The Ideal Student pt.2

     My opinion of the ideal student has not changed much since I was last assigned to write about it. In my first blog, I wrote that the ideal student was one who knows where they want to go in life to be successful and works their hardest to achieve that version of success. They have set goals for themselves and don’t let anything stand in the way of what they want for themselves. I wrote that success isn't a big house, shiny car, and cushy job at some big law firm for all people. For some sure, but there are a lot of people who want the simple things in life. I gave the example of someone who wants to continue the tradition of managing the family resturaunt. That person probably wouldn't need to attend Yale to be successful. Taking business management and accounting classes at a local community college would be very well suited to their goal. The person who wants to work at a big NYC law firm on the other hand, would not succeed with a community college degree. If someone had convinced the person who wanted to manage the family resturaunt that they should go to Yale and become a lawyer, I believe that even if they became "successful" lawyers they would feel like a failure and be miserable. I think that your definition of success is all about personal perspective and that is reflected in your view of the ideal student. One last example: I did not take higher math and science classes in high school. I took honors and advanced placement classes for history and english, but as I had no interest in pursuing a career in math and science, I took it easy in those areas. A lot of people probably saw me as lazy, or not as smart, or whatever. Why should I (now a history major) take advanced placement chemistry and calculus if I don't like math and science, would have to work incredibly hard to pass, and would never use any of it ever again past high school or maybe college? It wouldn't make sense. I did what I had to do for my own personal goals, regardless of what others told me I should be doing. If you want to feel successful with youself and your career later in life, I believe you should not let anything get in the way of what makes you happy. The paycheck doesn't matter, the style of architecture of your house doesn't matter, the car you drive doesn't matter, etc. The only thing that matters is that you can wake up everyday and enjoy the life that working hard has given you. You get there by being this version of the ideal student: relentlessly pursuing your dreams.

Stem Cell Research and My Thinking Domain

The relation between Stem Cell Research and the Social, Ethical, and Historical Thinking Domain is not hard to find. In fact, they are practically intertwined with each other. “Social, ethical, and historical thinking studies patterns of individual behaviors and human interactions; distinguishes between acts that harm other living beings and those which promote the welfare of others; and discerns and justifies reasoned ethical and moral judgments.” Stem Cell Research is a very controversial scientific procedure where scientists use stem cells to try to find cures for diseases such as cancer, Alzheimer’s, Autism, etc. This is controversial because the most useful stem cells are found by terminating embryos very early. Adult stem cells are helpful, but because they have already matured and been specified for a particular task in the human body, scientists cannot manipulate them into as many things as they could an embryonic stem cell. There are two main arguments about stem cell research. People who are Pro-life believe that even at the earliest stages, a fertilized embryo is a human being. To these people, terminating the embryos for research would be considered first degree murder. The opposition to the argument believes that the bundle of cells in an embryo has the potential to become a human being, but as it does not have a brain, organs, consciousness, arms, a body, etc. it is not really a person yet. There is a major debate about whether embryonic stem cell research is ethical. No one seems to have any problem with adult stem cell research, but it does not have the desired effects. The debate has been practically continuous since the discovery of stem cells in the 60’s. (historical) A person usually decides whether they are pro-life or pro-choice based on family beliefs or their religion. (social) So does Stem cell research harm living beings, or promote welfare of others. It all depends on what you believe.

Personally, I am pro-choice. I don’t find that the teeny tiny little cells are a human life. A lot of people would probably disagree, but I think that we should be more worried about the human beings that are already alive and breathing before we worry about the cells that don’t even have a brain yet. So many children are abused, neglected, abandoned, and even murdered on this planet. If we used our energy, time, and resources to fight for them we would save a lot more lives than if we stopped embryonic stem cell research. Plus, it’s even possible that we might find cures for diseases that are killing even more of our children (and adults as well). I believe that the majority of the embryo’s that scientists used are ones that are getting thrown away anyway. If the pro-life argument is that all of these embryos should be given a chance to go full term and be born into this world, I am curious as to who will be taking care of all of the overflow babies. The social service system is already overworked and overcrowded. I don’t have the right or wrong answers; I just know what I believe. Everyone believes something a little differently, and that is why the ethical debate continues.

Gender Divided Classrooms: The Way of the Future

   It's pretty clear from the title of this blog how I feel about gender divided classrooms. I believe that the American education system is not working and this is one possible solution to a growing academic gap between male and females that is caused by gender bias. Gender divided classrooms are just what they sound like. I think that in core classes (Mathematics, Science, English, and Literature) boys and girls should be taught by teachers of their own gender in seperate classrooms. I believe that this would eliminate teacher and student bias that could be detrimental to the student's education.
   In my opinion, these are the two main arguments in support of gender divided classrooms. Boys and girls learn in different ways. Some girls also learn differently than other girls and the same can be said about boys. It makes it very difficult for teachers to attempt to cater to so many different learning styles. Having gender divided classrooms would split this problem in half. The teacher would still have to teach to the different individual learning styles, but they would not be fighting against gender related differences. For example, let's look at a classroom with six students, three females and three males. (that class size is unheard of I know, but it's just an example) Rachel learns by reading text, Tina learns by listening to lectures, Noah learns by looking at diagrams, and Mike learns by building models. A single science teacher might have trouble keeping all four very different students interested and engaged in the assignment. If the classrooms were divided by gender, two science teachers would find the task much less challenging. Rachel and Tina can be taught by reading journal articles about science and by having the lectures about subjects in the book so that they could follow along. Noah and Mike would be much better taught by doing experiments themselves and by participating in class projects and demonstrations. These four students would be interested twice as long and therefore learn twice as much. Wait! What about the other two students? Of course, there is always the possibility that Brittany likes to do experiments and Kurt likes to read text. So do they just fall through the cracks? Of course not! The teacher would be able to notice that they were uninterested and add curiculum to the class to get them involved. If they were still struggling, Brittany and Kurt's teachers could pull them aside individually and tutor them using their learning methods of choice. Gender divided classrooms also eliminate gender bias. If you are a young girl in a class full of other young girls being taught by a female teacher, there are no boys to impress or prove yourself for. The same goes for a young boy in a class full of other young boys being taught by a male teacher.
   The main counter arguments that I have heard are that a) this would affect a child socially, and b) stereotypical gender "issues" will create problems in the classroom. The first argument actually upsets me. When did the classroom become a social situation? Social interactions between kids are for lunch, gym class, and the playground. The classroom is for learning and individual academic enhancement. I'm not saying that it should be a prison, but boys and girls shouldn't be learning how to talk to each other properly during math class. They still can talk to each other during the school day. This is not an argument for gender divided schools. The second argument seems to be a little silly since it itself seems to be based entirely on bias. The belief is that "boys will be boys" and "girls will be girls". If they were in seperate classrooms, girls would spend the entire class texting and gossiping and boys would get into fights with each other. They would argue with the teacher about discipline "because the boys get to do it", or vice versa. I honestly don't think that this would be a problem. Dividing the classrooms by gender should start very early in the education system. The studies that I and my class group have read show that 1st through 4th grade is the critical period for the academic gender gap. All of these stereotypical behaviors are learned. If they are swept off the board early on, they won't be a problem.
   I want to defend this topic against one last objection. The opposing group in our class debate brought up that they believe that gender divided classrooms would be unconstitutional. They cited Title IX and Plessy vs. Ferguson to prove their point. I disagree with this idea completely. I don't think that unequal classrooms would be an issue. The coursework would be specifically designed with the students in mind so no one would have anything over another. Also, if gender divided classrooms are unconstitutional, then so are classrooms divided by intelligence, such as Honors vs. Regular courses. I can't really see a difference between the two division types.
    This is everything that I can think of to say about Gender Divided classrooms. There are some other concerns, such as financial worries, but I truly believe that the positive outcomes outweigh the negative in the long run. Sure it will be difficult to make the change, but does that mean we should just give up? We have a responsiblilty to provide our children, the future of this nation and the world, the best education that we can possibly give them. The educational system as it is right now is not doing that. I think that implementing gender divided classrooms, combined with an overhaul of coursework and textbooks, can fix this dilemna. This blog title was taken from our classes group project, but I believe it works perfectly for my personal opinions as well. I believe that gender divided classrooms really are the way of the future.

Are girls different than boys?

      I think that girls are different than boys in many ways. Obviously we are biologically different, but we also speak and act differently, dress differently, and throughout history have done different activities. I don’t think that anyone would have to stretch the idea that we learn differently as well. The primary source article that I choose was about a study done that tested Mathematical thinking differences between kindergarten girls and boys. The study “suggested that differences in mathematics performance between boys and girls may not be entirely determined genetically and are at least partially affected by environmental variables, particularly the teacher’s behavior.” I definitely agree with this idea. I think that there are some genetic differences between the girls and boys process information. I think the math and science gender gap comes from the way students are taught. Stereotyping for sure puts an impression on students, but there are many smaller influences for why this gap occurs in my opinion.  I think that it has a lot to do with Dweck’s “messages about success”. Children read the things we say quite differently than how the message was intended. I think of the kindergartener Bruce from Mindset, whose teacher and mother gave him two very different answers to questions he asked. Only his teacher was able to understand the hidden concerns and tell him what he really wanted to know. I also think that teaching styles have a lot to do with student’s individual success. I had an Algebra I teacher my freshmen year of high school who talked incredibly fast. I could barely keep up with her. I tried to write notes and got lost and I misunderstood directions or just didn’t hear them at all. When I asked her to repeat them she would get very angry and say I should have listened the first time. I spent the entire year completely lost and I hadn’t been that great at math to start out with. I progressively got worse and worse. When I moved on to geometry I did not know the formulas necessary to do the work. I started going to a tutor after school just to keep up. My Geometry teacher picked on me and enjoyed pointing out to the class that “my tutor must not be very good since I still couldn’t get a good grade.”The next year I had Algebra II, and my teacher was excellent. She would stay after class with me every day during her lunch break going over basic Algebra and Geometry things with me so that I could keep up in her class. I maintained an A for almost the entire year because of her dedication and support. If I had not had this teacher, I probably would still think that I was a failure at math. I still think that it’s my worst subject, I just am more confident in my problem solving abilities now. I don’t really know how a boy in my exact situation would have reacted. I do know that my little brother is a freshmen this year and he had a very good math teacher his 8^th grade year. He is doing very well this year in his math class. I don’t know if this is because he is just naturally “better” at math, or because he had a great teacher, or if he just really likes math. Whatever the reason, this is an area that my brother and I differ greatly in. I think that Gladwell would agree with the article, but I’m not quite sure about Dweck. The article places a lot of responsibility on environment and circumstances. Gladwell might say that I would have been an excellent math student if I had received a proper math education. Dweck would be more inclined to believe that it would be how I processed the information given to me by teachers and parents, which I see as maybe being a genetic situation. She would probably say that a boy might have processed the information given to me differently than I had and been more successful. I do believe that girls and boys are different and agree with the article. It’s kind of a combination of both Gladwell’s and Dweck’s perspectives. I tend to believe more in the environmental influences than the genetic influences, but I do think that it is very probable that they exist.

Success is the disease of me!

 In our society, success is the only acceptable option. We pressure our children to be the smartest student, the best athlete, the most talented artist, etc. Parents expect greatness from their children at an early age. Think of the mothers who sit around bragging about their babies: “Well my little Jimmy was walking at 9 months”.

There is no room for failure in this fast paced world. We need to slow down for a little while and understand that failure can be good too. Failure teaches you how to persevere in hard times and it brings humility and strength. Let’s continue to use babies as an example. How did you learn how to walk? Trial and error is the more likely method, rather than hopping out of your mother’s arms and running away. Failure is a natural part of life, but we have made it a taboo subject. If we continue this destructive path, we will soon create a nation of fixed mindsets. Where would we go from there? There is no room for growth in a fixed mindset.

If you experience failure you can use it as a learning tool for your future. This is a growth mindset. There are more possibilities and opportunities for the growth mindset than the fixed mindset. I love Dr. Dweck’s example of Elizabeth, the young gymnast. She expected to walk out of her first meet with ribbons to hang on her wall. When she didn’t, her father told her that she did not yet deserve the awards, as she had not worked as long and hard as some of the other girls. Elizabeth was able to use his advice to grow and become a better gymnast, so that the next time she competed she was able to win many ribbons. If he had told her she had been cheated, or that she’d get them next time, or that gymnastics didn’t really matter anyway, than Elizabeth would have no chance at improving because of a fixed mindset learned by her father. This is the same theory that Jon Carroll, of the San Francisco Chronicle had when he wrote:  “Failure is how we learn. I have been told of an African phrase describing a good cook as "she who has broken many pots." If you've spent enough time in the kitchen to have broken a lot of pots, probably you know a fair amount about cooking.”

Success is the disease of all humans. It is something we desire greatly and place above all other things. We can lose sight of who we are by letting our quest for success take over our lives. Failure is natural and it is a good thing to experience, yet we avoid it at all costs. I think that is what Dr. Dweck was saying in Mindset.

Natural vs. Experience

          When I first received this assignment, I have to admit that I couldn’t think of anything that I was a natural at. I have things that I am good at and enjoy doing, like music and writing, but I didn’t just wake up one day and realize that I was good at them. I have had to work extremely hard to get where I am today.

                 I started playing the flute in the 4^th grade at a private Catholic school that I had attended since kindergarten. In the 5^th grade, my parents transferred me to a public school with no band program, so I missed out on a full year of band, but took private lessons with a family friend. In the 6^th grade, I started with a leg up on the other kids, because they had never had the private school music experience. Soon after the year started though, my band director died and we were “taught” by a permanent substitute with little or no musical background. In 7^th grade, my musical education finally became more normal. I had band three days a week with a real teacher. I played flute in the concert band and also played the keyboard in the Jazz Band. In 8^th grade I was the first chair flute. I auditioned for Region IX Honor Band and got last chair, but I was there. My freshmen year I started marching band and I was probably the worst flute player there. I’m not afraid to admit it. I couldn’t read music, I couldn’t play the higher notes required by a flute player, and I was a failure on the marching field. Concert Band was even worse. We did chair auditions to place us in a spot in either the Symphonic or “the dumb band” as it was not so affectionately called. I bet you can guess which band I was in. Imagine the torture as a freshman reading your name next to the words: lesser band, last chair. I thought that I was better than that. I worked hard to overcome my problems. I took theory lessons and learned how to adequately read music. I took more flute lessons and I practiced more and harder. Over the next two years, I got better and better. My junior year, I auditioned for Drum Major and I got it! In concert band, the director had combined the Symphonic and “dumb” band. I earned the second chair spot in the flute section. My senior year, I won a best drum major award and became co-section leader. I worked hard because of how much I loved band and it paid off! I felt confident enough with my work in high school to move on to college level music. I am now playing the piccolo in Marshall University’s Marching Thunder. I am not, nor will I ever be an amazing musician. I don't want to be.  I love music, and I am pretty decent at it, but I am not a natural musician.

                I also love writing and a lot of people tell me that I am very good at it, even going as far as to say that I am a natural at it. I am not as convinced though. It takes me forever to write something. I will stare at my computer screen for an hour before I think of anything to type. I will probably type, delete, and rewrite parts of papers at least ten times before I turn it in. My papers are always goldmines for grammatical and spelling errors. If I work really hard and focus on only the paper for several days, I can usually create something really good, but it doesn’t just flow right off of my “pen” (as in my keyboard). I love to write and I work hard to produce good work, but I am not a natural writer.

                I don’t even believe that “naturals” exist. I agree with Gladwell’s theory that it is practice and experience that makes you The Beatles or Steve Jobs, not some mysterious inclination for music or computers.  I believe that it is all hard work and dedication that makes you good at something. Some people are just skilled at making it look effortless.

Failure=Success?

                                   "Only those who dare to fail greatly can achieve greatly."
                                                                          - Robert F. Kennedy

       Michael Jordan is a pretty popular guy. In fact, a lot of people would say that he is the greatest basketball player ever. (a lot of people, as in every single boy on the playground at the elementary school I went to) So why on earth did he make a commercial about all the times he has failed? It's because Michael Jordan knows that he was by no means perfect. He knows how many times he had to pick himself off the floor and try again. He knows that if he had sat down on the bench after missing one of those game winning shots and said "I'm done", than he would never have gotten as far as he did.

                "I have failed over and over and over again.....and that is why I succeed."

Life is not an easy ride. You are pretty naive if you believe it is. The person who succeeds is the one who, like Michael Jordan, fails over and over again but never stops trying to get to the top. I did a little research and found that this formula for success (the whole "never give up" thing) works pretty well.

*Thomas Edison discovered 1,000 ways how to not make a lightbulb before he succeeded
*Winston Churchill failed the 6th grade
*Lucille Ball was told to "try any other profession" by her acting proffessor
*Freud was booed off the stage the first time he presented a theory
*27 publishers rejected Dr. Suess' first book
*Robert Sternberg got a C in his Intro to Psychology course
                  and how about a little sports?
*Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team
                                  (http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/efficacynotgiveup.html)

*Julie Andrews was told she "wasn't photogenic enough for film"
*J.K. Rowling's book "Harry Potter and the Sorceror's Stone" was rejected 12 times
*2 companies turned down Steve Jobs' offer to buy one of Apple's earliest computers
                                 (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120940892966150319.html)

These are just a few examples of people who took their failures and turned them into success because they never gave up. If you have a goal for yourself and you never give up, than you are unstoppable. Success is yours for the taking.  That is the message that Michael Jordan wanted to send in this video.
 I end this blog with one of my favorite quotes:

                    "Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall."
                                                                           -Confucious