THE IDEAL STUDENT: PART DEUX

I remember when I did this the first time. I thought to myself, "What in the world is Dr. C talking about?" So I decided that I would say the obvious answer: good grades, extra curricular activities, blah blah blah. But now that I think about it, I was somewhat wrong.

Let's start with the grades part. Honestly, I think that your actual grades don't matter. As long as you are doing your best thats all that matters. From personal experience, I am making A's and B's right now. But it isn't because I am "intelligent" (sorry to use the dreadful word), it is because I study a lot. Just from that, I feel accomplished (and that feels good). This also ties into a growth mindset. If the ideal student gets a sub-par grade, that does not stop them. That just inspires them to do better next time.

Extra curricular activities are great. But they don't necessarily have to be on campus. To me, extra curricular activities are things that you enjoy doing (things that are healthy of course). Go for a jog, have a pizza with friends, go see a good movie. The ideal student balances studying with mind-relaxing activities. This prevents he/she from going completely insane.

The ideal student doesn't worry about how to make a creative attention getter or Marita's bargain, the ideal student ponders about how continuing their education and making right decisions will impact their future. The ideal student wants to make a positive impact on the world. I found this quote that kind of ties in with this topic. Mahatma Gandhi said, "Be the change you want to see in the world." This is the ideal student.

Communication Domain and Stem Cell Research

The Communication domain consists of written communication, visual communication, and oral communication. The ongoing debate about stem cell research is among these various types of communications.

As far as written communication, there are thousands of popular articles and scientific journals regarding stem cell research. Political journalists try to convey their view points to the uneducated population reading popular articles. Scientists publish their research findings to the scientific world through journals and scholarly articles.

Stem cell research is involved in visual communication. This includes political cartoons and television advertisements. The political cartoon above just one of several different animations on the subject. These are put out in various newspapers across the country. This is done so the majority of our country's population can see these biased animations.

Oral communication is a large part of stem cell research. We've all watched Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, etc. We've all seen the heated discussions about different things. You can witness heated debates on stem cell research. Stem cell research is also involved in something of a smaller scale such as a classroom debate.

The fact that stem cell research is such a controversial issue makes it a hot item for the communication domain. It is involved in all of the communication domain.

I AM AGAINST GENDER DIVIDED CLASSROOMS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When I first thought about the disadvantages of gender divided classrooms, I thought about what if I had to go through a gender divided classroom going through school. After much thought on this, I've come to the conclusion that I would have absolutely hated going through gender divided classrooms. Some of the closest friends I have are girls and I met them in the classroom. I wouldn't have developed the social skills to be able to interact with people (girls) who had different personalities. Like Ms. Jenna said, girls and boys think in different ways (right brain vs. left brain). If you know how to interact with different types of personalities, then it's pretty safe to say that you could develop really good leadership skills. 

In an article called "Advantages and Disadvantages of Single Sex Public School Education," a gender divided classroom actually costs the school more than a regular classroom. In these tough economic times, I really don't think that schools want to spend more on something that would cater to a certain sex. Which leads me to my next point...

In the United States of America, we are all about equality. If this is true, then why would we allow gender divided classrooms? All the time, girls are being told that they are the same as boys; perhaps they might question this claim when they are in an all-girl classroom. Then some male-chauvinistic kid might think they are superior to girls. 

Due to the economic impacts, inhibitions of social skills, and issues with equality, gender divided classrooms are not a good idea.

Boys vs Girls

In an article entitled, “Why boys achieve less at school than girls: the difference between boys' and girls' academic culture,” the author, Mieke Van Houtte, claims that girls are more motivated than boys when it comes to school. She/he blames it on the gender specific stereotypes that our society has on girls and boys. For example, it wouldn’t be “cool” for a boy to make good grades and that it’s okay for girls to be cool and smart. Also, his/her main point is backed up by several tests taken. I completely disagree with his claim. From personal experience, I’ve seen a lot of both ends of the spectrum.  The majority of the academically motivated people I know are boys. I also know a lot of motivated girls too. But at the same time, I’ve seen some pretty lazy girls and boys.

                One thing I think that Mr. (or Ms.) Van Houtte needs to consider is that boys and girls have mostly different personalities that cause them to learn in different ways. Boys are more energetic and have a shorter attention span, while girls (most of the time) are more reserved and can pay attention to something a lot longer.  So if you want boys to be successful, then have a lot of hands on stuff and don’t have.

                In regards to the whole “culture” and stereotype thing, I think that the fact that our society has those kinds of stereotypes is a bit ridiculous. A person should not be affected by the way our society views intelligence. If that’s the case, then you have a problem. Girls and boys should have the same amount of motivation to do well. I mean, just because we have physical differences doesn’t mean we can’t academically do as well as each other. That is “so dumb, fo real” (Sorry if you don’t get that allusion).  

                I think that it all boils down to Carol Dweck’s obsession: MINDSETS. You cannot sit here and tell me that more girls have the growth mindset than boys do.  Someone of the growth mindset will “obviously” do better in the classroom. So basically, what I’m trying to say is, gender does not matter. 

He said...She said...

MALCOLM:

                Malcolm is obsessed with “Outliers.” Those are people who stand out of the norm of something. He talks about Asian math students and some computer whizzes as being outliers.  He thinks that these people who are very successful are not naturals, but rather hard workers who take advantages of extraordinary opportunities. For example, he tells the story of Marita, a girl who escaped the life of poverty and applied for the prestigious KIPP School.  According to Malcolm, there could be several “Maritas” out there, but not all of them took advantages of good opportunities. 

DWECK: 

                Dweck is all about Mindsets. Are you a growth mindset or a fixed mindset? While I read that book, I asked myself that question several times. Anyways, the growth mindset is someone who can build off success or failure. On the other hand, the fixed mindset is someone who just gives up per se, or gives little effort after success; they think that intelligence is something permanent.  She uses the example of someone getting a bad grade on a paper, then being blown off by a friend, etc. She then asks the reader how they would handle it. The growth mindset  would just say I can do a lot better and realize that maybe their friend was busy, while the fixed mindset would say,” I’m so dumb,” or something along those lines.

THE CONNECTION and MY OPINION:

                Honestly, I don’t see much of a connection between the two authors’ opinions.  It seems like Malcolm was just trying to get a book on the NY Times Best-Seller List. I think that Dweck is pretty logical and reasonable. The two mindsets are very relevant to society today.  I also think that Malcolm was just trying to make one of those “feel good” books, whereas Dweck gives the good and the bad.  Also, I think that part of the reason I think that I like Mindset more is because I can relate to it. I am definitely not an “outlier,” however, I have had my growth and fixed mindset moments. Don’t get me wrong, Malcolm’s points sound logical, but overall, Dweck wins this battle. 

SUCCESS IS THE DEATH OF ME???!!

WARNING: this post is repetitive..

Malcom Gladwell, the author of Outliers, has the idea that people are successful due to opportunities they are given and whether or not a person takes advantage of these opportunities. Because of this, I believe that Gladwell would disagree with the statement “success is the ‘disease of me.’”

                All of Gladwell’s examples of an “outlier” have lots of success in their stories.  So in theory, he could say that without success, they would not be an outlier. I think that if he truly believed that success can bring a person down, he would have included a story about someone who had all this success and then they crashed and burned; but he didn’t.

                As for my personal opinion, I think that success can SOMETIMES be bad for a person. I guess it just depends on their ego. If it’s someone with the growth mindset, I really don’t think that it would affect them that much. However, if someone with a fixed mindset has success, then I think that it would cause them to just be satisfied and not try as hard on the next time.  Most (if not all) outliers have the growth mindset, so success wouldn’t affect them.

                Like my last essay, I’ll end with a quote. "The two hardest things to handle in life are failure & success” (it was anonymous). Isn’t that the truth? Like I said earlier, I don’t think success is bad all the time, it depends on the person; which is what I think Gladwell thinks.

Am I a Natural at Something?

I have pondered this question many times. Before I answer it, I’d like to give my opinion on the definition of a “natural.” To me, being a natural is simply mastering whatever you do. Whether it is soccer, playing a violin, etc.  , naturals make whatever they do look like a piece of cake.  Now I might be going to the extreme side here, but let’s face it, some people are just a lot more gifted than others. No matter how hard you try and practice, there is always someone who can learn whatever you are doing a lot easier than you can. For example, I’m a pretty athletic person, but one sport I cannot play is golf. Yet I know several people who never played a sport in their life go out and play one game of golf and they do really good.  You also have to consider something else; people become a natural at different times in their career.  Let’s go back to the Michael Jordan example.  It’s pretty safe to say that MJ was a natural at basketball. But like I said in my previous post, he was cut from his junior high school basketball team. Nobody thought he would become the greatest player to ever walk on a basketball court. He didn’t become a standout until later in high school. However, people also become naturals at a very early age.  Argentinian soccer star Lionel Messi arrived at FC Barcelona’s youth development program at the age of thirteen. That’s right. Thirteen. Can you imagine being a boy and being at one of the biggest soccer clubs in the world? 

            Now back to the original question.  Am I a natural at something? I think so. I started playing soccer at the age of four. Now don’t get me wrong, I’m not going to sit here and say that I was this amazing player like Lionel Messi, because I definitely was not.  However, I was somewhat of a standout in my soccer playing days.  I don’t know what it was, but everything about soccer just made sense. There was never a moment when I felt like “What the heck am I supposed to be doing?” The feel of a ball at my feet just seemed natural (no pun intended) and it just felt right being out on a pitch.  It always felt like people were watching me to learn how to do something. So yes, I think I was a natural (and it feels pretty cool too).