English 99: Literacy Among the Ruins

Gannon was offered a job at a small college where he thought he would be teaching a non-fiction creative writing class. Instead, he ended up teaching an English 99 class, which was basically the lower division class for kids who weren't ready for English 101. This class didn't even count as credit towards a degree for a student. I think that Gannon may have felt like he had been underestimated by the college. He mentions that he knows they had him teach English 99 because it was a profitable course, but even so if I were him I would feel a bit dishonored. Gannon obviously doesn't feel underestimated because he talks in a positive way about the course. He displays his humerous attitude towards teaching the course by saying, "Of course, I was an imposter. But so was the class I taught. I was posing as a professor and English 99 was posing as a college course." Gannon goes on to talk about how there were three categories in the class. There were the bored looking girls, the jocks, and the Bosnian refugees. He said that the girls talked about how life is hard, how they can't do anything, and about how tired they are. The jocks talked about how they have fun, they need freedom, and their talents. Then he said that the refugees talked only about life and the war they had experienced. If I were Gannon, I would be so rediculously bored with the concepts that the kids were writing about. He said that he started to dread the days he had to teach English 99. I think that I would definitely feel the same way if I were to be teaching English 99.

Jon Spayde: Learning in the Key of Life

Spayde refers to education as training for competition. He does not believe that in class education is the only means in understanding the many concepts in life. He talks about slow knowledge and fast knowledge, and how some things in life are common sense. People usually can tell what "ought to be". "It is knowledge 'shaped and calibrated to fit a particular ecological and cultural context,' he writes, distinguishing it from the 'fast knowledge' that zips through the terminals of the informatin society." I think what Spayde is saying is that slow knowledge is something you acquire and learn as you go. You pick up on facts about cultures and genres, and you are not taught in one single class session. Fast knowledge, on the other hand, is something that can be taught in as little as an hour. Sitting down and writing out the facts is fast knowledge, because it does not have to be learned and tested out through everyday experiences. It is a solidified fact, and therefore it can be instilled in a person's head in a quick manner. "School helps, but it's just the beginning of the engagement between ideas and reality - as Abel Lomas can attest." I believe that life experiences are what can further an education in a person's life. School informs a person all of the basics as far as specific subjects such as math and english, but it does not inform a person on cultures and ideas of different types of people.

Kyoko Mori - School

Mori compares the educational system in Japan to America. She says that in America adults are able to return to college even at the age of 40. On the other hand, in Japan adults are only given one chance to get a degree in college. They are not able to return to college and get a second degree like an adult in America might be able to. In Japan, the only way to get into college is to take entry level exams directly out of high school. If they don't get in, they have to wait for a year and are considered ronin, which means they are floating around. If they don't get in after a year, they usually just settle for a low-paying job. In America, we're able to work for a couple years and then apply to colleges. Japanese adults don't have this priveledge. Mori says that the fact that it is so easy to get into college for people in America makes it seem as if "they are not real or substantial enough." Americans idealize Japan's education for its toughness. Mori says that it may be tough, but she didn't learn very much in her years in Japanese education. She still does not know how to write Japanese, so she cannot translate her novels. Mori talks about her how she didn't understand why she got the grades she did in school. Her teachers didn't tell her or her friends ways to improve. "Over and over again, our Japanese education offered this sort of harsh judgement combined with vague exhortation." Experiencing this must have made her feel helpless. When I was in my earlier education, I always seeked my teacher's approval and comments, and tried my hardest to improve. I would feel frustrated not knowing what to do in order to improve my work. Mori says that when she began learning English, the assignments she got back had detailed comments. She was happy to finally get feedback from her teachers. She was able to go on and learn the many methods of writing. Mori talks about Zen, and how it teaches the overall concepts and does not describe specifics. Many of Mori's friends liked this kind of teaching because it did not require much description. American teaching talks about specifics rather than the overall subject. I believe this method of teaching is better because it specifically lets the student know what they need to do to improve. The method of Zen is so ambiguous and leaves the student confused. If I were to test out both methods of education, I would prefer the method that informs me with the details that are necessary for improvement.

Michael Sokolove - Football Is a Sucker's Game

This article talks about the positives and the negatives of football. Although there are many postives to sports, the negatives definitely outweigh them. It mentions that "to build the U.S.F. athletic complex will cost as much as $15 million. To furnish it - starting with $425,000 in weight-training equipment, a $65,000 hydrotherapy tub, portable X-ray machines, satellite uplinks and downlinks, trophy cases for a U.S.F. sports hall of fame in the atrium entrance - will cost up to $5 million more." From this fact, we can see that football is definitely not a cheap sport. In fact, a dozen athletic departments have a budget of $40 million and up. Even with such a large budget, some schools "face the choice of spending themselves into oblivion or being embarrassed on the field." With the rediculous amount of pads and equipment needed for a football team, the costs can rack up quickly. Only schools with an average attendance that exceeds 100,000 are guaranteed a reimbursement of the spending. In many cases such as these, schools are paid to lose. College sports have escalated in expenses to such an extent that some of the largest schools end up losing money. "The University of Michigan, which averages more than 110,000 fans for home football games, lost an estimated $7 million on athletics over the course of two seasons. Sokolove's use of evidence proves that football costs more than some may think. With the cost of equipment and coaches, many teams are not guaranteed revenues. I think that Sokolove's point in writing this article is that even though many think that football is worth the cost, they don't realize how much the cost actually is. He says that football is a sucker's game, and I agree. We are wasting money on sports, when the funds could be put towards departments such as nursing. Yes, the people love their football and will support it until they die. But is the cost of entertainment too much when put into the grand scheme of things? I believe so. The loss is much more than the gain, and this is proven through the facts that Sokolove uses to prove his point. I think that this is a good peice of writing because it shows evidence that football is soaking up a large amount of funds, and it proves the point that football is a sucker's game.

Lynne V. Cheney - Politics in the Schoolroom

The article talks about how 40 years ago classrooms were filled with white male teachers teaching white male students. The civil rights movement changed all of that, creating a more broad educational program everywhere. Now, education includes a "more ethnically and racially diverse group of students as well as their ideas, experiences, and perspectives." Cheney doesn't believe that "classroom innovations that feature multicultural or feminist perspectives" are a necessary "diversion from more important academic concerns." She disagrees that this integration of a diverse culture is necessary, because it may distract from concentration. She thinks that the classrooms should concentrate on teaching important aspects of subjects, and that they should teach the version that doesn't hide anything. Cheney speaks about how kids are taught the positive aspects of Christopher Colombus. She believes that kids should know that he wasn't really the founder of America, but more a man who stole it. She feels that the government has control of what we learn and what we become. The media is able to distort this information, and make things look better than they are. She forces the idea to question the media and the so called "facts" that they state. She feels that the "truth" may be sugar coated, and that people should know the real facts. Her problem with what the government teaches is that it is not truthfull. One example of a misrepresentation of a subject is the slave trades. She talks about how they mention the trans-Atlantic slave trade, but not the slave trade conducted by African kings or Arab traders that happened after the trans-Atlantic slave trade. This is just one subject that back up her opinion. Kids are being taught a small portion of the truth. I agree with Cheney, because she proves a good point. People should know everything, not just a small sugar-coated version of a subject. Maybe kids don't want to hear it or don't understand that things may be worse than they thought, but it is necessary for them to understand the evils in the world. Informing people the entire truth may be the answer to preparation for the future. Cheney's point is valid and usefull. If the everyone knew the entire truth, they would be able to get farther in life.

Deborah Tannen - The Roots of Debate in Education and the Hope of Dialogue

Tannen talks about a classroom full of debate and opinions. When she looks further into the situation, she sees that not all of the students are involved in the debate. She assumes that the reason why they aren't involved is because they don't have an argument against another person's point. Although debate is a large part of education in the west, Ong talks about how the Chinese culture approaches debates. "The aim was to 'enlighten an inquirer' not to 'overwhelm an opponent.' " The tactic seems a lot less attacking and invasive. It focuses on "integrating ideas and exploring relations among them than on opposing ideas and fighting over them." This may very well be the answer to all conflict in the West. Instead of debating in a barbairac manner, we can integrate ideas and get a better understanding of another person's point of view. This article is a peice of good writing because it portrays numerous ways of debate. There is the Western debate, that allows people to become feirce and angry, and there is the Chinese approach, which is a lot more laid back and integrated. There are numerous subjects in which you can have a debate. Subjects such as English allow for a broadened debate because of the room for interpretation. Subjects such as math and science do not allow much of debate room. There may be numerous ways to solve the equation, but the answer will always be the same. When utilizing debate tactics in the classroom, I will remember this article and reference back to the different types of debate. I will try to use the Chinese approach, and integrate ideas rather than attack.

Donald Kagan - What is a Liberal Education?

In this article, Kagan argues that a liberal education varies depending on what era a person is in. In the era of Aristotle, a liberal education meant preparing a man for the world so that he can fit in with society. The people of the Middle Ages beleived that God was the source of all truth, and "to comprehend truth was to come closer to divinity."In the Middle Ages, they obviously studied in order to become closer to God. In the Renaissance, "their idea of a liberal education, the studia humanitatis, continued to include grammar and rhetoric from the old curriculum but added the study of canon of classical poets, historians, and political and moral philosophers." They enjoyed encorporating these studies, but they also included them because they would help a person to speak in a benevolent manner, and to become smarter. Kagan talks about how a liberal education wasn't always strictly for a career in those days. It was more for a well-rounded person who was able to fit in with the rest of the people. These days, a liberal education serves as a background for a career choice, as well as an aid to become a well-rounded person. I think this peice of writing is great because Kagan states his point and then references to the many different eras as his background. He states that a liberal education is different according to each era, and this is supported through the evidence in eras such as the Middle Ages, the Renaissance, and Aristotle's time. Kagan's point and support was clear and straight forward.

John Henry Newman: The Idea of a University

Newman talks about how one branch of education is not the same without the influences of another. His simile referring to colors allowed me to understand his point further. He stated that the many combinations of colors give a different effect to each picture. Without the combination of colors and shades, the picture would not be as intricate. This can apply to education as well. When learning a certain subject such as English, one may be more knowledgeable if they had studied History as well. Linking the two subjects can create a clearer picture in the mind of a student. Knowing the background of a subject may come in handy while studying another. Newman states that being exposed to an array of subjects will benefit the students, even if they don't utilize every one of them. He states, "They learn to respect, to consult, to aid each other." He goes on to talk about the purpose of the university, saying "Its art is the art of social life and its end is fitness for the world." I believe this statement to be very true. Not only does a university teach you subject matter, but it also introduced you to a social arena. It mentally and socially prepares you for the world, and the many obstacles ahead. The university "aims at raising the intellectual tone of society" and provides a clear interpretation of life without judgement or opinion. Universities allow people to think on a more mature and logical level. Attending a university can definitely change a person and their outlook towards the world. I feel that this article was great because it allowed me to look beyond just the educational program in a university. I was able to see that a university not only provides education courses, but it also prepares one for the many social conflicts in life. This article made me think about the changes that I will be going through in the next four years, and how my perspective may change in the future.