I got ≈ six hours of sleep last night, but I'm feeling great today.
President Obama gave a speech yesterday at Benjamin Banneker High School in Washington D.C., which is one of the nation's top performing high schools. In his speech he basically said, "Good job, work hard, America depends on you." I just searched YouTube for the speech, and the video had 69 likes and 111 dislikes. I didn't even watch the whole thing, but from what I saw he didn't wow me by any measuring stick. If you have ever seen the film Waiting for Superman, which a great movie and I would highly recommend to anyone, you would know that Washington D.C. actually has the worst academic ranking of any of the US states. I realize Washington D.C. isn't a state but it should still have more than 12% of its eighth-graders able to read and do math sufficiently. So President Obama is aware that there is massive problem with the school in D.C., yet he plans to give a speech to people that are already succeeding. Hmmm...maybe they don't need a speech? Perhaps Mr. President, you could actually talk about something, instead of praising kids and then just saying other optimistic things. Maybe Mr. President you could talk about what steps you plan to take to make education better in this country instead of talking about how great we already are, which is even worse because we aren't great. We are low to mid range on the global scale.
If you haven't already guessed yet I am a firm believer that those that are academically capable or gifted should have autonomy and freedom whilst going to school. Each person should be allowed to pursue an education both as they are able to and as they see fit. Why do we give credit based on how much time we spend in class? If you know the material you know the material, and if you don't going to class doesn't necessarily equate to knowing anything. Sure people say "It's more about effort than ability" but that's false. I don't want a surgeon to operate on me with the attitude of "I could screw this up, but the compensate for that doubt I have I will try really hard and hopefully this person will be okay," I want them to walk into the operating room with knowledge of their trade and confidence in their ability, not a reliance on overcompensation and an imperfect understanding of the human body.
Success comes not from trying really hard, but from having ability and applying yourself. That's my thesis statement for today. Boom. Roasted.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Another Joyous Blog Post of Which I Am So Happy to Engender for You
A hip, to the hop, a hippety bippety bip bop, systematic mic control....are you ready?
If you're wondering what the above words mean, don't. It probably has something to do with how tired I am, at 6:53 PM. I feel like I should be in a wheelchair and have no teeth, my only source of sustenance being the awful smoothies the nurse brings around. That's an awful thought to have about being old, I just hope I die before I get that way.
Education, education, education. How you never cease to amaze me, and annoy me, as I have to type up new things about you every time. Original and genuine thoughts, put into clear and concise sentences that flow from and the mouth and across the page like a fat heifer on ice skates. Oh, how I do love wacky similes. You can thank Mrs. Kovarik, the English teacher at North Fayette, for teaching me that one.
Education. There it is again. I should treat it as a dirty word, or maybe it just seems like a dirty word to me because it occupies my thought process at least 30% of the time. What does it mean to me? It means books and pencils, boring classes and insufferable teachers, it means to me about the same as oxygen for a drowning man, though at the same time it serves me about as well as a retarded donkey with carpal tunnel syndrome would serve as a stenographer. Going to school is mostly a waste of time. Grades are essentially worthless. Effort doesn't get results it builds self-esteem. Reading material you either don't care about or don't understand doesn't serve any purpose. Having a teacher being completely unexcited and downright boring is a thing I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. Doing memorization drills just before a test doesn't gain you any knowledge it gets a good grade. Degrees are expensive pieces of paper.
Do you like this method? The above is a series of things I find excruciatingly awful, also all of the above are things I have experienced. "This kid just whines about stuff!!" If that's what you're thinking first thing no one made you read this blog, secondly I don't complain. I state my own opinion, but if one's opinion is backed by enough similar opinions, would that not make it true? Of course not, but that would be handy if it worked that way.
Some of the most valuable things I've learned didn't come from a lecture or a worksheet, but just from myself exploring things for what they are. I once read a chapter of a book that was written in Latin. I had about this much exposure to Latin prior to reading it. Despite the lack of prior knowledge I understood it. Obviously I couldn't give an analysis of the text or talk about tone or other fancy concepts we talk about in this class, but I understood it. My old German teacher told me I had a large capacity for language learning, which is all fine and good but I didn't see it. I once read the Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare, not assigned, just wanted to read it. Great stuff. I read Physics books without being told to. This sounds totally nerdy and if there are any eligible young women reading don't be so quick to judge. They say don't judge a book by its cover but everyone does. If you selected one book out of twelve with plain white covers, all written with similar text and a similar number of pages, you wouldn't know whether it was any good or not until you had finished reading it. Don't kid yourself, immediately when you see something you judge it by how it looks. Whether it be a person or a car or a building, absolutely anything at all, you're judging it, willingly or not. With that tidbit out of the way, I can move on. There are books about Einstein on my toilet, as well as other fine literature such as Mental Floss and Uncle John's Bathroom Reader. What am I saying? I'm saying worksheets and quizzes and textbooks and overly-structured lessons and lectures are suffocating, and if you've ever had the experience of being is such a classroom, I relate to you. I learn all sorts of things on my accord, whether it be about history or science or the evolution of language. I feel like when teachers make lesson plans they see where I'm at academically, then start six, eight, even ten chapters back. As if I had forgotten everything I learned last year, they organize an extensive review which is an utter waster of my time. Even in the event that there is something completely and absolutely new, a brand spanking new concept of which I haven't the slightest idea, I have yet to come upon something that genuinely befuddles me. It hasn't happened (Mr. Ayers, if and when you read this, I'd like to make it clear that you're doing a stellar job, keep it up. I must say however Language Arts is my least favorite subject due to it's parameters and rules, its seemingly pompous attitude that it exudes, and its subjectiveness. I disagree with rules on language. Yes, we should have grammar and all that happy hopscotch, but it really doesn't matter to me how imperfect my grammar is, or if I mix big words with slang words. Language is something you're supposed to use to create, and I believe that everything in language is fair game, whether it be scholarly speech or backyard baseball lingo.)
Thing to take away from this post; if you read the whole thing and are wondering about what exactly was said, or if you skipped it all and hoped I would give you a summary: I don't think education is nearly as effective as it could or should be, certainly not in this country anyway. I think that there isn't any way two people of hugely varying academic ability can learn the same thing and be happy, and I believe that to expect a teacher to both cater to those struggling and push those who excel is like asking a person to lick their elbow while making spaghetti outside in the rain with no umbrella. It simply can't be done. Rather I should say that I have yet to see anyone succeed at it.
If you're wondering what the above words mean, don't. It probably has something to do with how tired I am, at 6:53 PM. I feel like I should be in a wheelchair and have no teeth, my only source of sustenance being the awful smoothies the nurse brings around. That's an awful thought to have about being old, I just hope I die before I get that way.
Education, education, education. How you never cease to amaze me, and annoy me, as I have to type up new things about you every time. Original and genuine thoughts, put into clear and concise sentences that flow from and the mouth and across the page like a fat heifer on ice skates. Oh, how I do love wacky similes. You can thank Mrs. Kovarik, the English teacher at North Fayette, for teaching me that one.
Education. There it is again. I should treat it as a dirty word, or maybe it just seems like a dirty word to me because it occupies my thought process at least 30% of the time. What does it mean to me? It means books and pencils, boring classes and insufferable teachers, it means to me about the same as oxygen for a drowning man, though at the same time it serves me about as well as a retarded donkey with carpal tunnel syndrome would serve as a stenographer. Going to school is mostly a waste of time. Grades are essentially worthless. Effort doesn't get results it builds self-esteem. Reading material you either don't care about or don't understand doesn't serve any purpose. Having a teacher being completely unexcited and downright boring is a thing I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy. Doing memorization drills just before a test doesn't gain you any knowledge it gets a good grade. Degrees are expensive pieces of paper.
Do you like this method? The above is a series of things I find excruciatingly awful, also all of the above are things I have experienced. "This kid just whines about stuff!!" If that's what you're thinking first thing no one made you read this blog, secondly I don't complain. I state my own opinion, but if one's opinion is backed by enough similar opinions, would that not make it true? Of course not, but that would be handy if it worked that way.
Some of the most valuable things I've learned didn't come from a lecture or a worksheet, but just from myself exploring things for what they are. I once read a chapter of a book that was written in Latin. I had about this much exposure to Latin prior to reading it. Despite the lack of prior knowledge I understood it. Obviously I couldn't give an analysis of the text or talk about tone or other fancy concepts we talk about in this class, but I understood it. My old German teacher told me I had a large capacity for language learning, which is all fine and good but I didn't see it. I once read the Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare, not assigned, just wanted to read it. Great stuff. I read Physics books without being told to. This sounds totally nerdy and if there are any eligible young women reading don't be so quick to judge. They say don't judge a book by its cover but everyone does. If you selected one book out of twelve with plain white covers, all written with similar text and a similar number of pages, you wouldn't know whether it was any good or not until you had finished reading it. Don't kid yourself, immediately when you see something you judge it by how it looks. Whether it be a person or a car or a building, absolutely anything at all, you're judging it, willingly or not. With that tidbit out of the way, I can move on. There are books about Einstein on my toilet, as well as other fine literature such as Mental Floss and Uncle John's Bathroom Reader. What am I saying? I'm saying worksheets and quizzes and textbooks and overly-structured lessons and lectures are suffocating, and if you've ever had the experience of being is such a classroom, I relate to you. I learn all sorts of things on my accord, whether it be about history or science or the evolution of language. I feel like when teachers make lesson plans they see where I'm at academically, then start six, eight, even ten chapters back. As if I had forgotten everything I learned last year, they organize an extensive review which is an utter waster of my time. Even in the event that there is something completely and absolutely new, a brand spanking new concept of which I haven't the slightest idea, I have yet to come upon something that genuinely befuddles me. It hasn't happened (Mr. Ayers, if and when you read this, I'd like to make it clear that you're doing a stellar job, keep it up. I must say however Language Arts is my least favorite subject due to it's parameters and rules, its seemingly pompous attitude that it exudes, and its subjectiveness. I disagree with rules on language. Yes, we should have grammar and all that happy hopscotch, but it really doesn't matter to me how imperfect my grammar is, or if I mix big words with slang words. Language is something you're supposed to use to create, and I believe that everything in language is fair game, whether it be scholarly speech or backyard baseball lingo.)
Thing to take away from this post; if you read the whole thing and are wondering about what exactly was said, or if you skipped it all and hoped I would give you a summary: I don't think education is nearly as effective as it could or should be, certainly not in this country anyway. I think that there isn't any way two people of hugely varying academic ability can learn the same thing and be happy, and I believe that to expect a teacher to both cater to those struggling and push those who excel is like asking a person to lick their elbow while making spaghetti outside in the rain with no umbrella. It simply can't be done. Rather I should say that I have yet to see anyone succeed at it.
More thoughts...on education, of course
I thought I was going to start this blog with very wide, sweeping concepts that would stimulate your mind and then I would eventually would work into more and more specific concepts and situations, blah blah blah you see how it would go. I am now officially throwing out that idea. Terrible idea. It's easier to talk about specific things as they come along, and by the end of this I will have developed my own understanding and thesis about this subject, and you will walk away with a refreshing and invigorating feeling of mind-expanding awesomeness.
So! What shall we talk about? Education through experience. Sounds wonderful.
My father always told me that their is no teacher like experience. I, understanding these words, thought I understood the concept. Such was not the case. When I was learning how to drive my dad was always fretting, worrying about the next big truck that I would supposedly carelessly slam into. I would ask him, "What are you so worried about?" He explained that because I was new to driving I hadn't been in a situation that required swift and careful action on my part, for example, a moose t-boning me at a stop sign. Would you know what to do in that situation? Probably not, unless you're a big game hunter, then you're almost certainly packing heat, which comes in handy when dealing with the angry, bigger cousin of the deer. Anyways, my dad's point was that experience had taught him the things he knows about driving, as well as an array of other topics. And sure enough, he was right. I didn't find myself in any hairy driving situations until after I got my license. Dad wasn't there to tell me to slow down (which is insufferably annoying by the way), not there to give any advice. Accordingly, I had a few close calls, a few deer ran out in front of me, among other things. I never did put it in the ditch though, which is a thing I think far too many people resort to too quickly.
Sometime at this point I ask a question that is supposed to remind you of the main point of the blog. Education through experience: what does that mean? People learn things by doing them? Really? That actually works? Yes, yes it does Mr. President. I don't know why I put the President in there, but I needed an object in the sentence. In my mind experience is the best kind of education. Where might we apply this? Say you wanted to learn how to play guitar. Reading books about the topic helps, but ultimately how is it that you would learn how to play guitar? By playing guitar, that's how. No matter how much you read and study and take notes about something it doesn't actually stick until you apply it, and with a thing that involves such dexterity as playing guitar, you honestly cannot expect to learn without picking up the guitar and applying your knowledge you already have (or lack thereof) until you start to put things together, and make music.
I think one huge flaw in education today is not only the educators, but the education the educators receive in order to become educators. That sounds confusing. Part of the problem is the way the teachers are taught when they are learning how to be a teacher. You cannot write a textbook on how to teach someone. I'm sorry if you are or know someone who writes textbooks, but it simply cannot be done. Recall from a previous post my point about how education doesn't happen when the teacher teaches, it happens when the student learns. In other words, no matter what measures an instructor takes to give their students the best possible education, learning won't occur without an effort on the student's part. Sometimes effort isn't enough, but that's another conversation. Segueing back to my previous point, the education of teachers is flawed. In talking with my teachers, I have come to the conclusion that if one wants to obtain a degree in education you must go through a series of a hoops and circles consisting of classes about making bulletin boards, to more useful ones such as psychology, for three and a half years. (Ms. O'Connor if you read this I don't mean to make the education program sound miserable, I've never experience it for myself and you should in no way doubt your career choice because the world needs more good teachers like yourself.) THEN comes student teaching, which is supposed to be a chance to apply everything one has learned in the last three years, and an environment in which to see the effectiveness of such techniques learned at college. Now, when some student teachers walk into a classroom for the first time they feel completely at ease, confident that the knowledge instilled in them is more than enough to overcome the trials and tribulations of their first teaching experience. HOWEVER, for some of those same student teachers, they find that they really didn't learn as much as they thought they did, or as much as they should have, and now they are for the first time really thinking about how teaching works, which is a difficult task when you're both thinking about and at least trying to act like your teaching. In the people that I have spoken with, most of their learning occurred during their student teaching. If that happens so often, that is nearly graduated education majors on the cusp of going off and applying for a teaching position learning the most in the final days of their college experience, why don't we do things differently? Why not throw someone that has just started in their pursuit of a degree in education into the classroom, letting them flounder around aimlessly? Obviously these are gross generalizations and I don't mean to say absolutely everyone sucks at teaching the first time they try it, though many do. What would happen if the above were applied in practice? Well I think the most noticeable effect would be that the new-education-major student/teacher would realize that teaching is more than meets the eye, and they will be more susceptible and open to the information that the classes they have to take to graduate, which will cause them to be more driven and ultimately get them to realize the utility of what is being taught (which is the goal of learning anything...if not for utility then for what? Entertainment? I think not). In doing that, this will improve their teaching. If you are thrown into restaurant kitchen with no prior experience (which is something I've literally done) you are either going to learn to keep up with the orders or be fired. It's the classic sink or swim situation. If the same principle were to be applied to an education program, that is throw college students into a real-life classroom with no guidance or instructions, they would most likely fail, causing the children to laugh heartily at their incompetence (complete exaggeration which is a bit mean, but I've seen it happen). If I were in such a position, I would be more than happy to receive advice from my professors, from peers, from other teachers. I would also be more than willing to pay attention to my college professors, who are giving me a solid foundation in which to draw from when I go back to student teach. Doesn't that sound dandy? Why don't we do this?
If in reading this you think, "Wow this guy has no continuity and he is scatter-brained as all get-out" I'm not surprised. It's something I have to work on, the continuity and preciseness of my thoughts.
So! What shall we talk about? Education through experience. Sounds wonderful.
My father always told me that their is no teacher like experience. I, understanding these words, thought I understood the concept. Such was not the case. When I was learning how to drive my dad was always fretting, worrying about the next big truck that I would supposedly carelessly slam into. I would ask him, "What are you so worried about?" He explained that because I was new to driving I hadn't been in a situation that required swift and careful action on my part, for example, a moose t-boning me at a stop sign. Would you know what to do in that situation? Probably not, unless you're a big game hunter, then you're almost certainly packing heat, which comes in handy when dealing with the angry, bigger cousin of the deer. Anyways, my dad's point was that experience had taught him the things he knows about driving, as well as an array of other topics. And sure enough, he was right. I didn't find myself in any hairy driving situations until after I got my license. Dad wasn't there to tell me to slow down (which is insufferably annoying by the way), not there to give any advice. Accordingly, I had a few close calls, a few deer ran out in front of me, among other things. I never did put it in the ditch though, which is a thing I think far too many people resort to too quickly.
Sometime at this point I ask a question that is supposed to remind you of the main point of the blog. Education through experience: what does that mean? People learn things by doing them? Really? That actually works? Yes, yes it does Mr. President. I don't know why I put the President in there, but I needed an object in the sentence. In my mind experience is the best kind of education. Where might we apply this? Say you wanted to learn how to play guitar. Reading books about the topic helps, but ultimately how is it that you would learn how to play guitar? By playing guitar, that's how. No matter how much you read and study and take notes about something it doesn't actually stick until you apply it, and with a thing that involves such dexterity as playing guitar, you honestly cannot expect to learn without picking up the guitar and applying your knowledge you already have (or lack thereof) until you start to put things together, and make music.
I think one huge flaw in education today is not only the educators, but the education the educators receive in order to become educators. That sounds confusing. Part of the problem is the way the teachers are taught when they are learning how to be a teacher. You cannot write a textbook on how to teach someone. I'm sorry if you are or know someone who writes textbooks, but it simply cannot be done. Recall from a previous post my point about how education doesn't happen when the teacher teaches, it happens when the student learns. In other words, no matter what measures an instructor takes to give their students the best possible education, learning won't occur without an effort on the student's part. Sometimes effort isn't enough, but that's another conversation. Segueing back to my previous point, the education of teachers is flawed. In talking with my teachers, I have come to the conclusion that if one wants to obtain a degree in education you must go through a series of a hoops and circles consisting of classes about making bulletin boards, to more useful ones such as psychology, for three and a half years. (Ms. O'Connor if you read this I don't mean to make the education program sound miserable, I've never experience it for myself and you should in no way doubt your career choice because the world needs more good teachers like yourself.) THEN comes student teaching, which is supposed to be a chance to apply everything one has learned in the last three years, and an environment in which to see the effectiveness of such techniques learned at college. Now, when some student teachers walk into a classroom for the first time they feel completely at ease, confident that the knowledge instilled in them is more than enough to overcome the trials and tribulations of their first teaching experience. HOWEVER, for some of those same student teachers, they find that they really didn't learn as much as they thought they did, or as much as they should have, and now they are for the first time really thinking about how teaching works, which is a difficult task when you're both thinking about and at least trying to act like your teaching. In the people that I have spoken with, most of their learning occurred during their student teaching. If that happens so often, that is nearly graduated education majors on the cusp of going off and applying for a teaching position learning the most in the final days of their college experience, why don't we do things differently? Why not throw someone that has just started in their pursuit of a degree in education into the classroom, letting them flounder around aimlessly? Obviously these are gross generalizations and I don't mean to say absolutely everyone sucks at teaching the first time they try it, though many do. What would happen if the above were applied in practice? Well I think the most noticeable effect would be that the new-education-major student/teacher would realize that teaching is more than meets the eye, and they will be more susceptible and open to the information that the classes they have to take to graduate, which will cause them to be more driven and ultimately get them to realize the utility of what is being taught (which is the goal of learning anything...if not for utility then for what? Entertainment? I think not). In doing that, this will improve their teaching. If you are thrown into restaurant kitchen with no prior experience (which is something I've literally done) you are either going to learn to keep up with the orders or be fired. It's the classic sink or swim situation. If the same principle were to be applied to an education program, that is throw college students into a real-life classroom with no guidance or instructions, they would most likely fail, causing the children to laugh heartily at their incompetence (complete exaggeration which is a bit mean, but I've seen it happen). If I were in such a position, I would be more than happy to receive advice from my professors, from peers, from other teachers. I would also be more than willing to pay attention to my college professors, who are giving me a solid foundation in which to draw from when I go back to student teach. Doesn't that sound dandy? Why don't we do this?
If in reading this you think, "Wow this guy has no continuity and he is scatter-brained as all get-out" I'm not surprised. It's something I have to work on, the continuity and preciseness of my thoughts.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
No leet speak :(
I feel like I have been skimping in my blog posts. I have a plethora of ideas and conjectures to share with you, and I've only scratched the surface. Most of these thoughts in my head, yes they could be summed in a series of single sentence posts but that is no fun for me. That and I would receive a terrible grade. I shall end this filibustering paragraph now.
Education simply doesn't work in this country. Sure we go to school and learn 2 + 2 = 4, yes we know how to balance our checkbook (probably), but we haven't the slightest idea how the universe the works, we don't know anything about servicing a computer, or figuring out ridiculous calculus. The vast majority of students will most likely have a great feeling of dread after reading the previous sentence, which is part of the problem. I realized something today, I have gained perspective as to education is this country and I'm eager to share with you. Part of the problem is the government, an equal portion of blame can be placed on teachers, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah! I believe that one of the main faults in education, and quite possibly the most fatal, is the cultural attitude people have toward education. Education really doesn't carry the same weight as it used to. My parents certainly didn't seem to think I wanted to go anywhere in life, they never talked with me about what I wanted to do after high school, after college, for the rest of my life. They never asked me (in a serious conversation anyway) what my dream job was/is. They never asked me where I wanted to live, how I wanted to live, goals, dreams, aspirations, nadda. Don't get me wrong, I love my parents, and they obviously love me in some degree if they're willing to live away from each other for me to get a better education. However, I think their attitude was, "He'll figure it out" or "This school is good enough" or "$14,000 is enough to give him a degree" or "He can have a comfortable living with the resources we've provided him". Again, I don't mean to sound ungrateful or greedy, but honestly, I was very, very, unhappy with how my parents thought of education. In case you haven't guessed already, I have my eyes set pretty high in this world. I plan to go places, do things, meet people and experience a life all my own, not a manufactured cookie-cutter product that society would have us be content with. My parents didn't expect anything extraordinary of me, and accordingly, they didn't go to any extraordinary measures, or even half-hearted measures, to give me a better opportunity to give myself a better opportunity. I was the one that instigated the whole process of moving, I was the one that was dissatisfied with my education, not them.
What's the point? Well ask yourself, do your parents encourage not just to keep up with school, but to excel? Do they work hard to ensure you have a chance at exceptional opportunities? I think I may be asking the wrong audience here, because Kennedy is a good school. Obviously if your parents live here they are at least aware you're receiving a quality education, if not intentionally so because they do care about your future. My point is that I think too many parents in this country treat education too lightly. I am not a fan. I am actually the opposite of a fan. What do you call that? An anti-fan.
Education simply doesn't work in this country. Sure we go to school and learn 2 + 2 = 4, yes we know how to balance our checkbook (probably), but we haven't the slightest idea how the universe the works, we don't know anything about servicing a computer, or figuring out ridiculous calculus. The vast majority of students will most likely have a great feeling of dread after reading the previous sentence, which is part of the problem. I realized something today, I have gained perspective as to education is this country and I'm eager to share with you. Part of the problem is the government, an equal portion of blame can be placed on teachers, blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah! I believe that one of the main faults in education, and quite possibly the most fatal, is the cultural attitude people have toward education. Education really doesn't carry the same weight as it used to. My parents certainly didn't seem to think I wanted to go anywhere in life, they never talked with me about what I wanted to do after high school, after college, for the rest of my life. They never asked me (in a serious conversation anyway) what my dream job was/is. They never asked me where I wanted to live, how I wanted to live, goals, dreams, aspirations, nadda. Don't get me wrong, I love my parents, and they obviously love me in some degree if they're willing to live away from each other for me to get a better education. However, I think their attitude was, "He'll figure it out" or "This school is good enough" or "$14,000 is enough to give him a degree" or "He can have a comfortable living with the resources we've provided him". Again, I don't mean to sound ungrateful or greedy, but honestly, I was very, very, unhappy with how my parents thought of education. In case you haven't guessed already, I have my eyes set pretty high in this world. I plan to go places, do things, meet people and experience a life all my own, not a manufactured cookie-cutter product that society would have us be content with. My parents didn't expect anything extraordinary of me, and accordingly, they didn't go to any extraordinary measures, or even half-hearted measures, to give me a better opportunity to give myself a better opportunity. I was the one that instigated the whole process of moving, I was the one that was dissatisfied with my education, not them.
What's the point? Well ask yourself, do your parents encourage not just to keep up with school, but to excel? Do they work hard to ensure you have a chance at exceptional opportunities? I think I may be asking the wrong audience here, because Kennedy is a good school. Obviously if your parents live here they are at least aware you're receiving a quality education, if not intentionally so because they do care about your future. My point is that I think too many parents in this country treat education too lightly. I am not a fan. I am actually the opposite of a fan. What do you call that? An anti-fan.
Monday, September 19, 2011
4n07h3r (00£-£00|{1n9 h34Ð1n9
If you can figure out what the title says (no cheating!) you deserve a high-five.
I recently saw the film A Beautiful Mind, and I loved every minute of it. In the film, John Nash, a famous mathematician that is troubled by schizophrenia, experiences the trials and tribulations of life without the slightest idea that the most important people and the greatest moments in his life never happened. He does get his doctorate and such, and he's aware that he won a Nobel Prize, but the other awesome stuff never happened. I think you'll just have to watch the film.
Glossing over the specifics of the story, let's talk about Nash as an academic and a professor. Nash's professor at Carnegie Tech wrote a letter of recommendation consisting of a single sentence, "This man is a genius." Nash was accepted to both Princeton and Harvard, but he went to Princeton because they made a more lucrative offer. (The following information is based on the film, which is based on Nash's life, so the following information is probably true but there is no cold, hard facts to prove it.) In the film Nash is a professor at the age of 32. During his first lesson, he throws his textbook in the trash and explains the frivolity of homework and even that of coming to class. He then writes what can can only be an incredibly difficult math problem on the board and adjourns the lesson. Some people would call him a terrible teacher. But, seeing as Nash never went to class himself or believed in studying books, I think he must have been doing something right. Whether or not his methods work for everyone is obviously up for debate. I personally would've loved him as a teacher and enjoyed every minute I was in his class. This was a man that essentially taught himself the inner workings of game theory (look it up if you don't know what it means), and earned several degrees and a Nobel Prize for it. He was not a man that had been taught how to teach, basically given a cookie-cutter method in which to force his students' minds and learning curves.
What am I driving at? I am introducing the topic of the teacher, for this will be a very long discussion. The reason I must end this post is because I'm tired, and my sleep is more important than this blog. More reading will be coming, I assure you. Boom. Roasted again.
I recently saw the film A Beautiful Mind, and I loved every minute of it. In the film, John Nash, a famous mathematician that is troubled by schizophrenia, experiences the trials and tribulations of life without the slightest idea that the most important people and the greatest moments in his life never happened. He does get his doctorate and such, and he's aware that he won a Nobel Prize, but the other awesome stuff never happened. I think you'll just have to watch the film.
Glossing over the specifics of the story, let's talk about Nash as an academic and a professor. Nash's professor at Carnegie Tech wrote a letter of recommendation consisting of a single sentence, "This man is a genius." Nash was accepted to both Princeton and Harvard, but he went to Princeton because they made a more lucrative offer. (The following information is based on the film, which is based on Nash's life, so the following information is probably true but there is no cold, hard facts to prove it.) In the film Nash is a professor at the age of 32. During his first lesson, he throws his textbook in the trash and explains the frivolity of homework and even that of coming to class. He then writes what can can only be an incredibly difficult math problem on the board and adjourns the lesson. Some people would call him a terrible teacher. But, seeing as Nash never went to class himself or believed in studying books, I think he must have been doing something right. Whether or not his methods work for everyone is obviously up for debate. I personally would've loved him as a teacher and enjoyed every minute I was in his class. This was a man that essentially taught himself the inner workings of game theory (look it up if you don't know what it means), and earned several degrees and a Nobel Prize for it. He was not a man that had been taught how to teach, basically given a cookie-cutter method in which to force his students' minds and learning curves.
What am I driving at? I am introducing the topic of the teacher, for this will be a very long discussion. The reason I must end this post is because I'm tired, and my sleep is more important than this blog. More reading will be coming, I assure you. Boom. Roasted again.
Sunday, September 18, 2011
£337 717£3
I have only 51 words to go!
Quick review: we've asked the question pertaining as why we are educated, either willingly or against our will; I've given a quick story about my newness to Kennedy, and we've defined education. I think it also noteworthy that there is one big question mark around all of this, so if you find yourself reading an exceptionally long and elaborate exploration of a seemingly frivolous tidbit, you've been warned.
My apologies if the length of this post doesn't satisfy your hunger for new writing. Seeing as how many followers I have, I'm really feeling the pressure to produce quality, blog-appetite-satisfying posts.
NOW, let's get to talking about something. As I mentioned in "A starting point" I will begin our journey with the subject of the teacher. What exactly is a teacher? One who teaches (or one who learns, as in the phrase, "Would you learn to tie my shoes?" makes me cringe)? That raises the question as to what specifically teaching is. Is it standing behind a lectern delivering a speech? Is it playing a card game? Perhaps a simple discussion? I believe that Albert Einstein says it best:
Quick review: we've asked the question pertaining as why we are educated, either willingly or against our will; I've given a quick story about my newness to Kennedy, and we've defined education. I think it also noteworthy that there is one big question mark around all of this, so if you find yourself reading an exceptionally long and elaborate exploration of a seemingly frivolous tidbit, you've been warned.
My apologies if the length of this post doesn't satisfy your hunger for new writing. Seeing as how many followers I have, I'm really feeling the pressure to produce quality, blog-appetite-satisfying posts.
NOW, let's get to talking about something. As I mentioned in "A starting point" I will begin our journey with the subject of the teacher. What exactly is a teacher? One who teaches (or one who learns, as in the phrase, "Would you learn to tie my shoes?" makes me cringe)? That raises the question as to what specifically teaching is. Is it standing behind a lectern delivering a speech? Is it playing a card game? Perhaps a simple discussion? I believe that Albert Einstein says it best:
“I never teach my pupils; I only attempt to provide the conditions in which they can learn.”
Friday, September 16, 2011
A starting point
In the last post I think I provided a lot of personal information, without an overabundance of structure or even hints as to what exactly I will be writing about. Obviously epicenter of the .
Education is a vague topic. Define education right now. I'll give you eight seconds. Time's up. What did you come up with? If you didn't cheat by googling (yes that is a word now) it you may have found yourself struggling to find the right words. If you simply thought, "Education = school" you aren't necessarily wrong, but you certainly right in the purest sense either. Wikipedia (I really don't give a rip if you think Wikipedia is the end of scholarly research so you can save your opinion) defines education as "any act or experience that has a formative effect on the mind, character, or physical ability of an individual. In its technical sense, education is the process by which society deliberately transmits its accumulated knowledge, skills, and values from one generation to another."
When you read the first part of that definition it very well may have not made a lot of sense to you. This is perfectly fine, it didn't click immediately with me either (may or may not have something to do with how dehydrated I am right now, nothing a little H²O can't fix). In the first definition, they're saying that anything you could possibly learn or experience via any vehicle at all is considered education. A familiar example would be a young child being hit by a car because he was standing in the street. If said child has any working brain cells, and assuming he survives the hit-and-run, he will have learned that standing in the street hurts. This will predictably shape his decisions in the future, when, say, he's crossing the street. The second part of the definition should be familiar to all of us so I don't have to come up with an example that walks the line between horrifying and funny.
Throughout the year I am hoping to cover a few specific areas within education: the student, the teacher, the roles of each of the former, and government's effect on education. I am in no way limited to the specific discussions listed. I have lots of different tidbits to talk about, but listing them all would be tiresome for me and boring for you to read. Boom. Roasted.
Education is a vague topic. Define education right now. I'll give you eight seconds. Time's up. What did you come up with? If you didn't cheat by googling (yes that is a word now) it you may have found yourself struggling to find the right words. If you simply thought, "Education = school" you aren't necessarily wrong, but you certainly right in the purest sense either. Wikipedia (I really don't give a rip if you think Wikipedia is the end of scholarly research so you can save your opinion) defines education as "any act or experience that has a formative effect on the mind, character, or physical ability of an individual. In its technical sense, education is the process by which society deliberately transmits its accumulated knowledge, skills, and values from one generation to another."
When you read the first part of that definition it very well may have not made a lot of sense to you. This is perfectly fine, it didn't click immediately with me either (may or may not have something to do with how dehydrated I am right now, nothing a little H²O can't fix). In the first definition, they're saying that anything you could possibly learn or experience via any vehicle at all is considered education. A familiar example would be a young child being hit by a car because he was standing in the street. If said child has any working brain cells, and assuming he survives the hit-and-run, he will have learned that standing in the street hurts. This will predictably shape his decisions in the future, when, say, he's crossing the street. The second part of the definition should be familiar to all of us so I don't have to come up with an example that walks the line between horrifying and funny.
Throughout the year I am hoping to cover a few specific areas within education: the student, the teacher, the roles of each of the former, and government's effect on education. I am in no way limited to the specific discussions listed. I have lots of different tidbits to talk about, but listing them all would be tiresome for me and boring for you to read. Boom. Roasted.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Why do we go to school?
To get a good job, as Lewis Black would have you believe.
The answer to this question obviously varies from person to person, because we all have different goals and aspirations in life. Predictably, and rather lazily I will explain my thoughts and reasons, which is another way of saying why one would pursue an educatoin.
Some enjoy going to school, some despise it, and some others have no choice because they're being pressured into straight A's by their snooty parents and anything but would result in a catastrophic family crisis. I personally enjoy school, parts of it anyway. Throughout this blog I will be explaining every nook and cranny of my thoughts about school via my own experience in school and draw from research of others.
Now, a personal story, written by me, about me, for you to read. I am new to Kennedy (as some of you know already). I moved here literally just before school started. The whole reason I'm here at Kennedy is purely for a superior education. My family still lives where they have for the past ten years, on a small farm outside Clermont, Iowa. I used to go to North Fayette High School in West Union, Iowa. You've probably never heard of either of those places, but West Union is about an hour and a half north of here. When I was seven years old my family and I moved from Independence, where I was born, to the farm I just recently moved from. I started second grade in West Union, and went through North Fayette Schools until the end of my sophomore year. During my sophomore year I basically told my parents that North Fayette wasn't any place for me anymore and I wanted to go to Kennedy. Neither of them were shocked to hear this; I mean to say yes they were a bit surprised to hear that my school of choice was Kennedy, but they were not surprised at my growing resentment of North Fayette. And their reaction honestly was a shock to me. I thought I would have to beg and plead and coerce and persuade to get this to happen but it was a breeze. To make a long story shorter my mother rented an apartment here in Cedar Rapids and she stays with me three nights a week. Here I am, essentially on my own, in a town that is mostly unknown to me, planning to attend a high school in which I know no one but one person (Wiatt Cariveau is his name, if anyone cares to know. I actually talked with him about Kennedy, so I guess you could say he recruited me in a sense). What does this story mean? To you personally it could mean next to nothing, which is fine. To this blog it is giving a very deep personal connection to my first topic: education. I have been and still often find myself hugely angry with a lot of things educators do today. The previous sentence says everything as to why exactly I left my old school, my old friends, my old teachers to come here; I was pissed off at North Fayette for their lack of excellence in education. If that doesn't create the synapse in your head that says, "This kid really cares about his education" I don't have another method to illustrate that.
While you're reading this I don't intend for you to feel like I'm attacking you with my words. Yes, my words may seem poignant at times, maybe even cynical. I'd like to make clear that my attitude towards education is optimistic. I would like to think the best about going school, my teachers, and my classmates. I would like to enjoy learning new things and exploring previously uncharted expanses of the academic cosmos. If I didn't care about those things I would've stayed where I was, going through the same motions, experiencing the same mediocre education that is North Fayette. If I were to list the ways that Kennedy far exceeds North Fayette I'd have a list out the door. I actually did write down pros and cons once and I had a page and a half of pros before I could think of ten cons.
This is the stuff I care about. And though Lewis Black has a good point, there are many, many more arguments that lie at the crux of the question, "Why do we go to school?"
The answer to this question obviously varies from person to person, because we all have different goals and aspirations in life. Predictably, and rather lazily I will explain my thoughts and reasons, which is another way of saying why one would pursue an educatoin.
Some enjoy going to school, some despise it, and some others have no choice because they're being pressured into straight A's by their snooty parents and anything but would result in a catastrophic family crisis. I personally enjoy school, parts of it anyway. Throughout this blog I will be explaining every nook and cranny of my thoughts about school via my own experience in school and draw from research of others.
Now, a personal story, written by me, about me, for you to read. I am new to Kennedy (as some of you know already). I moved here literally just before school started. The whole reason I'm here at Kennedy is purely for a superior education. My family still lives where they have for the past ten years, on a small farm outside Clermont, Iowa. I used to go to North Fayette High School in West Union, Iowa. You've probably never heard of either of those places, but West Union is about an hour and a half north of here. When I was seven years old my family and I moved from Independence, where I was born, to the farm I just recently moved from. I started second grade in West Union, and went through North Fayette Schools until the end of my sophomore year. During my sophomore year I basically told my parents that North Fayette wasn't any place for me anymore and I wanted to go to Kennedy. Neither of them were shocked to hear this; I mean to say yes they were a bit surprised to hear that my school of choice was Kennedy, but they were not surprised at my growing resentment of North Fayette. And their reaction honestly was a shock to me. I thought I would have to beg and plead and coerce and persuade to get this to happen but it was a breeze. To make a long story shorter my mother rented an apartment here in Cedar Rapids and she stays with me three nights a week. Here I am, essentially on my own, in a town that is mostly unknown to me, planning to attend a high school in which I know no one but one person (Wiatt Cariveau is his name, if anyone cares to know. I actually talked with him about Kennedy, so I guess you could say he recruited me in a sense). What does this story mean? To you personally it could mean next to nothing, which is fine. To this blog it is giving a very deep personal connection to my first topic: education. I have been and still often find myself hugely angry with a lot of things educators do today. The previous sentence says everything as to why exactly I left my old school, my old friends, my old teachers to come here; I was pissed off at North Fayette for their lack of excellence in education. If that doesn't create the synapse in your head that says, "This kid really cares about his education" I don't have another method to illustrate that.
While you're reading this I don't intend for you to feel like I'm attacking you with my words. Yes, my words may seem poignant at times, maybe even cynical. I'd like to make clear that my attitude towards education is optimistic. I would like to think the best about going school, my teachers, and my classmates. I would like to enjoy learning new things and exploring previously uncharted expanses of the academic cosmos. If I didn't care about those things I would've stayed where I was, going through the same motions, experiencing the same mediocre education that is North Fayette. If I were to list the ways that Kennedy far exceeds North Fayette I'd have a list out the door. I actually did write down pros and cons once and I had a page and a half of pros before I could think of ten cons.
This is the stuff I care about. And though Lewis Black has a good point, there are many, many more arguments that lie at the crux of the question, "Why do we go to school?"
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)