This guy I know has always said that country music is the best. I think he is incredibly stupid, so this statement cannot be true. The hatred of country music is widespread...i mean, come on! Everyone hates it!!! You claim that you like country music, and that is fine. I just have to remind you that twangy sounds in any sense are terrible, therefore your music taste is also terrible. 65% of all music listeners agree with me that country music is awful. Simply awful. And sixty five percent is a lot! So, obviously, I must be correct in my statement since so many people agree with me. Music as a general trend is beginning to move away from country music, therefore it will likely be completely gone from existence within a few years. People are instead respecting real music.
After people attend country music concerts, they are tired. Therefore, country music makes people tired and why would anyone want to listen to something that makes them tired? That's a hazard, especially while driving! Plus, southern states were for slavery. So....country music is terrible.
(Disclaimer. I do hate country music. But I love Dez, and she loves country music. Therefore I kind of like country music.)
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Monday, October 29, 2007
Blog #5
This cartoon is by New Yorker cartoonist Bob Mankoff. I feel like I always have to write blogs about something I'm passionate about, and issues surrounding foreign labor (especially when it's underpaid foreign labor) are another of my hot-buttons.
This cartoon was originally directed at the reader base of the New Yorker, but through the magic of the internet found its way to me (I, admittingly, am not an avid reader of the New Yorker but have occasionally glanced through it). I believe that it is funny only to a certain percentage of the world's population, namely those that buy and read the New Yorker on a daily basis (or occasional one). If the context were to change, and this cartoon were to be shown to, say, an under-paid child laborer in Mexico working for Nike or Adidas (or any of the other huge companies that admit to foreign labor), I don't think laughs would ensue.
Additionally, the cartoon is comparing those labor countries to hell, and the companies as heaven. Perhaps the cartoon is comparing the action of expoiting foreign labor workers as hellish. Regardless, there is a negative connotation on the foreign labor that I feel is glanced over by the average reader of this cartoon. At first glance, the reader laughs simply because the cartoon appears funny. Not many go on to think about the countless factories in countless countries that actually do make goods and clothes and shoes for big companies all over the world, and don't get paid enough or respected in the least. Companies admit to creating these "hellish" conditions, but nothing changes. As far as I can remember in my short life, people have been battling for workers' rights in other countries...I particularly remember battles with Nike and Adidas, which is why I previously mentioned them. Sweat shops and factories all over the world exist, and when we try to bring out the issue with humor (as this article has done) I'm not sure it accomplishes anything. It's just like the discussion we had in class...the cartoon is probably only funny to those who read the New Yorker, and thus will mainly stay circulating with readers of the New Yorker, who largely are on the wealthier end of the wage spectrum, who probably do not stop to think about the sweat shops that made their shoes and clothes and handbags. For those of us who do read this cartoon and stop to think about it, do we do anything either? It's a classic example of a cartoon that was probably made for political action...which will largely accomplish nothing with its existence.
Sunday, October 7, 2007
blog response #3
I picked this article because Teach For America is another one of my hot button issues (imagine that, another education article that I want to respond to!)
This article immediately plays to the reader's emotions by describing children as "just nasty animals trying to secure their share of the food supply." This is additonally shocking to the reader, creating a tension. This tension is relieved (release and relief theory) through the article's source, The Onion, which is known for its sarcasm and satire. Thus, the reader is uncomfortable with a statement like this, but the tension is relieved because it is supposed to be viewed as sarcastic.
To me, the interesting part of this article lies in the fact that one again, the Onion has written about an issue that has some truth in it. TFA does not supply its candidates with adequate enough teaching to handle inner-city districts, especially since many of the applicants are English or Ethnic Studies majors like in the article. The Onion writes from an extreme standpoint (one person saying the entire country is fucked and no one can do anything about it), but in reality this is what happens to many of TFA participants. They aren't prepared to handle everything that teaching in an urban disctrict throws at you (I'm in the education program, and after 4 semesters of education training and experience I'm not even sure I am well enough equipped to really make a difference to children in an inner city).
We additionally experience some of the ambivalence theory when reading this article. The points they are making are not only depressing ("In the end, you've gotta resign yourself to failure and move on with your life"), they are a conflict to what we want our own lives to be. As a future teacher, this article caused a huge conflict of emotions in me!!! People do get frustrated in this profession--that can't be disputed--but there are plenty of opportunities to change the world too. Even if you only influence one child in your entire year of teaching you are still not a failure. The problem with programs like TFA is that they never really communicate many of the important points about teaching that I've learned here at UW. A TFA teacher is better than no teacher, I suppose, but many of them will end up (although slightly less radically) like Cuellen in this article.
Before doing these blogs, I never really noticed how the Onion took issues that were basically true (like the pitfalls of TFA or the healthcare issue I responded to previously) and over-truthed them to make them humorous (I'm making up words again!). This article would be sort of factual if everything wasn't over-emphasized, but I think that steady readers of the Onion understand this.
This article immediately plays to the reader's emotions by describing children as "just nasty animals trying to secure their share of the food supply." This is additonally shocking to the reader, creating a tension. This tension is relieved (release and relief theory) through the article's source, The Onion, which is known for its sarcasm and satire. Thus, the reader is uncomfortable with a statement like this, but the tension is relieved because it is supposed to be viewed as sarcastic.
To me, the interesting part of this article lies in the fact that one again, the Onion has written about an issue that has some truth in it. TFA does not supply its candidates with adequate enough teaching to handle inner-city districts, especially since many of the applicants are English or Ethnic Studies majors like in the article. The Onion writes from an extreme standpoint (one person saying the entire country is fucked and no one can do anything about it), but in reality this is what happens to many of TFA participants. They aren't prepared to handle everything that teaching in an urban disctrict throws at you (I'm in the education program, and after 4 semesters of education training and experience I'm not even sure I am well enough equipped to really make a difference to children in an inner city).
We additionally experience some of the ambivalence theory when reading this article. The points they are making are not only depressing ("In the end, you've gotta resign yourself to failure and move on with your life"), they are a conflict to what we want our own lives to be. As a future teacher, this article caused a huge conflict of emotions in me!!! People do get frustrated in this profession--that can't be disputed--but there are plenty of opportunities to change the world too. Even if you only influence one child in your entire year of teaching you are still not a failure. The problem with programs like TFA is that they never really communicate many of the important points about teaching that I've learned here at UW. A TFA teacher is better than no teacher, I suppose, but many of them will end up (although slightly less radically) like Cuellen in this article.
Before doing these blogs, I never really noticed how the Onion took issues that were basically true (like the pitfalls of TFA or the healthcare issue I responded to previously) and over-truthed them to make them humorous (I'm making up words again!). This article would be sort of factual if everything wasn't over-emphasized, but I think that steady readers of the Onion understand this.
Article #3
Teach For America Chews Up, Spits Out Another Ethnic-Studies Major
February 16, 2005 | Issue 41•07
NEW YORK—Teach For America, a national program that recruits recent college graduates to teach in low-income rural and urban communities, has devoured another ethnic-studies major, 24-year-old Andy Cuellen reported Tuesday.
Enlarge Image
Cuellen stands in front of the elementary school where he used to teach.
"Look, the world is a miserable place," said Cuellen, a Dartmouth graduate who quit the TFA program Monday morning. "All people—even children—are just nasty animals trying to secure their share of the food supply. I don't care how poor or how rich you are, that's just a fact. I'm sorry, but I have better things to do than zoo-keep for peanuts."
Just one of the 12,000 young people TFA has burned through since 1990, Cuellen was given five weeks of training the summer before he took over a classroom at P.S. 83 in the South Bronx last September.
"I walked into that school actually thinking I could make a difference," said Cuellen, who taught an overflowing class of disadvantaged 8-year-olds. "It was trial by fire. But after five months spent in a stuffy, dark room where the chalkboard fell off the wall every two days, corralling screaming kids into broken desks, I'm burnt to a crisp."
Cuellen said his TFA experience "taught him a lot about hopelessness."
"The cities are fucked. The suburbs are fucked. The whole country is fucked," Cuellen said. "And there's not a goddamned thing you or anyone can do about it. Anyone who says otherwise is selling something. Or trying to get you to teach kids math."
According to Dartmouth literature, as a member of the ethnic-studies department, Cuellen learned "to empower students of color to move beyond being objects of study toward being subjects of their own social realities, with voices of their own."
Teach For America executive director Theo Anderson called ethnic-studies departments "a prime source of fodder."
"Oh, I'd say we burn through a hundred or so ethnic-studies majors each year," said Anderson, pointing to a series of charts showing the college-major breakdown of TFA corps members. "They tend to last a little longer than women's studies majors and art-therapy students, but Cuellen got mashed to a pulp pretty quickly. It usually takes ethnic-studies majors another year to realize that they're wasting their precious youth on a Sisyphean endeavor."
Continued Anderson: "Of course, we don't worry about it too much. Every year, there's a fresh crop to throw in the grinder. As we speak, scores of apple-cheeked students are hearing about TFA for the first time."
According to Anderson, a small portion of these students will lose interest after hearing horror stories from program alumni.
"But the majority of them will march on like cattle to the slaughter, thinking that pure determination and hope can change young lives," Anderson said. "I can hear their footsteps now, marching toward our offices like lemmings to a cliff. And believe me, we're ready for 'em."
Cuellen said he applied to TFA in search of a "character-building experience."
"I knew that teaching in a severely under-funded inner-city school would be challenging, but I wanted to get out into the real world," Cuellen said. "Well, breaking up fistfights between 8-year-olds all day long, I got a real ugly view of reality. Do you want to know reality? Look at a dog lying dead in the gutter. That's reality."
Although Cuellen quit the program early, his mother said he was with TFA long enough for it "to crack open his bones and suck out the marrow inside."
"Andy is a ghost," Beverly Cuellen said. "Those [TFA] people beat the idealism out of him, then they stomped on him while he lay there gasping for air."
TFA regional coordinator Sandra Richman said it is common to blame the TFA employees for the organization's high plow-through rate.
"Should I have said something to wake those kids up sooner?" Richman said, crushing out her seventh cigarette. "Probably. But listen, no one can tell you that you can't make a difference. It's something you have to figure out for yourself."
"You can only do so much," Richman added. "After a couple years of trying to teach our applicants about how difficult and depressing their lives will inevitably be—no matter what they choose to do for money—I just got burnt out. In the end, you've gotta resign yourself to failure and move on with your life."
February 16, 2005 | Issue 41•07
NEW YORK—Teach For America, a national program that recruits recent college graduates to teach in low-income rural and urban communities, has devoured another ethnic-studies major, 24-year-old Andy Cuellen reported Tuesday.
Enlarge Image
Cuellen stands in front of the elementary school where he used to teach.
"Look, the world is a miserable place," said Cuellen, a Dartmouth graduate who quit the TFA program Monday morning. "All people—even children—are just nasty animals trying to secure their share of the food supply. I don't care how poor or how rich you are, that's just a fact. I'm sorry, but I have better things to do than zoo-keep for peanuts."
Just one of the 12,000 young people TFA has burned through since 1990, Cuellen was given five weeks of training the summer before he took over a classroom at P.S. 83 in the South Bronx last September.
"I walked into that school actually thinking I could make a difference," said Cuellen, who taught an overflowing class of disadvantaged 8-year-olds. "It was trial by fire. But after five months spent in a stuffy, dark room where the chalkboard fell off the wall every two days, corralling screaming kids into broken desks, I'm burnt to a crisp."
Cuellen said his TFA experience "taught him a lot about hopelessness."
"The cities are fucked. The suburbs are fucked. The whole country is fucked," Cuellen said. "And there's not a goddamned thing you or anyone can do about it. Anyone who says otherwise is selling something. Or trying to get you to teach kids math."
According to Dartmouth literature, as a member of the ethnic-studies department, Cuellen learned "to empower students of color to move beyond being objects of study toward being subjects of their own social realities, with voices of their own."
Teach For America executive director Theo Anderson called ethnic-studies departments "a prime source of fodder."
"Oh, I'd say we burn through a hundred or so ethnic-studies majors each year," said Anderson, pointing to a series of charts showing the college-major breakdown of TFA corps members. "They tend to last a little longer than women's studies majors and art-therapy students, but Cuellen got mashed to a pulp pretty quickly. It usually takes ethnic-studies majors another year to realize that they're wasting their precious youth on a Sisyphean endeavor."
Continued Anderson: "Of course, we don't worry about it too much. Every year, there's a fresh crop to throw in the grinder. As we speak, scores of apple-cheeked students are hearing about TFA for the first time."
According to Anderson, a small portion of these students will lose interest after hearing horror stories from program alumni.
"But the majority of them will march on like cattle to the slaughter, thinking that pure determination and hope can change young lives," Anderson said. "I can hear their footsteps now, marching toward our offices like lemmings to a cliff. And believe me, we're ready for 'em."
Cuellen said he applied to TFA in search of a "character-building experience."
"I knew that teaching in a severely under-funded inner-city school would be challenging, but I wanted to get out into the real world," Cuellen said. "Well, breaking up fistfights between 8-year-olds all day long, I got a real ugly view of reality. Do you want to know reality? Look at a dog lying dead in the gutter. That's reality."
Although Cuellen quit the program early, his mother said he was with TFA long enough for it "to crack open his bones and suck out the marrow inside."
"Andy is a ghost," Beverly Cuellen said. "Those [TFA] people beat the idealism out of him, then they stomped on him while he lay there gasping for air."
TFA regional coordinator Sandra Richman said it is common to blame the TFA employees for the organization's high plow-through rate.
"Should I have said something to wake those kids up sooner?" Richman said, crushing out her seventh cigarette. "Probably. But listen, no one can tell you that you can't make a difference. It's something you have to figure out for yourself."
"You can only do so much," Richman added. "After a couple years of trying to teach our applicants about how difficult and depressing their lives will inevitably be—no matter what they choose to do for money—I just got burnt out. In the end, you've gotta resign yourself to failure and move on with your life."
Thursday, September 27, 2007
Blog #2...response to U.S. Pets' Healthcare Better Than Rwandan Humans'
This article from the Onion struck me right away because Healthcare is one of my largest concerns for the future. And the saddest part about this article is that, although it is meant to be satirical and sarcastic, it is probably largely a true statement.
In Rwanda, 60% of the population live below the poverty line and 10-12% of the population suffer from food insecurity every year (Wikipedia).
In the US, we spend over $11 billion dollars on pet food alone, more than enough to help those citizens of Rwanda with their food and healthcare.
This article, I think, uses elements of Release and Relief humor. The tension created is that of the crisis of living conditions currently in Rwanda (what with genocide, poverty, and inadequate food supply), and the relief is the humorous way in which this article addresses the problem. The reader detaches from the problem enough so that they are not disturbed by the truth, but at the same time the article makes clear the fact that our US pets live better than Rwandan citizens. It's impossible, knowing the nature of Onion articles, to not pick up on this point. However, the humor of the article relieves us from the uncomfortable knowledge that people in certain parts of the world are far less well off than we.
I also see some aspects of Cognitive humor. Without prior knowledge of the goings-on in Rwanda, this article might not seem as humorous to a reader. However, when we know how living conditions are in certain parts of the world like Rwanda, we can laugh a little because the points made in the article are just astounding. I mean...come on! It's totally true that a pet owner in the US probably spends more on healthcare for their pet than is even AVAILABLE to a human citizen in Rwanda (or similar countries). It was still a disturbing article to me, but my prior knowledge made it a little bit more humorous.
Knowing the pet food/Rwandan food crisis fact also helps contribute to knowledge that makes the article more humorous. Only because it's so freaking ridiculous.
Not to say that pets aren't important, of course.
According to Brittanica Online, in 2002 there were 155 physicians in ALL of Rwanda. With a population of over 8,000,000, this is an astounding fact that speaks to Rwanda's poor health conditions. According to www.talktothevet.com/faqvetcareer.HTM, there are 58,000 vets in the United States alone.
I think that because of facts like these, even for those who do not have cognitive knowledge of the situation, there can exist a form of ambivalence theory. We laugh because we are conflicted. We do not want to turn a blind eye to the growing problems in Rwanda, but at the same time are being confronted with elements of humor. We want to laugh, but the topic is so humanely disturbing. We read quotes about people dying from lack of medication, then others about how great it would be to be a border collie in America. We are, in short, conflicted, and whether we laugh from the humor or laugh from being uncomfortable, it is clear that elements of Ambivalence theory are present in our reaction.
That's it, I suppose. It was really interesting to read this article because I didn't know how staggeringly different the numbers were when comparing Rwanda and US pets. It's so incredibly absurd that so many Rwandan citizens (or MOST) could be fed for what we spend on pet food, and even more absurd that we have so many more vets than they do physicians. I'm almost laughing now at how absurd it is! (but not really...i can't really think that Rwanda's crisis is that funny).
In Rwanda, 60% of the population live below the poverty line and 10-12% of the population suffer from food insecurity every year (Wikipedia).
In the US, we spend over $11 billion dollars on pet food alone, more than enough to help those citizens of Rwanda with their food and healthcare.
This article, I think, uses elements of Release and Relief humor. The tension created is that of the crisis of living conditions currently in Rwanda (what with genocide, poverty, and inadequate food supply), and the relief is the humorous way in which this article addresses the problem. The reader detaches from the problem enough so that they are not disturbed by the truth, but at the same time the article makes clear the fact that our US pets live better than Rwandan citizens. It's impossible, knowing the nature of Onion articles, to not pick up on this point. However, the humor of the article relieves us from the uncomfortable knowledge that people in certain parts of the world are far less well off than we.
I also see some aspects of Cognitive humor. Without prior knowledge of the goings-on in Rwanda, this article might not seem as humorous to a reader. However, when we know how living conditions are in certain parts of the world like Rwanda, we can laugh a little because the points made in the article are just astounding. I mean...come on! It's totally true that a pet owner in the US probably spends more on healthcare for their pet than is even AVAILABLE to a human citizen in Rwanda (or similar countries). It was still a disturbing article to me, but my prior knowledge made it a little bit more humorous.
Knowing the pet food/Rwandan food crisis fact also helps contribute to knowledge that makes the article more humorous. Only because it's so freaking ridiculous.
Not to say that pets aren't important, of course.
According to Brittanica Online, in 2002 there were 155 physicians in ALL of Rwanda. With a population of over 8,000,000, this is an astounding fact that speaks to Rwanda's poor health conditions. According to www.talktothevet.com/faqvetcareer.HTM, there are 58,000 vets in the United States alone.
I think that because of facts like these, even for those who do not have cognitive knowledge of the situation, there can exist a form of ambivalence theory. We laugh because we are conflicted. We do not want to turn a blind eye to the growing problems in Rwanda, but at the same time are being confronted with elements of humor. We want to laugh, but the topic is so humanely disturbing. We read quotes about people dying from lack of medication, then others about how great it would be to be a border collie in America. We are, in short, conflicted, and whether we laugh from the humor or laugh from being uncomfortable, it is clear that elements of Ambivalence theory are present in our reaction.
That's it, I suppose. It was really interesting to read this article because I didn't know how staggeringly different the numbers were when comparing Rwanda and US pets. It's so incredibly absurd that so many Rwandan citizens (or MOST) could be fed for what we spend on pet food, and even more absurd that we have so many more vets than they do physicians. I'm almost laughing now at how absurd it is! (but not really...i can't really think that Rwanda's crisis is that funny).
US Pets' Healthcare Better Than Rwandan Humans
Study: U.S. Pets' Healthcare Better Than Rwandan Humans'
November 4, 1998 | Issue 34•14
PHILADELPHIA–A University of Pennsylvania study released Monday found that U.S. pets enjoy superior healthcare to that of Rwandan humans.
Enlarge Image
Renal surgeon Dr. Timothy Verstegen performs a kidney transplant on an Akron, OH, cocker spaniel.
The five-year study, which compared the medical care of 2,500 U.S. dogs, cats, hamsters and parakeets to that of 2,500 humans in the Rwandan capital of Kigali, found that the Rwandans were edged out in every category.
"America's pet lovers can rejoice knowing that their precious, furry companions are well taken care of," study co-chair Dr. Nate Gotcher said.
Among the good news for U.S. animals: America has 15 veterinarians per 1,000 dogs, compared to Rwanda's one doctor per 1,000 humans. The infant-mortality rate among U.S. cats is 7 per 1,000 live births, compared to 119 per 1,000 live births among Rwandan humans.
"When the infection started to spread to my upper leg, they had to amputate," said Rwandan Kasongo Tshikapa, whose left leg was removed in May 1997 after he stepped on a piece of rusted scrap metal. "The surgery took five hours, and there was no anesthesia. The operation was performed by my brother-in-law, who has experience as a carpenter. Eight men had to hold me down."
Added Tshikapa: "If only I were a border collie in America."
According to Dr. Wendy Hentrich of the American Association of Veterinary Medicine, new breakthroughs in animal medicine are being made every day.
"The last few years have seen so many exciting advances in high-tech health care for pets," said Hentrich, also chief of cardiology at UCLA's Veterinary Hospital. "For example, at UCLA, we've developed a balloon angioplasty technique that can open a cat's deformed cardiac valves. A catheter is passed into the deformed valve, then a balloon is inflated, allowing blood to pass more freely. This painless, revolutionary procedure has already been used to save the lives of thousands of beautiful, lovable cats."
Rwandan doctors remove the infected right foot of Solwezi Tshibwika.
Such breakthroughs, along with advances in the prevention of diseases like feline leukemia, have caused the average life expectancy of U.S. cats to rise to 18.6 years, which, when converted to human years, is substantially higher than the Rwandan life expectancy of 38.8.
"If I do not have medicine soon, I will die," said Ndola Iringa, who contracted malaria five weeks ago during an outbreak of the disease in her village. "My sister and three of my brothers have died already. The convulsions are getting worse."
As a result of the study, Rwandan physicians are beginning to look toward U.S. petcare policy for ways to improve their own healthcare system. "In America, many dog foods contain nutritional supplements for healthy teeth and gums, as well as a lustrous, glowing coat," Rwandan physician Mbeya Liwale said. "Perhaps such supplements, if they could somehow be found here in Rwanda, could be put to use reducing the death tolls brought on by mass famine and genocide."
"I just don't know what I would do without my Muffin," said Palo Alto, CA, resident Gloria Shifrin, whose 6-year-old Welsh corgi had a grapefruit-sized tumor removed from her chest Monday and must undergo five weeks of chemotherapy. "But, thank God, the cancer is in remission, and it looks like she's going to be all right. No dog should have to go through this."
November 4, 1998 | Issue 34•14
PHILADELPHIA–A University of Pennsylvania study released Monday found that U.S. pets enjoy superior healthcare to that of Rwandan humans.
Enlarge Image
Renal surgeon Dr. Timothy Verstegen performs a kidney transplant on an Akron, OH, cocker spaniel.
The five-year study, which compared the medical care of 2,500 U.S. dogs, cats, hamsters and parakeets to that of 2,500 humans in the Rwandan capital of Kigali, found that the Rwandans were edged out in every category.
"America's pet lovers can rejoice knowing that their precious, furry companions are well taken care of," study co-chair Dr. Nate Gotcher said.
Among the good news for U.S. animals: America has 15 veterinarians per 1,000 dogs, compared to Rwanda's one doctor per 1,000 humans. The infant-mortality rate among U.S. cats is 7 per 1,000 live births, compared to 119 per 1,000 live births among Rwandan humans.
"When the infection started to spread to my upper leg, they had to amputate," said Rwandan Kasongo Tshikapa, whose left leg was removed in May 1997 after he stepped on a piece of rusted scrap metal. "The surgery took five hours, and there was no anesthesia. The operation was performed by my brother-in-law, who has experience as a carpenter. Eight men had to hold me down."
Added Tshikapa: "If only I were a border collie in America."
According to Dr. Wendy Hentrich of the American Association of Veterinary Medicine, new breakthroughs in animal medicine are being made every day.
"The last few years have seen so many exciting advances in high-tech health care for pets," said Hentrich, also chief of cardiology at UCLA's Veterinary Hospital. "For example, at UCLA, we've developed a balloon angioplasty technique that can open a cat's deformed cardiac valves. A catheter is passed into the deformed valve, then a balloon is inflated, allowing blood to pass more freely. This painless, revolutionary procedure has already been used to save the lives of thousands of beautiful, lovable cats."
Rwandan doctors remove the infected right foot of Solwezi Tshibwika.
Such breakthroughs, along with advances in the prevention of diseases like feline leukemia, have caused the average life expectancy of U.S. cats to rise to 18.6 years, which, when converted to human years, is substantially higher than the Rwandan life expectancy of 38.8.
"If I do not have medicine soon, I will die," said Ndola Iringa, who contracted malaria five weeks ago during an outbreak of the disease in her village. "My sister and three of my brothers have died already. The convulsions are getting worse."
As a result of the study, Rwandan physicians are beginning to look toward U.S. petcare policy for ways to improve their own healthcare system. "In America, many dog foods contain nutritional supplements for healthy teeth and gums, as well as a lustrous, glowing coat," Rwandan physician Mbeya Liwale said. "Perhaps such supplements, if they could somehow be found here in Rwanda, could be put to use reducing the death tolls brought on by mass famine and genocide."
"I just don't know what I would do without my Muffin," said Palo Alto, CA, resident Gloria Shifrin, whose 6-year-old Welsh corgi had a grapefruit-sized tumor removed from her chest Monday and must undergo five weeks of chemotherapy. "But, thank God, the cancer is in remission, and it looks like she's going to be all right. No dog should have to go through this."
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
A new form of education
'Students First In Line' Program To Offer Job Training At Needy Schools
I absolutely loved this clip from the Onion News Source. I was browsing around the clips, looking for something I was interested in, and lo and behold an education clip pops up. As an education major, I find myself constantly intrigued and concerned about our nation's growing problems with its education system. The Onion, as it usually does, highlights many of these wonderfully in this clip.
First and foremost, the subject of this clip is a school whose curriculum--that is maths,science, and literature-is replaced by something called the "Students First in Line" program (i.e. first in the line of combat). Basically, the standard education classes have been replaced by classes devoted to military training and basic survival skills. This program, as the principal states, ensures that "No Able-Bodied Student is Left Behind."
The tone of this clip is one of sarcasm and satire, in place to ridicule not only our nation's education system but the pressure of the military on students to enlist. Additionally, the issue of No Child Left Behind is briefly spoofed. The current Act does indeed leave children behind, as schools who do not perform up to standard are simply denied future funding--making it nearly impossible for these districts to increase their test performance. In this clip, this entire problem is "solved" by replacing the standard curricula with military training classes. No longer does it matter how intelligent a student is (or, in reality, how well they can take a test on a certain day). If they can walk, they can pass. If they can handle a weapon, they will not be left behind.
For many students of lower socio-economic status, the military is often presented as one of the only options after graduation (that is...gasp!...if the student even graduates! (teacher sarcasm there)). I think that on some level this clip is addressing the students of the nation about this very issue. Yes, for some the military is a good option for post-graduation. But it isn't the only option out there. and when it is presented in this way, where students are automatically assumed to only be good enough for boot camp, it makes students realize that their classes might not be all that "pointless" after all. Post-graduation holds so many possibilities for students if they just put their minds to it (wow I sound like an education ad), but in the hypothetical realm of this clip the only training students leave high school with is for military combat.
Knowledge has long been considered a weapon (of incredible good, however). This clip is using a play-on-words there, I think. The weapons of knowledge and social skills usually taught in school are replaced by the weapons of combat. Another proud moment for a nation who appears to value military spending (and in other countries, nonetheless) over its own educational system. This clip is using the duality of the word "weapon" to address this idea, as well as the controversy surrounding the question: why are we spending so much overseas when our nation's schools are in such desperate need of help? The military needs of the country are shown as overshadowing the needs of the schools--they, indeed, completely overrun the educational system and become the standard form of curriculum in this satirical clip.
Getting political...sorry. It's hard not to when education is one of your deepest passions.
Furthermore, the visuals in this clip really play on Emotional reasoning and argument. The image of a child holding a gun creates an image in most people's minds of shock. Absolute horror. Disgust in every possible way. And here is an entire clip of children handling weapons (BAZOOKAS for goodness sake) and engaging in military training. That's the thing that the article, through this satirical newscast, is trying to get along. Our nation's soldiers are getting younger and younger. There are so many of them in actual combat right now who just turned 18. It may not seem this way to us (since we are not much older), but to the general population those soldiers are just kids. Children! Handling weapons and fighting overseas and dying and doing things most adults would never dream of. I guess that brought out another emotional point for me, too.
I saw a bumper sticker once that read, "When we're done building Iraq, can we rebuild our schools?" The satire in the clip highlights this issue beautifully, in that it just solves the problem at the source--get rid of education!
~KT
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
