So I recently had a conversation with a friend about how I find myself less and less reading the editorial section of the NY Times. Not that it's awful, but many times it's either saying something that isn't of much importance in the grand scheme of things or just telling me something I already know/think/etc. That being said, I still enjoy "Room for Debate" immensely and every now and then find an editorial that sparks my interest:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/26/opinion/fixing-college-through-lower-costs-and-better-technology.html?_r=1&hp&gwh=7C37C0C6AC0C407B5EF21DD2A23D8CD3
I don't know how many times it needs to be said, but let's keep saying it until it happens: the price of college needs to decrease dramatically. There are many ways to do so, many option available to try- so there's no excuse for college to cost as much as it does in today's world.
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Dang Worthless Librarians...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/30/us/new-digital-divide-seen-in-wasting-time-online.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
So this article is slightly old (May 29) and I remember skimming over it and having some snarky conversations with myself. I didn't post it, but since there has been some backlash/uproar since this article came out, I thought it might be appropriate to post.
So...the FCC wants to create a task force to teach literacy skills? Here's a thought- maybe if libraries of all kinds were better staffed, this could help the problem. But with budget cut after budget cut, public, academic, school, etc libraries are strateching their professionals thin and using people that aren't trained to do more library related work. While I have mentioned many times that I'm still unsure of the total value of my Master's, it did give me a better understanding of the importance of information literacy, the role that libraries play in the community- these are things that on the job training wouldn't necessarily give me. But when you have people who don't have extensive training (because most libraries are hiring people without a Master's to save money but not training them much to, again, save money) doing a good amount of work in a library- our constituents are not getting the best service. But time and again, budgets are slashed over and over, with libraries somehow having to get by on bare bones while usage goes up every year.
It just seems counterproductive of the FCC to want this task force. Why not put that money towards funding/grants for libraries? More staff who are better trained would be able to provide this assistance with the skills the FCC wants to develop.
This article really had me thinking about school librarians. In an ideal world, I would have loved to have gotten my Master's and certification to be a school library media specialist. It combines all the things I love- working with students of different ages, information literacy, books, collaborating to improve education. But when it came down to it I would have had to spend more money to take extra classes, plus the costs of student teaching- in this economy and especially since school librarians have an even more unstable job market compared to other librarians- it didn't seem like a worthwhile risk. It makes me sad that I had to make such a decision, but that's life. But imagine if this money was funneled towards hiring more professionals to be in school libraries, the impact it could have on our education, specifically digital/information literacy could be amazing. Now I'm not usually a proponent of, as many stereotypical GOP'ers say "throwing money at the problem to fix it". But I don't think that is the case here. It would be hiring professionals, who have been trained, done research and are filled with ideas- to come and better the community. But you'd have to pay them real money- and sadly, I think that's what it comes down to.
So this article is slightly old (May 29) and I remember skimming over it and having some snarky conversations with myself. I didn't post it, but since there has been some backlash/uproar since this article came out, I thought it might be appropriate to post.
So...the FCC wants to create a task force to teach literacy skills? Here's a thought- maybe if libraries of all kinds were better staffed, this could help the problem. But with budget cut after budget cut, public, academic, school, etc libraries are strateching their professionals thin and using people that aren't trained to do more library related work. While I have mentioned many times that I'm still unsure of the total value of my Master's, it did give me a better understanding of the importance of information literacy, the role that libraries play in the community- these are things that on the job training wouldn't necessarily give me. But when you have people who don't have extensive training (because most libraries are hiring people without a Master's to save money but not training them much to, again, save money) doing a good amount of work in a library- our constituents are not getting the best service. But time and again, budgets are slashed over and over, with libraries somehow having to get by on bare bones while usage goes up every year.
It just seems counterproductive of the FCC to want this task force. Why not put that money towards funding/grants for libraries? More staff who are better trained would be able to provide this assistance with the skills the FCC wants to develop.
This article really had me thinking about school librarians. In an ideal world, I would have loved to have gotten my Master's and certification to be a school library media specialist. It combines all the things I love- working with students of different ages, information literacy, books, collaborating to improve education. But when it came down to it I would have had to spend more money to take extra classes, plus the costs of student teaching- in this economy and especially since school librarians have an even more unstable job market compared to other librarians- it didn't seem like a worthwhile risk. It makes me sad that I had to make such a decision, but that's life. But imagine if this money was funneled towards hiring more professionals to be in school libraries, the impact it could have on our education, specifically digital/information literacy could be amazing. Now I'm not usually a proponent of, as many stereotypical GOP'ers say "throwing money at the problem to fix it". But I don't think that is the case here. It would be hiring professionals, who have been trained, done research and are filled with ideas- to come and better the community. But you'd have to pay them real money- and sadly, I think that's what it comes down to.
Tuesday, June 12, 2012
The Education Black Hole
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/12/us/politics/in-romneys-voucher-education-policy-a-return-to-gop-roots.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp&gwh=9DF88BEF89F75A2FBC7D6A28E15921E6
Education really is turning into a black hole...and every Tom, Dick and Harry has their own solution. There was No Child Left Behind- which had some good ideas, and some really shitty ones too. Obama has sort of taken a hodgepodge approach- a little bit of testing, little bit of charter schools, little bit of helping struggling schools get better, etc. Romney wants to do quite an overhaul- essentially turning education into a voucher system- because he claims it will foster competition and make schools better overall. When you take it at face value, Romney's plan sounds great, seems simple and seems like it would succeed. And I can't say it would be a complete failure. But in further reading about it, about how kids will get to choose whatever school they want- public, private, charter- how will success be deemed? I haven't heard much from him about that. And if Romney decided to get rid of the Dept of Education- who will oversee to make sure that schools are spending the money wisely...who will provide oversight?
Would marketplace dynamics help education? Because it's failing. We all know that. And floundering is not helping. What went wrong? Everyone has an answer to that question as well. I personally like Obama's approach of trying to fix schools but also change our views towards education. I don't agree with every aspect of his education policy, but if we fail to look at how our society views education, nothing will change. We need to get people to care about school again, we need to groom parents who are involved in their child's education, we need to groom students who take their education seriously. Ok, now I'm grandstanding a little.
Education really is turning into a black hole...and every Tom, Dick and Harry has their own solution. There was No Child Left Behind- which had some good ideas, and some really shitty ones too. Obama has sort of taken a hodgepodge approach- a little bit of testing, little bit of charter schools, little bit of helping struggling schools get better, etc. Romney wants to do quite an overhaul- essentially turning education into a voucher system- because he claims it will foster competition and make schools better overall. When you take it at face value, Romney's plan sounds great, seems simple and seems like it would succeed. And I can't say it would be a complete failure. But in further reading about it, about how kids will get to choose whatever school they want- public, private, charter- how will success be deemed? I haven't heard much from him about that. And if Romney decided to get rid of the Dept of Education- who will oversee to make sure that schools are spending the money wisely...who will provide oversight?
Would marketplace dynamics help education? Because it's failing. We all know that. And floundering is not helping. What went wrong? Everyone has an answer to that question as well. I personally like Obama's approach of trying to fix schools but also change our views towards education. I don't agree with every aspect of his education policy, but if we fail to look at how our society views education, nothing will change. We need to get people to care about school again, we need to groom parents who are involved in their child's education, we need to groom students who take their education seriously. Ok, now I'm grandstanding a little.
Tuesday, June 5, 2012
A blog you should be reading
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/tag/suleika-jaouad/
Not a funny blog. No funny pictures of cats. Just a heartfelt blog through the NY Times chronicling the journey of a 23 year old cancer patient. It'll give you some food for thought, and maybe even a little perspective.
Yes, it's sad. But it's not depressing. And it doesn't try to make you feel guilty. It just gives a honest look at what it's like to be a young adult with cancer- a group of cancer patients that don't usually get much attention.
Not a funny blog. No funny pictures of cats. Just a heartfelt blog through the NY Times chronicling the journey of a 23 year old cancer patient. It'll give you some food for thought, and maybe even a little perspective.
Yes, it's sad. But it's not depressing. And it doesn't try to make you feel guilty. It just gives a honest look at what it's like to be a young adult with cancer- a group of cancer patients that don't usually get much attention.
Sucks to be a recent grad...
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/opinion/the-class-of-2012.html?_r=1&ref=opinion?hp
I like this editorial until the end when it gets all political. I figured it would happen, but it's part of the problem. If either side keeps blaming the other for something like this, we'll never get anywhere. Mindsets need to change- students shouldn't feel that they have to go to college. Students who want to go to college shouldn't feel the stigma of going to a community college the first 2 years. It just makes me angry to see how this generation is getting the short end of the stick- and it's not their fault. We're still living in a country where if you don't have a college degree, you're passed over. So these kids continue to go- incur debt, get low paying job they're overqualified for and then are told they are lazy and entitled because they have trouble paying back loans.
Sigh.
I like this editorial until the end when it gets all political. I figured it would happen, but it's part of the problem. If either side keeps blaming the other for something like this, we'll never get anywhere. Mindsets need to change- students shouldn't feel that they have to go to college. Students who want to go to college shouldn't feel the stigma of going to a community college the first 2 years. It just makes me angry to see how this generation is getting the short end of the stick- and it's not their fault. We're still living in a country where if you don't have a college degree, you're passed over. So these kids continue to go- incur debt, get low paying job they're overqualified for and then are told they are lazy and entitled because they have trouble paying back loans.
Sigh.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)