The answer to the all-popular question, "When will I ever need to know this?"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/opinion/27taylor.html?pagewanted=2

Let me just start off by saying that Marc Taylor is a genius. In his op-ed, he proposes an idea for universities to not just learn about the world for the sake of learning, but for the sake of understanding the problems in the world and proposing solutions. He discusses the worthlessness of having professor do research only in their department on obscure topics. He explains to readers that as professors stay within the boundaries of their department, the departments as a unit grow further apart. He proposes instead that universities in general change their curriculum and strategies from one that is narrow and focused in each department to one that is broad and inclusive of many departments. "Responsible teaching and scholarship must become cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural.," he writes. This makes so much sense! I think every school should do this. In any one subject, whether a grad school or a high school class, there are several different angles and perspectives of it. Consider African Studies, a course I took at NHS. This class incorporated language, economics, music, literature, art, and history into a study of past and modern Asian culture. Learning about all of these things together made me think in a new way. For once, I wasn't just learning about Shakespearean novels or how the sun uses nuclear fusion to create heat, asking myself, "When am I ever going to need to know this?" These were ideas and concepts I could actually incorporate into my studies and life.

Taylor says that if we are teaching students a multiplicity of ideas in each subject, we might as well be using students' knowledge to solve the world's problems. Many students today are preparing for futures that do not exist, explains Taylor. Many grad students will never be able to pursue a career in higher education like they hope. Instead, he proposes uses their intellect and motivation to make changes in the world that will help in the long run. For example, my AP Environmental Science course discusses the political, social, economic, and cultural impacts of issues like population growth. While fertility may not seem like part of an environmental science curriculum, it was important for me to understand why people decide to have more children in order to understand the trend of population growth. Population growth affects humans culturally, economically, socially, politically, and environmentally. There are so many people putting a strain on the earth today, that we might not be able to enjoy our good ol' planet for much longer. This is a problem that needs fixing! Taylor is basically saying that these kinds of problems are more important than "how the medieval theologian Duns Scotus used citations."

  This is logical - and cost-effective- advice.

Obama acknowledges a global economy at G-20

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=102748012

President Obama's approach to, not to mention his recognition of, a global economy is a huge change from the Bush administration. As the president said in an interview on April 3, "America has shown arrogance and been dismissive" towards its allies. He also declared that America has "failed to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world." Although I am interested why these quotes did not appear in the article, I was extremely glad to hear my nation's leader finally talking about the role of America in the world - and not always the other way around.

 However, for a man who says that he is at the G20 conference "to listen," he sure is expecting a lot of the other nations there. President Obama said, "every nation bears responsibility for what lies ahead - especially now." In this article, the author mentions the war in Iraq frequently - which is appropriate, considering how much attention the war formerly known as the "war on terror" has received in the press lately. In an article titled "Obama Pledges New U.S. Relations With Europe," the author did a good job of covering the different aspects of relations that would change - including economics and military alliances. The author's choice to focus more on the war was interesting, and seems to mirror the moves of other journalists at this time. For many, the economy is getting harder and harder to read about.

Empathy Through Equality - This School Just Doesn't Get It

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/05/education/05empathy.html?pagewanted=1&em

There seems to be a liberal wave of empathy sweeping schools, and it's about time. This article describes how more and more public schools are now teaching empathy to their students through workshops, community service, school events, and encouragement from teachers. An interesting question here, although the author, Winnie Hu, does not emphasize it, is whether or not public schools should be permitted to teach certain character traits to its students. In my opinion, it is perfectly acceptable to try and make students "better people" by stressing empathy, but in this case, I don't think the school understands what exactly empathy entails.  

Winnie Hu uses a number of quotes from students, which supplements the subject nicely. Students say that the experience has made them more kind, and more aware of other people's struggles. One student says that he is now able to "step into someone else's shoes." 

I think this is great. A behavioral lesson of this sort can be very effective in ending America's bullying crisis, but as for "teaching" empathy, I don't see it. How can you "teach" empathy with a lecture? Or in a classroom with kids who aren't fully aware of the struggles of other Americans?

The schools that are employing this practice are predominately white, middle-class suburban schools. In most of these schools, the life struggles of these students do not vary nearly as much as their lower-class, urban counterparts. If these schools wanted to truly transform kids' ignorance, they wouldn't be keeping these kids in their same schools. When kids are simply trying to relate with their peers, it isn't that much of an accomplish. Sure you can reduce gossiping or fighting, but in order to preserve human rights, like the principal of the school says she is committed to, these kids have to be made aware of human rights issues besides students whose feelings were hurt when they weren't invited to a party. In my opinion, the author is caught up in the optimistic ideology of administration of this middle school, overestimating the drama that occurs at that school and all schools. 

Yes, it's great for kids get along, we all know how teenagers can be after all, but I don't think these schools should be praised for supporting "core values such as empathy, respect, responsibility and integrity" on such a small scale.

Trampled by Trends

This column made me laugh out loud. Virginia Hefferman is hilarious. Her annoyance with technology in this piece is something every human can relate to- in a laughable, "I've been there" kind of way. She writes, "And so the iPhone made suggestions. Did I want to say Ride? Ripe? Ruin? No. I wanted to say Running. You know, the way a human might. But with its know-it-all suggestions, the iPhone seemed to want to be more human, more helpful, jollier than I was!" This wit and sarcasm come out again when Hefferman talking about other "trends" of the age: "As I spoke I felt like a chippy freak — one of those people too intransigently cranky even to like Barack Obama, or recycling, or the Internet." The rhythm of Hefferman's column has people immersed in a conversation with her. She talks about the style of the iPhone and Apple in general, and how she felt compelled to buy the new, much-acclaimed item. In the end, this "refined, introverted, mysteriously chilled iPhone" was too much for the self-proclaimed technologically-inept writer. She trades it in for a Blackberry, and is "just as happy." In this piece, the iPhone represents much more than technology - it is a lifestyle. I love how Hefferman questions this, in a time when it seems like so many do not.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/05/magazine/05wwln-medium-t.html?em

The Economics of the Environment -Thanks to Pres. Obama, There Is Such Thing

As I'm reading "Spreading the Green," by Bradley Bowden, I find myself thinking, "Wow. This guy is on to something." In this article, Bowden describes the business he and his wife own and manage called "Green Shield International."  Together, the Bowdens are trying to create a "green referral network" to distribute environmentally-friendly products among friends, their friends, their friends, etc. 

In autobiographical-like prose, Bowden describes how he went from a farm-boy in Wisconsin to "green-man on campus;" his interests ranging from pottery to business to the health of the earth; all the while observing passive resistance by those confronted with environmental issues. His descriptions narrate a stigma shift - we as Americans have gone from "a Hummer nation" (thanks to Maureen Dowd for that phrase) to one with Smart Cars and Hybrids; then toting big shopping bags and now sporting recycled burlap bags. Earth-friendly is in, and the perks of looking after your carbon footprint are even better today, thanks in part to President Barack Obama himself.

Obama's stimulus package includes many environmentally-conscious features, ranging from green jobs, green energy, and green infrastructure. Monetary incentives for citzens using solar power, passive heating of houses, and electric cars have soon followed. Bowden mentions how some green products are hard to advertise in today's fiscal crisis - but thanks to President Obama, this may not be the case for long. I wouldn't doubt if he had more taxbreaks up his sleeve for those willing to help this cause. Oh how the culture has changed. Hopefully, it's not too late.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/05/jobs/05boss.html?_r=1&8dpc

Ford's New Project is Counting On Consumers

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/11/business/11electric.html?hp

In this article, Bill Vlasik takes a cautious approach to describing Project M, Ford's new effort to put electric cars on the market by 2011. According to Vlasik, this project may be easier than the company projects. He writes, "There are no guarantees that consumers — for all their stated concerns about global warming, dependence on foreign oil and unpredictable gas prices — will buy enough of them. They may balk, for example, at the limits on how far they can drive on a single charge." After all, most of the prospective electric models need to be charged for several hours to cover a day's worth of driving. Without the summer's high gas prices, the demand for these cars is simply not there.  To me, Ford is being irresponsible to initiate this effort while Americans are still so distrustful of automakers. If any of the companies, Ford, GM, Chrystler, want to make money in America, they have to start listening to the people spending the money. It's simple, if there is no market for electric cars in America, don't spend the money making them. And with a price like $40,000, on Chevrolet's new Volt, buyers have got to love this car.

Economy seizes experience from future workforce

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/08/opinion/08mon3.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=teens%20jobs&st=cse

In today's dynamic and competitive world, workers' skills and experience are essential for growth in a country's economy, yet they have been widely neglected in the current state of economic affairs. "The part-time jobs that American teenagers once took for granted — but that millions can no longer find — provided a lot more than pocket money" says David Brooks, an Op-Ed columinst for the New York Times.

Teenagers gain many important skills by being a part of a business or service. Whether working in a restaurant, a department store, or even the school library, there are many responsibilities associated with the work which require organization, innovation, and adaptabilty. Teens can also aquire valuable abilities such as time-management, civil mindedness, and social skills.

I realize that it is much more important for adults to have jobs so that they can put food on the table and clothes on their children's backs. I understand that desperate times call for desperate measures. I know that many people aren't thinking about the future right now, but are worried instead with how they will cope with the present.

But is this an excuse to not prepare my generation for our already-pathetic-looking future? We're already going to be icurn debt billions of dollars, probably still fighting a war with the Middle East, be drinking polluted water, have our world ravaged by preventable diseases like AIDS, and have a ozone level thinner than our wallets. No offense to all the adults of the world, but haven't you done enough?

Sarah Palin, Don't Wink at Me, Ever

Under the scrutiny of the entire free world, Sarah Palin cleared an ankle-high bar last week at the Vice Presidential Debate. Indeed, Palin proved her oratical prowess by opening her mouth and having sound come out of it, though not much else.

In an attempt to prove herself to a skeptical liberal media, Palin did little more than stay afloat in her head-to-head against Joe Biden. After a series of stumbles in her infamous Katie Couric interview, Palin was declared all but dead by headlines across the nation. Alessandra Stanley of the New York Times dubbed Palin’s encounter with Couric as the “worst interview Palin has ever done.” Over on the West Coast, James Rainey of the Los Angeles Times calls Palin "rambling, marginally responsive and even more adrift than during her network debut with ABC’s Charles Gibson."

Certainly, a woman who could not name a single Supreme Court decision she disagreed with or a newspaper she read was not capable of being the vice president.

As it turns out, this widespread doubt about Palin’s competence may have given her an edge in the debate. America had such low expectations of this self-styled “hockey mom,” that Palin needed only to say one or two sensible things to avoid an election-defining blunder for John McCain’s campaign. Yes, dodging disaster was all she needed to do to recover from her previous encounters with the "Gotcha" press and win the debate in the eyes of millions of Americans.

“Last night was a big, big win for Sarah Palin,” wrote Gail Collins in the New York Times the day after the debate. “Gone, long gone, are the worries about how good or well-prepared Sarah Palin is.”

Really? In the debate I watched, Palin was baffled by many of Gwen Ifill’s questions. This “moose-gutting, polar bear-trashing, aerobics-class-networking vice presidential nominee” (as Gail Collins styles her) seemed to lose her Wonder-from-Wasilla attitude when asked about details of McCain’s foreign policy plan, especially. Palin’s responses were not 100% accurate, to say the least. Besides getting the name wrong of the commanding general in Afganistan (McKiernan, not McClellan, Sarah), she also misquoted Obama on health care, the Iraqi war, and tax increases.

            If all this is so, how did Palin manage to walk away from the debate with such a positive response from the press? I find this extraordinarily unusual, especially after Palin’s statement about the “Gotcha” press only a month earlier.

“Here’s a little news flash for all those reporters and commentators: I’m not going to Washington to win their good opinion,” Palin muttered angrily at a speech in St. Paul early this September.

If this current trend continues, I doubt she’ll be going at all.

(I read a few sources for this piece.. here are the articles I liked the best..)

-http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/04/opinion/04collins.html?em

-http://www.newsweek.com/id/162396

An Op-Ed with Good Intentions but a Poor After-taste

.

When discussing the political career of Sen. Barack Obama, most journalists avoid mention of his skin color, fearful of appearing biased. In "Racisim Without Racists," Nicholas ristof plunges headfirst into this controversy without hesitation, a trait unmatched by most modern political analysts. More than three decades after the Civil Rights Movement, most whites like to think prejudice is extinct. According to Kristof, these same "well-meaning whites" are the ones who "discriminate unconsciously," which has significantly affected Sen. Obama's campaign. This kind of accusation is so bold that it makes white readers, like myself, get their backs up, and makes them defensive enough to keep reading.

.

Kristof then mentions how racism helps Sen. Obama's campaign. He wrote, "[Obama's race] underscores his message of change; it appeals to some voters as a demonstration of their open-mindedness." Taken a step further, Kristof is saying that no matter how whites vote, they are biased. He later said, however, that only 50% of whites have unconscious bias. He is essentially contradicting himself, which for me, took away some of his credibility as a writer, although I admire his audacity to write about such a controversial matter.

.

Kristof's conclusion was also poor. With such a unique thesis, I expected Kristof to give readers a send-off that is equally unique and meaningful. Instead, Kristof tied up his article about racism with a history lesson on Catholics in the 1960s. Blacks have been abused for hundreds of years around the world, and to compare their struggle for freedom with that of the Catholic's lessens the urgency of the issue. The ending was weak and distasteful.

.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/05/opinion/05kristof.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=racism%20without%20racists&st=cse&oref=slogin