In the past two weeks, all of the graduation festivities for New Trier's seniors have been in action. Starting off, the most popular school newspaper of the year came out. It was the issue which declared every senior's next four years. The issue is a New Trier tradition which advertises and shows off its graduates. Going through the pages and searching for the most selective schools names seemed to be the mindset of many juniors. I started to wonder whether this advertisement was a theme specific to New Trier or whether it is more of an American theme.
After some quick research, the statistics that I came across were quite literally jaw dropping. According to www.classroom.synonym.com, in 2011 68.3% of high school graduates enrolled in college but nearly half of those kids were enrolled in a community college. PBS then revealed to me that only 40% of working-aged Americans hold a college degree. In striking contrast to these stats was our school newspaper. Only one (two if I missed one) graduate is attending our local community college, Oakton where as everyone else will be attending college, university, or taking a gap year.
It turns out that the college binder sitting on my desk which reads; "College is not a prize to be won, it is a match to be met" is truly a New Trier or maybe on a more general scale, an upper class motto (see my education inequality blogpost). This phrase has always bothered me, ever since my parents placed it on my nightstand. College to me is a prize to be won, it is what we work towards but that in itself is an upper class theme. Many Americans do not have the money to attend such selective pricy institutions. Growing up, college has always been an expectation. Dinners and run ins with family friends--the question nearly always arises; "where do you want to go to school?" or "where are you looking?" The New Trier theme of college expectations leads to further questions of class divides.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/percentage-americans-college-degrees-rises-paying-degrees-tops-financial-challenges/
Saturday, May 31, 2014
Handwriting is Lost in Surging Technology
This morning, the front page of the
science section in the New York Times sitting on my kitchen table caught me by
surprise. The issue that I had written about just a month ago turns out to be a
bigger deal than I previously believed. “What’s Lost as Handwriting Fades” by
Maria Konnikova pays particular attention to the difference between handwriting
versus typing but also addresses cursive versus print. Through a variety of
studies, Konnikova concludes that writing by hand increases the proficiency and
speed of reading and the ability to retain information. Further research
revealed that the messiness of handwriting, the difference of each letter you
write, triggers the memory. In addition to the benefit to all people, it can
particularly benefit kids with dysgraphia and alexia, diseases affecting the
brain and ability to read and write. Since cursive and print affect different
areas of the brain, each are beneficial in their own way.
Contrasting to the beneficial affects of
handwriting are the negatives of typing. According to Konnikova, typing “may
diminish our ability to process new information”. This goes to say that taking
notes by hand is much more beneficial than typing them. When I tied this into
New Trier, it is interesting to see how iPads are being incorporated into the
school. Many kids are already using their iPads to take notes and next year,
every student will have the option. While the technology advance seems to be
what New Trier is striving for, is it really worth it to take away the benefits
of hand writing?
The image that Konnikova chose to put with her article (left) was very interesting because of the color changes and the overlapping. The black and white side at first seemed to be the equivalent to the keyboard but the actual keyboard in the photo over laps both the black and white side and the color side. In addition to this, the print is on the black and white side where as the cursive is on the color side. The division is clear but what is its purpose? Where do print, cursive, and typing all lie?
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/03/science/whats-lost-as-handwriting-fades.html?_r=0
Thursday, May 22, 2014
When the Legend is Discovered to be a Myth
Last week the Stradivarius McDonald was sold at £27,000,000. For those who do not know, a Stradivarius is a string instrument made by Antonia Stradivarius, born in Italy in 1644. The instruments, only an estimated 650 of which still exist, are said to be the best instruments in the world. Typically, Strads are either played by the best of the best or owned by wealthy collectors since they are so costly. Internationally renowned viola soloist, David Aaron Carpenter, was chosen to play the McDonald for the auction.
After speaking with David about his experience playing the McDonald(view here), I realized that his feedback was expected considering it was a Strad. He raved about the tone and the quality of the viola; all he wanted to do was play the fine instrument again. I did not doubt his opinion at all and I still do not but after hearing NPR's raido story, "Is a Strad Just a Violin?", I started to think a bit more critically on whether the age of an instrument determines its quality and on a broader scale, how much of something's price and name influence the actual quality.
When shopping for a new violin, the age of the instrument is a huge factor, or at least it has been up until now. The older the better, and typically the more expensive. As I spent my time shopping for a new viola today, the oldest one from the 1700's turned out to be the least attractive in almost all of its aspects. In NPR's study, they did a blind test on master musicians by giving them a mask which blurred their vision and sense of smell and having them play many different instruments, some modern and some old. In the end, the majority of the musicians preferred a modern instrument over the Stradivarius and guessed which were old and new incorrectly.
This was shocking to me and very hard to believe. As the radio story speaker addressed, it is a disappointing study that musicians don't want to hear. Although it is relieving that you don't have to spend $45,000,000 to get the best instrument you can, the legend of Strads is something that you want to believe in and I know that personally I still do. Because I know that many people don't particularly care about string instruments, the study can be put into a different setting with almost anything. If a name is passed around so frequently and the price is so high it is nearly impossible to prevent that from influencing you're own bias. How much of what we believe to be true comes from our own opinion versus the legends and prices of items?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014/05/09/310447054/episode-538-is-a-stradivarius-just-a-violin
 |
| Stradivarius |
After speaking with David about his experience playing the McDonald(view here), I realized that his feedback was expected considering it was a Strad. He raved about the tone and the quality of the viola; all he wanted to do was play the fine instrument again. I did not doubt his opinion at all and I still do not but after hearing NPR's raido story, "Is a Strad Just a Violin?", I started to think a bit more critically on whether the age of an instrument determines its quality and on a broader scale, how much of something's price and name influence the actual quality.
When shopping for a new violin, the age of the instrument is a huge factor, or at least it has been up until now. The older the better, and typically the more expensive. As I spent my time shopping for a new viola today, the oldest one from the 1700's turned out to be the least attractive in almost all of its aspects. In NPR's study, they did a blind test on master musicians by giving them a mask which blurred their vision and sense of smell and having them play many different instruments, some modern and some old. In the end, the majority of the musicians preferred a modern instrument over the Stradivarius and guessed which were old and new incorrectly.
This was shocking to me and very hard to believe. As the radio story speaker addressed, it is a disappointing study that musicians don't want to hear. Although it is relieving that you don't have to spend $45,000,000 to get the best instrument you can, the legend of Strads is something that you want to believe in and I know that personally I still do. Because I know that many people don't particularly care about string instruments, the study can be put into a different setting with almost anything. If a name is passed around so frequently and the price is so high it is nearly impossible to prevent that from influencing you're own bias. How much of what we believe to be true comes from our own opinion versus the legends and prices of items?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014/05/09/310447054/episode-538-is-a-stradivarius-just-a-violin
Sunday, May 18, 2014
Two Secret Societies
This past weekend I spent several hours listening to the motivating and congratulatory speeches at my brother's graduation from the University of Madison Wisconsin. The speeches were well done but it was hard to stop from zoning out--that is until I heard a phrase that we had been discussing in my American Studies class. One professor who happened to be an alumni told the class that graduating from the University of Wisconsin Madison and becoming an alumni is like "joining a secret society". While the professor did not say anything more on the matter of "secret societies", I could not help but draw some parallels to the Great Gatsby.
One of the characters, Daisy Buchanan is and has been in the top tier of the upperclass for her whole life. When she is talking with her cousin, Nick, who is upperclass but not to the extent she is, she "asserted her membership in a rather distinguished secret society" (17). As a class, we came to the conclusion that this secret society consists of old money, people who come from generations of wealth. The secret society in the Great Gatsby is one that Gatsby himself is never able to become a part of no matter how many parties he threw, how much money he earned and money he spent, or how well he dressed--he was never able to quite find his way in.
Gatsby's failure of attempting to make it into the secret society is evidence that this secret society and the Wisconsin Alumni secret society are two different ones. Even though Gatsby attended Oxford, he could not join yet all you need to do to become apart of the Wisconsin society is to graduate from the school. Although the eliteness between the two societies differ, they also share much in common. The most obvious aspect in the two is money. To be in the old money secret society, you must come from generations of wealth. To join the Wisconsin society, you need the money to pay for four years of tuition. The Wisconsin Alumni secret society also accepts people who don't come from money by granting scholarships where as old money cannot be given and cannot be earned.
It is clear that the two societies, Wisconsin Alumni and Old Money are two distinct societies but where do they cross? Is the Wisconsin Alumni secret society strictly Wisconsin or is it a college graduate secret society?
One of the characters, Daisy Buchanan is and has been in the top tier of the upperclass for her whole life. When she is talking with her cousin, Nick, who is upperclass but not to the extent she is, she "asserted her membership in a rather distinguished secret society" (17). As a class, we came to the conclusion that this secret society consists of old money, people who come from generations of wealth. The secret society in the Great Gatsby is one that Gatsby himself is never able to become a part of no matter how many parties he threw, how much money he earned and money he spent, or how well he dressed--he was never able to quite find his way in.
Gatsby's failure of attempting to make it into the secret society is evidence that this secret society and the Wisconsin Alumni secret society are two different ones. Even though Gatsby attended Oxford, he could not join yet all you need to do to become apart of the Wisconsin society is to graduate from the school. Although the eliteness between the two societies differ, they also share much in common. The most obvious aspect in the two is money. To be in the old money secret society, you must come from generations of wealth. To join the Wisconsin society, you need the money to pay for four years of tuition. The Wisconsin Alumni secret society also accepts people who don't come from money by granting scholarships where as old money cannot be given and cannot be earned.
It is clear that the two societies, Wisconsin Alumni and Old Money are two distinct societies but where do they cross? Is the Wisconsin Alumni secret society strictly Wisconsin or is it a college graduate secret society?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)