I am going to use the articles "Who Needs Computers?" and "Computers and Technology". I have no real idea about computers in the classroom, but I think that using these will help me understand the issue better.
Are computers helping or hurting the schools? Are they "dumbing down the students"? In "Who Needs Computers?", Clifford Stoll states that in 2101, everyone will be dead. "Almost everyone from the 20th Century will be dead. Most of our children are dead. Our grandkids now run the country, and out great-grandchildren complain about it". What will this mean when this could actually happen? Does this mean that everyone will eventually give up?
I think that everyone will eventually give in and just go with the flow. There will always be that person who won't want the computers in the classroom, and will constanly argue about them being there. Now I'm not saying that having them in there is a bad thing, I'm really saying that having them in the classroom can be a good thing, but it depends on the age group that the classrooms have the computers. If you have them in a 5th grade class, the teacher will get nothing done, because they are playing games online all the time. If the computers are in a college classroom, the students will pay attention more, because the college students have th ability to restarin themselves from doing frivilous things on the computer.
While having them in there can be a good thing, why do we need them? I remember in my biology class we would only watch film strips. We didn't need the computers, because in the film strips, you could show the film in whatever order you wanted. But saying that going back to filmstrips only is a bad thing, because in the way technology have improved, people can go at their own pace and not be bored with questions that they know the answer to.
What I am basically trying to say is that computers are not a necessity, but can influence how the students learn.
Friday, September 21, 2007
Are computers the right answer??? (combo of two articles)
"Wow!!!!" "Cool!!!" "New computers!!! Now we can work while in class!!! This is so awesome!!!"
Although that having computers in the class have increased the numbers of test scores and parental help, will the students eventually only pretend to work but send emails and instant messages? I know if I had the chance I would do it. So why have the computers in the classroom?
If you need a computer in the class, use a computer lab. I know that I would like to have a laptop to carry with me everywhere so I can do homework, but I know that that wouldn't happen. But would that really help me, as well as other students? Or would they get caught up in what type, style, and programs they had for their computer?
The students would more likely use the computers for entertainment, not education, as Richard Ohmann argues in his article, "Computers and Technology". The teachers most likely would become worried that the students would become so dependent on the computers that they, the students, wouldn't think for themselves anymore. That's what I am worried about. Also, if the teacher loses a lesson because of a computer malfunction, that would ruin the whole class time. So, I say, save the lesson by writing it manually and orally presenting it to the class. Always have three backups to anything important.
So, the use of computers would help, but also decline learning capabilities of future students. Who really knows what will happen? Everyone will just have to wait and see...
Although that having computers in the class have increased the numbers of test scores and parental help, will the students eventually only pretend to work but send emails and instant messages? I know if I had the chance I would do it. So why have the computers in the classroom?
If you need a computer in the class, use a computer lab. I know that I would like to have a laptop to carry with me everywhere so I can do homework, but I know that that wouldn't happen. But would that really help me, as well as other students? Or would they get caught up in what type, style, and programs they had for their computer?
The students would more likely use the computers for entertainment, not education, as Richard Ohmann argues in his article, "Computers and Technology". The teachers most likely would become worried that the students would become so dependent on the computers that they, the students, wouldn't think for themselves anymore. That's what I am worried about. Also, if the teacher loses a lesson because of a computer malfunction, that would ruin the whole class time. So, I say, save the lesson by writing it manually and orally presenting it to the class. Always have three backups to anything important.
So, the use of computers would help, but also decline learning capabilities of future students. Who really knows what will happen? Everyone will just have to wait and see...
class section summaries
I think that the class did an excellent job on summarizing the article. I think each section had it's good points and bad, but overall was very decent. I think that if someone tried to use all those as a paper, it wouldn't sound too well, but each section really cleared up any questions I had with the article.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
why are women supposed to be thin? why are 6 year olds dressed like Britney Spears?
Why are we, women, the way we are?
In the Introduction to Susan Bordo’s article, “The Empire of Images in Our World of Bodies,” she states that women are constantly changing their bodies to fit in with society. She quotes a New York Times reporter stating that “It’s now rare in certain social circles to see a woman over the age of 35 with the ability to look angry,” (152) because of botox injections. Women are becoming more susceptible to thinking that they are not pretty anymore, or they are not what men want. For example, the research done in Fiji by Anne Becker, with the islands in 1995 had no reported cases of eating disorders. Three years later, when U.S. and Britain television programs had been broadcasting there, the research reported that 62% of women surveyed admitted to dieting. Now this is interesting, because Fijians favor voluptuous bodies.
So when will people realize that having plastic surgery makes you look very fake and plastic? It shows that either people are too lazy to work or if they are getting a tummy tuck or liposuction, or they don’t realize that someone actually finds the “bump on the nose” attractive. It’s very stereotypical of people to think that they need to look a certain way for people to like them. I myself am not thin or very pretty. But I do have a great personality that will come out on top in the end.
When you look at someone who is very pretty, probably with botox or surgery, when you meet them, after thirty seconds you want to choke them to death because of how dumb they act. Now I’m not saying that all pretty people are dumb. That would be stereotypical of me, and that’s not me. I am not stereotypical. But then again, aren’t we all stereotypical? Don’t we all assume a certain person will act a certain way based on their appearance? And when we see how they really act, aren’t we surprised or amazed?
There are so many ways to determine what is pretty or not, but there really is no definite definition to pretty. What is pretty anyway? Is pretty going to eventually be perfection?
Good question. Perfection. What is perfection? Does anyone know the exact definition? Perfection in someone’s eyes may be completely different than from another’s eyes.
Even as Bordo emphasizes that some mothers are allowing their toddlers to dress up as Britney Spears on Halloween night, those mothers most likely will regret letting their toddlers doing that when their daughters are sixteen years old, sleeping around, and have a child. Many people don’t realize that what children do at a young age can affect their entire lives. For example, Bordo states, “In the world in which our children are growing up, there is a size zero, and it's a status symbol. The chronic dieters have been at it since they were 8 and 9 years old.” Does this show what the media is doing to children?
Celebrities are unconsciously teaching young children that being super-skinny is ok, no matter what you have to do to get there. “Generations raised in the empire of images are both vulnerable and savvy. They snort when magazines periodically proclaim (about once every six months, the same frequency with which they run cover stories about "starving stars") that in the "new" Hollywood one can be ‘sexy at any size.’” Is that really true? How many stars have you seen that are not a single-digit size? I know that there is some, Queen Latifah and Missy Elliott. But the world (the media in particular) needs to know that not everyone can look the same, or afford to change their bodies for cosmetic reasons. I for one am not happy with the way the world works today, but I haven’t the courage to change it. I just hope that someone else does.
In the Introduction to Susan Bordo’s article, “The Empire of Images in Our World of Bodies,” she states that women are constantly changing their bodies to fit in with society. She quotes a New York Times reporter stating that “It’s now rare in certain social circles to see a woman over the age of 35 with the ability to look angry,” (152) because of botox injections. Women are becoming more susceptible to thinking that they are not pretty anymore, or they are not what men want. For example, the research done in Fiji by Anne Becker, with the islands in 1995 had no reported cases of eating disorders. Three years later, when U.S. and Britain television programs had been broadcasting there, the research reported that 62% of women surveyed admitted to dieting. Now this is interesting, because Fijians favor voluptuous bodies.
So when will people realize that having plastic surgery makes you look very fake and plastic? It shows that either people are too lazy to work or if they are getting a tummy tuck or liposuction, or they don’t realize that someone actually finds the “bump on the nose” attractive. It’s very stereotypical of people to think that they need to look a certain way for people to like them. I myself am not thin or very pretty. But I do have a great personality that will come out on top in the end.
When you look at someone who is very pretty, probably with botox or surgery, when you meet them, after thirty seconds you want to choke them to death because of how dumb they act. Now I’m not saying that all pretty people are dumb. That would be stereotypical of me, and that’s not me. I am not stereotypical. But then again, aren’t we all stereotypical? Don’t we all assume a certain person will act a certain way based on their appearance? And when we see how they really act, aren’t we surprised or amazed?
There are so many ways to determine what is pretty or not, but there really is no definite definition to pretty. What is pretty anyway? Is pretty going to eventually be perfection?
Good question. Perfection. What is perfection? Does anyone know the exact definition? Perfection in someone’s eyes may be completely different than from another’s eyes.
Even as Bordo emphasizes that some mothers are allowing their toddlers to dress up as Britney Spears on Halloween night, those mothers most likely will regret letting their toddlers doing that when their daughters are sixteen years old, sleeping around, and have a child. Many people don’t realize that what children do at a young age can affect their entire lives. For example, Bordo states, “In the world in which our children are growing up, there is a size zero, and it's a status symbol. The chronic dieters have been at it since they were 8 and 9 years old.” Does this show what the media is doing to children?
Celebrities are unconsciously teaching young children that being super-skinny is ok, no matter what you have to do to get there. “Generations raised in the empire of images are both vulnerable and savvy. They snort when magazines periodically proclaim (about once every six months, the same frequency with which they run cover stories about "starving stars") that in the "new" Hollywood one can be ‘sexy at any size.’” Is that really true? How many stars have you seen that are not a single-digit size? I know that there is some, Queen Latifah and Missy Elliott. But the world (the media in particular) needs to know that not everyone can look the same, or afford to change their bodies for cosmetic reasons. I for one am not happy with the way the world works today, but I haven’t the courage to change it. I just hope that someone else does.
Sunday, September 09, 2007
which side are you on?? part 2 (agree)
In David Zinczenko's article, "Don't Blame The Eater", he states that there are no healthy inexpensive alternatives for fast food. I agree with him. If you take a look down memory lane, how many times have you gone into a McDonald's or fast-food joint? Too many to count? That's what I thought. Every couple of days we don't have a lot of time to make a meal, so where do we go? To the one place that has good, yummy food done in a flash. Most of the customers in fast food joints are teenagers. High school students need the quick fix meal so they can quickly get done with their homework so they can party longer. College students go there because they don't have enough time to do anything, and need something that you can hold in one hand and type with the other.
Even though there are other options, for example, the salad, there are just as many calories in the salad as other food items on the menu. The salad, croutons, dressing, and other toppings add to the calorie count as well.
So, where can you buy INEXPENSIVE and HEALTHY alternatives? I would really like to know.
Even though there are other options, for example, the salad, there are just as many calories in the salad as other food items on the menu. The salad, croutons, dressing, and other toppings add to the calorie count as well.
So, where can you buy INEXPENSIVE and HEALTHY alternatives? I would really like to know.
which side are you on?? part one (disagree)
In David Zinczenko's article, "Don't Blame The Eater", he states that there are no inexpensive alternatives for fast food. I say that there are, and they are even in the fast food restaurant. Take the caesar salad at McDonalds, for example. You don't have to put the dressing on, or even have the chicken on it. If you prefer to have the chicken, get it grilled in natural oils. That cuts down on the calories and the amount of fat from the deep frying. Instead of that diet soda, get juice or water. Water in a glass is FREE people!!
Also, cutting down on the amount of food you eat will also help. Don't go and order a double-quarter-pounder with cheese(740 calories), large fry(570 calories), and super-sized diet Coke(0 calories). That comes in at about 1,310 calories. That's more than half of what the government requires people to have in one day. So, if you go to McDonald's, order the caesar salad, with no dressing, and a glass of water. The total calories of that comes to: 90 calories. That will work fine for anyone.
He also states that it's the companies fault for making the children fat. I say it's partially the companies fault. They sell the greasy food, but it's the parents that bring their young children in and let them decide what they want. If the parents don't allow them to go in, they will not eat there as often, because they will have good eating habits and choose not to eat there. The parents teach their children eating habits. If you teach a child poor eating habits, when they are 25 and have type 2 diabetes, it's harder for them to lose weight. But, if you teach the child healthy options, at 25 they will more likely to lose weight if they are overweight.
An even better option is to go to Subway. They sell food with fresh ingredients, made to order, and without many preservatives. For example, Subway's club salad only has 150 calories. That may be a little more calories than the McDonald's Caesar Salad, but it really is a healthier option, and it only costs about $5.00 at most, and you get to choose what to have on or off it. That's a really cheap way to get a good healthy meal, even if you are on the road.
[for information on McDonald's nutrition information, visit the following website: http://www.mcdonalds.com/app_controller.nutrition.index1.html]
[for information on Subway's nutrition information, visit this site: http://www.subway.com/applications/NutritionInfo/index.aspx ]
Also, cutting down on the amount of food you eat will also help. Don't go and order a double-quarter-pounder with cheese(740 calories), large fry(570 calories), and super-sized diet Coke(0 calories). That comes in at about 1,310 calories. That's more than half of what the government requires people to have in one day. So, if you go to McDonald's, order the caesar salad, with no dressing, and a glass of water. The total calories of that comes to: 90 calories. That will work fine for anyone.
He also states that it's the companies fault for making the children fat. I say it's partially the companies fault. They sell the greasy food, but it's the parents that bring their young children in and let them decide what they want. If the parents don't allow them to go in, they will not eat there as often, because they will have good eating habits and choose not to eat there. The parents teach their children eating habits. If you teach a child poor eating habits, when they are 25 and have type 2 diabetes, it's harder for them to lose weight. But, if you teach the child healthy options, at 25 they will more likely to lose weight if they are overweight.
An even better option is to go to Subway. They sell food with fresh ingredients, made to order, and without many preservatives. For example, Subway's club salad only has 150 calories. That may be a little more calories than the McDonald's Caesar Salad, but it really is a healthier option, and it only costs about $5.00 at most, and you get to choose what to have on or off it. That's a really cheap way to get a good healthy meal, even if you are on the road.
[for information on McDonald's nutrition information, visit the following website: http://www.mcdonalds.com/app_controller.nutrition.index1.html]
[for information on Subway's nutrition information, visit this site: http://www.subway.com/applications/NutritionInfo/index.aspx ]
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
military pay
This blog is about the increase in military pay of 13%. Ms. Cindy Williams, a senior research fellow at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was assistant director for national security in the Congressional Budget Office from 1994 to 1997. She states that every member of the Unites States military is getting a 4.8 percent increase in pay, the biggest inflation boost the military has seen in 18 years.
My father was in the Navy for my whole life. He retired in September of 2003. So, this is stating that in almost my whole lifetime, this is the biggest pay raise the military has seen since I was born. That's an amazing fact.
My father was in the Navy for my whole life. He retired in September of 2003. So, this is stating that in almost my whole lifetime, this is the biggest pay raise the military has seen since I was born. That's an amazing fact.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)