading. The problem with the act is that the objectives come with some pretty serious repercussions for non-compliance. These repercussions range from some pretty stiff finger-waving as a warning to "improve or else", to getting rid of all the staff and turning the governance of the school over to the state, or a private administrator, in order to make improvements.
The baseline set of metrics for the act came from data culled in the 2001-2002 school year. Initially schools had two years within which to start showing marked improvement in the performance of the student body in the standardized tests. The label of "Adequate Yearly Progress" (AYP) is applied to schools making the grade. Schools that do not make AYP are given the label of "In Need Of Improvement" (INOI). After the grace period, an INOI school is first mandated to provide tutoring to the students not making the grade in hopes of improving their test scores. Failing that, the school is to allow students not making the grade to transfer to a school that labeled as AYP. As if that weren’t enough, the INOI schools must also take money from their own budgets to provide transportation to the AYP School for the students that have been allowed to transfer. If a school continues to not make the grade, the final level of sanction is restructuring. Under restructuring, the school may have: most, if not all, of its staff replaced; the school shut down temporarily to open as a charter school; and/or have the school’s management turned over to the state. Given these strong repercussions, the schools are responding in what seems to be the most logical way; they are tailoring the curriculum to cover what is on the standardized tests.
The introduction of the No Child Left Behind Act leaves us with three major questions: "What will this do to our school system?" "What will this do to our children?" and lastly, "What will this do to our future?" If a large number of schools are choosing to focus their curriculum on the standardized tests rather than a more balanced education, we really are turning the nation’s schools into test prep centers; largely due to schools not wanting to avoid the repercussions of being an INOI school. If we are to project the problem out five years, the educational landscape starts to look quite scary. Gradually, we will be faced with a patchwork of schools, and school systems – some being run by the municipalities, some being run by the state and some being run by private firms. All this new administration of resources will mean a need for new infrastructure – or at least a lot of addition to the old one. With all these schools being administered by different organizations, we also run the risk of further stratifying the educational system.
In addition, the AYP schools will suddenly be faced with increasing percentages of their student body being made up of children that were failing in the INOI schools. Thusly, schools that were once labeled as AYP are suddenly in danger of becoming INOI as more of their resources – and attention – go towards making sure that the failing students improve their test scores to a proficiency level that is acceptable to the legislators. Otherwise, they too run the risk of becoming "In Need Of Improvement."
Our children will also suffer. Sudden changes to a child’s school schedule can be jarring to say the least. Children – especially the younger ones – thrive on schedules that are more structured. If they are forced to suddenly change schools, or if their school is suddenly re-staffed, it will have an effect on them; an effect that may affect their test scores regardless of proficiency. A large number of schools have also begun changing the pedagogical styles being utilized in the classrooms more towards rote, as opposed to comprehension. Instead of teaching in a manner that is more conducive to the conceptual and logical understanding of a subject, students learn in a manner that is primarily based on memorization. Typically, when a person memorizes something, they are memorizing an instance of a concept. I.e. they are memorizing a particular version of a concept given certain variables. The problem arises when you change the variables involved. A "memorizing" person may not be able to abstract the necessary information to reformulate what they have memorized in a useful manner. Although that may sound trivial now, consider that in the future, today’s kids will be the people designing the cars we travel in, the buildings we work in, and the planes we so readily entrust with our lives as we cruise at 30,000 feet. Not so trivial now, is it?
If we consider that a teacher has the ability to give a more accurate assessment of a student’s abilities than any test, a test is then simply a snapshot of understanding and ability. What a test will not tell you is what may have been happening in that student’s life at the time of the test. They may be worried about their home situation; they may have not eaten anything that day – not out of not wanting to but perhaps out of not being able. A single snapshot in time does not give the same breadth of understanding that a moving picture does. A teacher would have a better understanding of the moving picture and therefore a better understanding of a student’s abilities. A child’s worries may have little context to us, but don’t forget that amongst all this learning, they are also trying to define how they fit into the world. By standardizing their learning and assessment, are we not also trying to standardize their place in the world? Some states are not allowing kids to graduate from high school unless they pass a standardized test. But, if we have failed in teaching them, how can we expect them to pass? While I agree that we should not give a high school diploma to anyone that shows up, I do believe that we if we will pass or fail a student based on their output, we should be more aware of the inputs we are preparing them with.
This leaves us looking towards the future. It is important to consider the future of education, as well as the future of our society. Education is, after all, building the world of tomorrow. One of the first things that comes to mind is what will happen once the kids of NCLB reach the post-secondary institutions. Will these children be prepared to suddenly follow a course of study that suddenly forces them to exponentially expand their scope of knowledge and understanding? Will the colleges and universities be prepared to deal with a student body that must switch to learning by concepts from learning by memorization? More students may choose to drop out because they’re just not "getting it", and society will suddenly be further stratified; much like the primary and secondary school systems will be through NCLB. Yes, indeed, it may very well be a bumpy ride.
The NCLB act is sending a clear message, "the primary goal of a school is to boost and maintain test scores. Do it, or else." As parents, grandparents and citizens we should be sending the legislature a message of our own: "The primary goal of education is to prepare the children of the future with the knowledge and means to run the world in an efficient, democratic and peaceful manner. Do it, or else." But none of this will happen unless we all choose to get involved. I don’t mean just signing your name on some form letter to your representative. I mean get involved with every facet of your child’s education at a personal, administrative, and legislative level. Get involved personally by taking more of an interest in what they learn and extending their learning activities beyond what school gives them. If you do not have the time to do this, then get smarter about the environment that you provide for them. I guarantee that a Leapster Interactive Learning System™ will be a better investment than a Nintendo GameBoy™. Immerse them in a passive learning environment so that learning is all around them. If you want to see the results of an immersive learning environment, read Cheaper By The Dozen" by Kenneth Galbreth Jr. and Ernestine Gilbreth Carey – I assure you, it has much more depth than the recently released movie version. In the same way that you worry about what goes into your child’s mouth through nutrition, you should worry about what goes into their minds through education.
You can also make efforts to get involved in the administration and legislation of your children’s education. Get informed about the issues, talk to the teachers, and see how you can help them be champions for our children’s education. And then, sign your name on those form letters that go to the legislators. We must stop thinking of education as a short-run investment. After all, at some point, our very lives may depend on it. The alternative? We may face the world years from now, as it looks upon the state of our society and says, "Feel dumb. It’s Ok."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are the words of President George W. Bush while speaking in Boston, Massachusetts, shortly after signing the "No Child Left Behind" Act (NCLB) in 2001. The NCLB is a proponent of standardized testing for K-12 children in the United States. It also introduces the concept of accountability for schools – with some pretty severe repercussions for schools that fail to deliver acceptable test results. Naturally, the schools feel that in order to remain compliant, they are better off to prepare students for the tests rather than teach them a curriculum that will cover what is on the tests. A standard, by definition, is a lowest common denominator. So, instead of teaching children in a diverse and nurturing manner, we are fine-tuning them to comply with the bare minimum. This commitment to mediocrity is not what you would expect from the world’s foremost super-power. Buckle up ladies and gentlemen; it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
Let us begin, like all good tales, at the beginning – or at least as far back as is relevant to the point. In April of 1983, a report called "A Nation At Risk; The Imperative for Educational Reform", put out by the U.S. Education Department, raised some very serious flags in regards to the quality of education being given to children in the United States. The report was quick to point out how children in the school system were lacking in some of the basic skills. The report went on to state that these kids are already behind the children in other nations. In 1989, President George Bush Sr. drafted a law that was later signed by President Clinton; it was called Goals 2000. It moved towards educational standards in 13 subject areas. Not without irony, congress rejected the notion of having the law’s implementation overseen by the federal government. They had little interest in administrating this initiative.
In January 2002, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) act came into law. The Act had seemingly noble objectives; by 2014, all the school children in the U.S. were to attain 100% proficiency in mathematics and reading. The problem with the act is that the objectives come with some pretty serious repercussions for non-compliance. These repercussions range from some pretty stiff finger-waving as a warning to "improve or else", to getting rid of all the staff and turning the governance of the school over to the state, or a private administrator, in order to make improvements.
The baseline set of metrics for the act came from data culled in the 2001-2002 school year. Initially schools had two years within which to start showing marked improvement in the performance of the student body in the standardized tests. The label of "Adequate Yearly Progress" (AYP) is applied to schools making the grade. Schools that do not make AYP are given the label of "In Need Of Improvement" (INOI). After the grace period, an INOI school is first mandated to provide tutoring to the students not making the grade in hopes of improving their test scores. Failing that, the school is to allow students not making the grade to transfer to a school that labeled as AYP. As if that weren’t enough, the INOI schools must also take money from their own budgets to provide transportation to the AYP School for the students that have been allowed to transfer. If a school continues to not make the grade, the final level of sanction is restructuring. Under restructuring, the school may have: most, if not all, of its staff replaced; the school shut down temporarily to open as a charter school; and/or have the school’s management turned over to the state. Given these strong repercussions, the schools are responding in what seems to be the most logical way; they are tailoring the curriculum to cover what is on the standardized tests.
The introduction of the No Child Left Behind Act leaves us with three major questions: "What will this do to our school system?" "What will this do to our children?" and lastly, "What will this do to our future?" If a large number of schools are choosing to focus their curriculum on the standardized tests rather than a more balanced education, we really are turning the nation’s schools into test prep centers; largely due to schools not wanting to avoid the repercussions of being an INOI school. If we are to project the problem out five years, the educational landscape starts to look quite scary. Gradually, we will be faced with a patchwork of schools, and school systems – some being run by the municipalities, some being run by the state and some being run by private firms. All this new administration of resources will mean a need for new infrastructure – or at least a lot of addition to the old one. With all these schools being administered by different organizations, we also run the risk of further stratifying the educational system.
In addition, the AYP schools will suddenly be faced with increasing percentages of their student body being made up of children that were failing in the INOI schools. Thusly, schools that were once labeled as AYP are suddenly in danger of becoming INOI as more of their resources – and attention – go towards making sure that the failing students improve their test scores to a proficiency level that is acceptable to the legislators. Otherwise, they too run the risk of becoming "In Need Of Improvement."
Our children will also suffer. Sudden changes to a child’s school schedule can be jarring to say the least. Children – especially the younger ones – thrive on schedules that are more structured. If they are forced to suddenly change schools, or if their school is suddenly re-staffed, it will have an effect on them; an effect that may affect their test scores regardless of proficiency. A large number of schools have also begun changing the pedagogical styles being utilized in the classrooms more towards rote, as opposed to comprehension. Instead of teaching in a manner that is more conducive to the conceptual and logical understanding of a subject, students learn in a manner that is primarily based on memorization. Typically, when a person memorizes something, they are memorizing an instance of a concept. I.e. they are memorizing a particular version of a concept given certain variables. The problem arises when you change the variables involved. A "memorizing" person may not be able to abstract the necessary information to reformulate what they have memorized in a useful manner. Although that may sound trivial now, consider that in the future, today’s kids will be the people designing the cars we travel in, the buildings we work in, and the planes we so readily entrust with our lives as we cruise at 30,000 feet. Not so trivial now, is it?
If we consider that a teacher has the ability to give a more accurate assessment of a student’s abilities than any test, a test is then simply a snapshot of understanding and ability. What a test will not tell you is what may have been happening in that student’s life at the time of the test. They may be worried about their home situation; they may have not eaten anything that day – not out of not wanting to but perhaps out of not being able. A single snapshot in time does not give the same breadth of understanding that a moving picture does. A teacher would have a better understanding of the moving picture and therefore a better understanding of a student’s abilities. A child’s worries may have little context to us, but don’t forget that amongst all this learning, they are also trying to define how they fit into the world. By standardizing their learning and assessment, are we not also trying to standardize their place in the world? Some states are not allowing kids to graduate from high school unless they pass a standardized test. But, if we have failed in teaching them, how can we expect them to pass? While I agree that we should not give a high school diploma to anyone that shows up, I do believe that we if we will pass or fail a student based on their output, we should be more aware of the inputs we are preparing them with.
This leaves us looking towards the future. It is important to consider the future of education, as well as the future of our society. Education is, after all, building the world of tomorrow. One of the first things that comes to mind is what will happen once the kids of NCLB reach the post-secondary institutions. Will these children be prepared to suddenly follow a course of study that suddenly forces them to exponentially expand their scope of knowledge and understanding? Will the colleges and universities be prepared to deal with a student body that must switch to learning by concepts from learning by memorization? More students may choose to drop out because they’re just not "getting it", and society will suddenly be further stratified; much like the primary and secondary school systems will be through NCLB. Yes, indeed, it may very well be a bumpy ride.
The NCLB act is sending a clear message, "the primary goal of a school is to boost and maintain test scores. Do it, or else." As parents, grandparents and citizens we should be sending the legislature a message of our own: "The primary goal of education is to prepare the children of the future with the knowledge and means to run the world in an efficient, democratic and peaceful manner. Do it, or else." But none of this will happen unless we all choose to get involved. I don’t mean just signing your name on some form letter to your representative. I mean get involved with every facet of your child’s education at a personal, administrative, and legislative level. Get involved personally by taking more of an interest in what they learn and extending their learning activities beyond what school gives them. If you do not have the time to do this, then get smarter about the environment that you provide for them. I guarantee that a Leapster Interactive Learning System™ will be a better investment than a Nintendo GameBoy™. Immerse them in a passive learning environment so that learning is all around them. If you want to see the results of an immersive learning environment, read Cheaper By The Dozen" by Kenneth Galbreth Jr. and Ernestine Gilbreth Carey – I assure you, it has much more depth than the recently released movie version. In the same way that you worry about what goes into your child’s mouth through nutrition, you should worry about what goes into their minds through education.
You can also make efforts to get involved in the administration and legislation of your children’s education. Get informed about the issues, talk to the teachers, and see how you can help them be champions for our children’s education. And then, sign your name on those form letters that go to the legislators. We must stop thinking of education as a short-run investment. After all, at some point, our very lives may depend on it. The alternative? We may face the world years from now, as it looks upon the state of our society and says, "Feel dumb. It’s Ok."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
INFORMATION IS GOOD. EDUCATION IS BETTER.
In the United States we live in a culture where “more is better”. This is apparent in the size of our vehicles, the size of our typical food portions, and statistically in the size of our waists. When asked the question, “Should restaurants and fast food chains be required to provide their clients with nutritional information of the products they make?”, I feel compelled to reply with, “Well, sure, why not. But what good will having that information do?”. In order to really answer the question we need to back up a little. What good is information that you don’t really know what to do with? A chemical formula for Trinitrotoluene in the hands of someone who knows what to with it could be hazardous. The same formula in the hands of an average person is quite harmless; they may never know they hold the recipe for dynamite. If knowledge is power, then information is that power’s potential.
In 1993 the US Food and Drug Administration brought the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) into effect. According to the NLEA “Food labeling is required for most prepared foods, such as breads, cereals, canned and frozen foods, snacks, desserts, drinks, etc.” This makes the United States one of the countries with the most amount of nutritional information available to them on the shelves. So, why is it that approximately two thirds of adults, and roughly nine million American children are considered to be overweight or obese? It is simply not enough to only provide the data. We need to learn how to interpret it. In the old days we used to only worry about fat and calories. Nowadays, fat is broken down into saturated, unsaturated and trans fat. Calories are broken down into sugars and carbohydrates, and suddenly fiber is the new kid on the block. But at the end of the day, what does it all mean? In the same way that we learn that it’s always “i before e except when followed by c” we should also be taught “protein before sugar except when followed by fiber”. I am 34 years old, and I am still dumbfounded by the nutritional labels on simple things like breakfast cereal. A box of Trix has fewer carbohydrates than a box of Grape-Nuts but also has two less grams of fiber than Grape-Nuts. If I know I weigh 230 lbs how can I place two grams into context? I can clip a fingernail and lose two grams; but how important is two grams of fingernail in the context of my entire body? I have access to the data, but I don’t know what to do with it. The solution comes back to education. Make nutrition the fourth “R” (along with reading, writing and arithmetic).
On Wednesday March 10, 2004 the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly in favor of the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act (a.k.a. Cheeseburger Bill). The bill postulates that people should be responsible for their own choices under the principle of volenti non fit injuria (the voluntary assumption of risk). The underlying assumption here is that we should be able to exercise enough self-restraint to make our nutritional choices with a certain amount of wisdom and moderation. After all, even too much water can be harmful to the average person.
The critics of the cheeseburger bill are up in arms because they feel that this bill absolves the “corporate fat cats” from adhering to any sort of social responsibility. But in the end, what is that saying about our ability to choose? Herein lies the dilemma. We can have the choice and eat ourselves into heart attacks, or we can give up some of the choice and end up healthier. Lord Acton stated, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Absolute choice, it seems, has a tendency to do the same. But, if we can become better informed about the choices that we make, then we can take that power back and “uncorrupt” it. If we fundamentally understood the concept of nutrition and its components we would surely think twice about super-sizing our next fix. Why is it that we can expect high school students to understand how to work a graphing calculator, and yet, not to understand some basic biochemistry when it comes down to how food is broken down in our bodies? The Sonoma County Family Nutrition Task Force in California is beginning work on programs that will attack the problem from three main viewpoints: give the kids healthier choices in vending machines and cafeterias at schools, advise physicians on ways to better “spread the word” about nutrition, and lastly, show the parents how to make nutritional lifestyle changes to instill better eating habits. The task force aims to use preventive measures to decrease the contributing factors to heart disease, diabetes and other diet related illnesses. Don’t put off ‘til tomorrow what you can do today. Education allows us to make better and more informed choices.
While requiring restaurants and fast food chains to provide their clients with nutritional information of the products they make may be a good idea, teaching people what to do with all the nutritional data we throw at them would be much better. We can also benefit from decreasing the amount of excess available to the general public (even if it has to be through legislation). McDonald’s, to their credit, have said that they will be phasing out the super-size value meals by the end of 2004. We will have less choice, but that will be a good thing. We have proven to ourselves that we could not exercise enough self-restraint to make good choices regarding food consumption. As the saying goes, “You can’t talk yourself out of a problem you’ve behaved yourself into”. Then again, with enough nutritional education (and the ability to finally make contextual sense of the data) we may find that those choices we no longer have were never viable anyway. Groups like the Sonoma County Family Nutrition Task Force have right idea. Information is good. Education is better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 1993 the US Food and Drug Administration brought the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) into effect. According to the NLEA “Food labeling is required for most prepared foods, such as breads, cereals, canned and frozen foods, snacks, desserts, drinks, etc.” This makes the United States one of the countries with the most amount of nutritional information available to them on the shelves. So, why is it that approximately two thirds of adults, and roughly nine million American children are considered to be overweight or obese? It is simply not enough to only provide the data. We need to learn how to interpret it. In the old days we used to only worry about fat and calories. Nowadays, fat is broken down into saturated, unsaturated and trans fat. Calories are broken down into sugars and carbohydrates, and suddenly fiber is the new kid on the block. But at the end of the day, what does it all mean? In the same way that we learn that it’s always “i before e except when followed by c” we should also be taught “protein before sugar except when followed by fiber”. I am 34 years old, and I am still dumbfounded by the nutritional labels on simple things like breakfast cereal. A box of Trix has fewer carbohydrates than a box of Grape-Nuts but also has two less grams of fiber than Grape-Nuts. If I know I weigh 230 lbs how can I place two grams into context? I can clip a fingernail and lose two grams; but how important is two grams of fingernail in the context of my entire body? I have access to the data, but I don’t know what to do with it. The solution comes back to education. Make nutrition the fourth “R” (along with reading, writing and arithmetic).
On Wednesday March 10, 2004 the House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly in favor of the Personal Responsibility in Food Consumption Act (a.k.a. Cheeseburger Bill). The bill postulates that people should be responsible for their own choices under the principle of volenti non fit injuria (the voluntary assumption of risk). The underlying assumption here is that we should be able to exercise enough self-restraint to make our nutritional choices with a certain amount of wisdom and moderation. After all, even too much water can be harmful to the average person.
The critics of the cheeseburger bill are up in arms because they feel that this bill absolves the “corporate fat cats” from adhering to any sort of social responsibility. But in the end, what is that saying about our ability to choose? Herein lies the dilemma. We can have the choice and eat ourselves into heart attacks, or we can give up some of the choice and end up healthier. Lord Acton stated, “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Absolute choice, it seems, has a tendency to do the same. But, if we can become better informed about the choices that we make, then we can take that power back and “uncorrupt” it. If we fundamentally understood the concept of nutrition and its components we would surely think twice about super-sizing our next fix. Why is it that we can expect high school students to understand how to work a graphing calculator, and yet, not to understand some basic biochemistry when it comes down to how food is broken down in our bodies? The Sonoma County Family Nutrition Task Force in California is beginning work on programs that will attack the problem from three main viewpoints: give the kids healthier choices in vending machines and cafeterias at schools, advise physicians on ways to better “spread the word” about nutrition, and lastly, show the parents how to make nutritional lifestyle changes to instill better eating habits. The task force aims to use preventive measures to decrease the contributing factors to heart disease, diabetes and other diet related illnesses. Don’t put off ‘til tomorrow what you can do today. Education allows us to make better and more informed choices.
While requiring restaurants and fast food chains to provide their clients with nutritional information of the products they make may be a good idea, teaching people what to do with all the nutritional data we throw at them would be much better. We can also benefit from decreasing the amount of excess available to the general public (even if it has to be through legislation). McDonald’s, to their credit, have said that they will be phasing out the super-size value meals by the end of 2004. We will have less choice, but that will be a good thing. We have proven to ourselves that we could not exercise enough self-restraint to make good choices regarding food consumption. As the saying goes, “You can’t talk yourself out of a problem you’ve behaved yourself into”. Then again, with enough nutritional education (and the ability to finally make contextual sense of the data) we may find that those choices we no longer have were never viable anyway. Groups like the Sonoma County Family Nutrition Task Force have right idea. Information is good. Education is better.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHEESEBURGER BILL
Re: Cheeseburger Bill...
You know what the funny thing is? The economic foundation of supply and demand is quickly forgotten by people as the critics say "the food industry now does not have to worry about public health". If people stopped demanding it, then it would not be profitable to produce such crap (but sometimes nummy) food. The fact is that it's there because we all still ask for it.
Has anyone seen the Phillip Morris Ads on TV pointing to the website that tells you how bad smoking is for you? The thing is, they figure (much like the fast food industry does, I'm sure) that these things are all such a part of our culture that it doesn't matter how bad they tell us the stuff is, we'll still be asking for it and making it profitable for them to sell to us.
I think the government is just saying "Hey people, you can't blame McDonalds for your fat ass because YOU are the one going in there and spending YOUR money on stuff that YOU KNOW is not good for you. Why is it we externalize so much of our responsibility? "It's God's will and the devil made me do it"... Um, OK I'll leave that one for another entry.
Surely they could begin to legislate "vices" out of existence, but then we'd all be up in arms about our freedom to choose being taken away from us.
So, the moral of the story? Hey, you have a choice, so CHOOSE WISELY.
You want democracy? then speak up and let your choices speak for themselves. Otherwise, sit your soon to be fat ass down on the couch and I recommend you start taking an aspirin a day. They'll thin your blood so that you can continue to live with your choices just a little longer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You know what the funny thing is? The economic foundation of supply and demand is quickly forgotten by people as the critics say "the food industry now does not have to worry about public health". If people stopped demanding it, then it would not be profitable to produce such crap (but sometimes nummy) food. The fact is that it's there because we all still ask for it.
Has anyone seen the Phillip Morris Ads on TV pointing to the website that tells you how bad smoking is for you? The thing is, they figure (much like the fast food industry does, I'm sure) that these things are all such a part of our culture that it doesn't matter how bad they tell us the stuff is, we'll still be asking for it and making it profitable for them to sell to us.
I think the government is just saying "Hey people, you can't blame McDonalds for your fat ass because YOU are the one going in there and spending YOUR money on stuff that YOU KNOW is not good for you. Why is it we externalize so much of our responsibility? "It's God's will and the devil made me do it"... Um, OK I'll leave that one for another entry.
Surely they could begin to legislate "vices" out of existence, but then we'd all be up in arms about our freedom to choose being taken away from us.
So, the moral of the story? Hey, you have a choice, so CHOOSE WISELY.
You want democracy? then speak up and let your choices speak for themselves. Otherwise, sit your soon to be fat ass down on the couch and I recommend you start taking an aspirin a day. They'll thin your blood so that you can continue to live with your choices just a little longer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RIGHT-SIZING YOUR EDUCATION
In recent years we have all come to know the cliché “right-sizing”. Sometimes we feel its sting through the loss of employment, and other times we may use it in jest to refer to wardrobes and such. So, how do you “right-size” an education?
After 10 years as a graphic designer and management consultant specializing in web-based training (the former with my own company and the latter with PricewaterhouseCoopers) I decided to leave it all and go back to school for a degree in Architecture. My biggest challenge (aside from the opportunity cost of my income) was to get my mind wrapped around the school mindset once again.
I had attended college before, but at the time I was much more interested in the experience of being at school as opposed to the learning itself. This time it was different. I would be transforming myself from that 90-pound academic weakling to the likes of a Charles Atlas academic Adonis in a scant 5 years. The question was, what would be the most effective way of doing it?
While looking at my options I instinctively went to the University of Arizona. After all, if you want a higher education, you should go to a higher education facility right? Well, not so much. One is quick to ignore the university’s seemingly lesser little brother, the community college.
Since I had been out of the academic education loop for almost 11 years I began to think about how to best manage this change in my lifestyle. University classes are notorious for being large and impersonal. In addition, University is more expensive than community college. Given the fact that I had just “right-sized” my income, cost was definitely an issue. The transition from the workforce to academia was also something I would have to deal with. Suddenly community college did not look so bad.
Once I did more research, I realized that not only was community college cheaper, but classes were also smaller and they had a transfer program to the university into the Architecture program. Suddenly college seemed like the more obvious choice. Since I was in a transfer program, all the classes I would be taking at Pima Community College would transfer directly into my university degree at the university of Arizona. I was sold.
Pima Community College has allowed me to get a good quality education while allowing me to transition from a work mindset to a study one. Not only that, but it has allowed me to do that at approximately half the price for credits that I now don’t have to pay for at the university. I highly recommend community college as a transitioning step from workforce to a new career path. The smaller classes are more hands-on, which allows me to get more of the attention I need as I become a student.
In short, I have a newfound respect for community colleges. What I once thought of as high school with ATMs and a bigger parking lot, has now become an extremely viable way to re-enter a frame of mind that most of us may have had a tendency to enter only once in our lives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After 10 years as a graphic designer and management consultant specializing in web-based training (the former with my own company and the latter with PricewaterhouseCoopers) I decided to leave it all and go back to school for a degree in Architecture. My biggest challenge (aside from the opportunity cost of my income) was to get my mind wrapped around the school mindset once again.
I had attended college before, but at the time I was much more interested in the experience of being at school as opposed to the learning itself. This time it was different. I would be transforming myself from that 90-pound academic weakling to the likes of a Charles Atlas academic Adonis in a scant 5 years. The question was, what would be the most effective way of doing it?
While looking at my options I instinctively went to the University of Arizona. After all, if you want a higher education, you should go to a higher education facility right? Well, not so much. One is quick to ignore the university’s seemingly lesser little brother, the community college.
Since I had been out of the academic education loop for almost 11 years I began to think about how to best manage this change in my lifestyle. University classes are notorious for being large and impersonal. In addition, University is more expensive than community college. Given the fact that I had just “right-sized” my income, cost was definitely an issue. The transition from the workforce to academia was also something I would have to deal with. Suddenly community college did not look so bad.
Once I did more research, I realized that not only was community college cheaper, but classes were also smaller and they had a transfer program to the university into the Architecture program. Suddenly college seemed like the more obvious choice. Since I was in a transfer program, all the classes I would be taking at Pima Community College would transfer directly into my university degree at the university of Arizona. I was sold.
Pima Community College has allowed me to get a good quality education while allowing me to transition from a work mindset to a study one. Not only that, but it has allowed me to do that at approximately half the price for credits that I now don’t have to pay for at the university. I highly recommend community college as a transitioning step from workforce to a new career path. The smaller classes are more hands-on, which allows me to get more of the attention I need as I become a student.
In short, I have a newfound respect for community colleges. What I once thought of as high school with ATMs and a bigger parking lot, has now become an extremely viable way to re-enter a frame of mind that most of us may have had a tendency to enter only once in our lives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This blog is intended to house my opinions and observations on the world as I see it. Although my arguments may come from the more emotional realm I do try to apply as much fact as I have available to me at the time of writing. I am not writing an encyclopedia here, I am writing opinions. Av
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)