I came across an older article on the Washington Post's website today from 21 May, entitled "Is college too easy? As study time falls, debate rises," by Daniel de Vise. It's one of several I've seen in the last year or two, citing emerging evidence suggesting that the amount of time college students spend studying has gone down significantly over the past five decades. As a fairly recent college graduate, these sorts of stories tend to peak my interest, so why don't we talk about it.
The evidence suggests that in the 1960s college students on average dedicated 24 hours to studying every week. Coupled with 16-18 hours of class time, that brings their total to about 40-42 hours of scholarly work a week, or about the amount of weekly time people in America tend to consider full-time employment.
Today the average seems to have fallen to about 15 hours of study per week, with 16-18 hours spent in class, totalling 31-33 hours of scholarly work a week. Over the course of a 16-week semester, that makes 640-672 hours for the 24-hour/week group, and 496-528 hours for the 15-hour/week group. To be fair the numbers here are iffy, because class time (at least at my college) did not continue all the way up to the final exam in week 16. Presumably however, the time without class could have been spent preparing for an exam or writing a final paper, so for simplicity's sake we'll assume that the drop in class time is made up by a corresponding increase in study time. Drawing out these numbers over eight semesters--the number I spent as an undergraduate--the 24-hour/week study group would accumulate 5120-5376 hours, while the 15-hour/week study group 3968-4224 hours. That's a big difference in work-rate, assuming the numbers and assumptions are true, and based on them alone it's unsurprising this matter is getting so much press. But as the article points out, the issue may be a great deal more complex than it at first appears.
Let's start with the general debate. On the one hand are those who look at these numbers and say college students today are lazier than their peers decades ago. As told in the Post:
"Some critics say colleges and their students have grown lazy. Today’s collegiate culture, they say, rewards students with high grades for minimal effort and distracts them with athletics, clubs and climbing walls on campuses that increasingly resemble resorts."
On the other the hand are those who suggest less study time is the result of busier students, dividing their time between, among other things, jobs and long commutes which today's student endures in order to bear the higher cost of university education. Students today aren't lazier they say; they're busier than ever.
That seems to be the debate in its most basic form, and I admit while in college to have witnessed evidence supporting both sides, (though I wonder what students in the 60s would make of today's incessant e-mail barrage levelled at students and faculty alike). So whose interpretation more accurately captures reality? Let's dig a little deeper.
One important piece of evidence the article mentions is the wide variability in study time, both between different colleges as well as different majors. Drawing upon data gathered through the National Survey of Student Engagement--a service used by universities to gather information about their students--one finds that students from some schools, like Washington and Lee in Virginia, averaged about 20-hours/week, while those at Howard University averaged 13. The remainder of the schools highlighted in the article had averages within that range, with none of them reaching the 24-hour/week load.
In addition, the choice of major seems to effect the amount of time spent in study. According to research cited by the article:
"Architecture students studied the most, at 24 hours a week. Further down the list, in descending order: physics (20 hours), music and biology (17), history (15), psychology (14), communications (13) and, at 11 hours, parks, recreation and leisure studies."
How might we understand all this? It seems clear that something is happening with the amount of time spent studying--traditionally understood--but it seems less clear what that means. Are students today lazy? In my experience some would certainly qualify (and I would at times have included myself in this group). There were also folks I knew who worked and did school full-time, often favoring job commitments at the expense of their studies. Furthermore, some folks I knew seemed to study less because of commitments to sports and/or performance groups, while others made an effort to do school work but ended up on Facebook all night instead.
I admit my experience is limited to the confines of one college among many, but even with these limitations in mind, generalized explanations remain unsatisfying. Variations in study time between schools, even between schools who select from the same types of students, suggest at least some environmental influence on study behavior. In addition, variation among majors suggest that different courses of study make different demands of students. Having recently worked alongside an architecture student at Philadelphia University, I'm fully prepared to believe they study more than many, given the types of demands the major makes. After all, they are expected to design things that don't readily fall down. Other majors do that too, but all things being equal I'd rather a theory or an argument fall apart than the building in which I'm currently sitting.
So while study time may well be decreasing, the ramifications remain unclear. Given the costs of getting (or indeed not getting) a higher-education today, it is I believe a pertinent question, and warrants greater scrutiny. Something to considering anyway.
Happy Thursday, friends :)
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Learning from frustration
Sometimes we become frustrated, impatient, or angry with something. In a quick world where every appetite or desire can be satiated almost instantly, I suspect the occurrence of these feelings may become more prominent when things that usually work well fail to perform as expected. It may be that people become short with one another when demands are not, like demands made to functioning machines, met instantly.
This is just as true, though not nearly as noticeable, as when the demand is made of ourselves. For example, I have experienced frustration many times when, having asked myself to be creative, I instantly found my mind devoid of relevant thoughts. Indeed that harder I tried, very often the poorer the result.
In other cases I've asked my body to perform a particular workout, only to find that my response proved less-vigorous that my conscious mind expected. The resulting frustration almost always produced a further diminishment in performance, and still more frustration thereby. The negative cycle can form from this type of activity, and it's spiral is often difficult to break.
Why these negative cycles occur is not always clear, but I suspect they result in part from a mis-match between expectations and reality. Sometimes this mis-match can be reconciled by sheer will, such as discussed in an earlier post on expectation and athletic performance. Experiments discussed in that post suggested a modest-but-measurable capacity for people to exercise beyond their previously-perceived limits because, given the information they'd been give, they believed such a mis-match should not actually exist. Later experiments showed the effect of this belief has limits, but is effective to a point.
It would seem then that will alone cannot overcome major instances in which our expectations do not accord with reality. This can be frustrating, but also instructive. Unmet expectations reveal aspects of our thinking and performance of which we might not have otherwise been aware. For example, if a runner expects to run 15:00 for the 5k and runs 16:40 instead, the experience is a potential treasure-trove of information. Why did the runner have such high expectations? Were they warranted or were they made without regard to evidence and other factors? If warranted, what factors undermined the performance? Was it a poor pacing strategy, unexpected weather, psychological stress, or nutrition? The questions one might ask are numerous, and the answers, given honestly, may prove helpful in planning for the future, minimizing frustration, and remaining positive.
The same method may have wider application when expectations do not match reality. A person who treats me poorly might be a jerk, or they might be having a bad day. I relationship I expect to flourish but instead sinks like a stone may be the result of actions made by one or both parties, but may also be the result of deeper levels of incompatibility that have driven the two sides, however imperceptibly, further apart.
The point is that un-matched expectations can be frustrating but also instructive, illuminating aspects of reality that might have otherwise gone unnoticed. In some cases the factors involved may be simple, and in others quite complex. Remaining positive through it all requires many things, but a healthy understanding of how the pieces fit may be a good start. Something to consider anyway.
Happy Tuesday, friends :)
This is just as true, though not nearly as noticeable, as when the demand is made of ourselves. For example, I have experienced frustration many times when, having asked myself to be creative, I instantly found my mind devoid of relevant thoughts. Indeed that harder I tried, very often the poorer the result.
In other cases I've asked my body to perform a particular workout, only to find that my response proved less-vigorous that my conscious mind expected. The resulting frustration almost always produced a further diminishment in performance, and still more frustration thereby. The negative cycle can form from this type of activity, and it's spiral is often difficult to break.
Why these negative cycles occur is not always clear, but I suspect they result in part from a mis-match between expectations and reality. Sometimes this mis-match can be reconciled by sheer will, such as discussed in an earlier post on expectation and athletic performance. Experiments discussed in that post suggested a modest-but-measurable capacity for people to exercise beyond their previously-perceived limits because, given the information they'd been give, they believed such a mis-match should not actually exist. Later experiments showed the effect of this belief has limits, but is effective to a point.
It would seem then that will alone cannot overcome major instances in which our expectations do not accord with reality. This can be frustrating, but also instructive. Unmet expectations reveal aspects of our thinking and performance of which we might not have otherwise been aware. For example, if a runner expects to run 15:00 for the 5k and runs 16:40 instead, the experience is a potential treasure-trove of information. Why did the runner have such high expectations? Were they warranted or were they made without regard to evidence and other factors? If warranted, what factors undermined the performance? Was it a poor pacing strategy, unexpected weather, psychological stress, or nutrition? The questions one might ask are numerous, and the answers, given honestly, may prove helpful in planning for the future, minimizing frustration, and remaining positive.
The same method may have wider application when expectations do not match reality. A person who treats me poorly might be a jerk, or they might be having a bad day. I relationship I expect to flourish but instead sinks like a stone may be the result of actions made by one or both parties, but may also be the result of deeper levels of incompatibility that have driven the two sides, however imperceptibly, further apart.
The point is that un-matched expectations can be frustrating but also instructive, illuminating aspects of reality that might have otherwise gone unnoticed. In some cases the factors involved may be simple, and in others quite complex. Remaining positive through it all requires many things, but a healthy understanding of how the pieces fit may be a good start. Something to consider anyway.
Happy Tuesday, friends :)
Thursday, May 24, 2012
The mental component of peak performance
In an earlier post, we discussed some aspects of "peaking" for distance running competitions. The discussion focused primarily on the importance of progressing from "general fitness" to "race fitness" as the date of competition approached. In light of more recent posts (here and here) regarding the conscious appraisal of fatigue, it seemed fitting that a further wrinkle should be added to our discussion of achieving a peak.
The recent posts to which I referred above discuss a paper by Dr. Tim Noakes which suggests that the sensation of fatigue is not a "physical event" in the working muscles so much as a brain-based emotion, the appraisal of which affects the way athletes decide how hard to push themselves in a race setting. The paper provided the conscious element of Dr. Noakes' otherwise unconscious Central Governor Theory for which I had been searching since writing an earlier discussion on the role of expectation in exercise performance. Accordingly, I'm beginning to think that "peaking" involves a mental as well as a physical progression from general to race fitness.
I admit ignorance when it comes to the specifics of mental racing fitness, but Dr. Noakes' paper offers one possible way of better understanding its nature. As he describes:
"...somewhere in the final section of the race, the brains of the second, and lower placed finishers accept their respective finishing positions and no longer choose to challenge for a higher finish."
Accordingly, a conscious mental decision regarding some variation on the question "Am I going to win this race?" would seem to be the final step of several in the termination of exercise in races. Admittedly some athletes push beyond the physical capacity of their bodies and pass out (making their conscious choice moot), but having the ability to keep affirming "yes" to the question stated above--even under the most intense sensations of fatigue brought on by racing--may indicate the chief mental component of peak racing performance. For simplicity's sake, we might call this component mental toughness.
How does one go about bringing mental toughness to a peak? As we described in an earlier post on the effect of expectation on performance, changes in the way an athlete appraises available information alters the level of performance they can achieve. In the experiment discussed in that post, cyclists who believed they were racing an avatar of equal ability to themselves managed to race 1% faster over 4km than previous time-trials suggested they could go. While the effect was limited, it suggests that the mental component of fitness is, at least in part, derived from the way athletes interpret information during a race.
In his book Lore of Running, Dr. Noakes presents a model describing how stimuli interact with aspects of the mind to yield behavior. An incoming stimulus is interpreted by a belief system, which through the positive or negative interaction between thoughts and emotions yield behaviors. Thoughts, emotions, and behaviors all provide feedback to the belief system, which undergoes changes as a result (Lore of Running, 529). The belief system then, appears to be the vanguard of the mind's capacity for toughness under rigorous circumstances.
According to Dr. Noakes, "The difference between a strong or weak belief system is determined by your self-concept," which he defines as, "what you believe about yourself" (532). Furthermore, the "self-concept is not static: every day [it] faces new challenges that will either enhance or detract from it."In this way, self-concept is analogous to physical fitness, in that it changes over time depending on circumstances. One big difference I see is that while physical fitness tends to change gradually, the self-concept has the potential to change daily. One should expect individual variation in this regard, but it seems important to bear in mind that how we interpret stimuli is always responding to feedback from our thoughts, emotions, and experience.
This points to an important element of preparing the mind for a peak performance; namely, by establishing a positive feed-back loop between emotions, thoughts, and behaviors as a way of strengthening the belief system, and thereby increasing our capacity for mental toughness in racing. In general this seems to mean helping athletes develop habits of positive self-talk, in which the mind habitually encourages itself when faced with adversity. For some athletes this will probably come quite naturally, but for others I suspect it would require much effort. The rewards of a strong self-concept would most likely extend beyond the bounds of sport, and as such is a valuable skill for any athlete to cultivate.
The basic takeaway from the preceeding discussion is that mental aspects of performance play an important role in peak racing. As such, any program seeking to bring athletes to a peak on at the desired moment would do well not to neglect this modest but potentially decisive component of fitness. As one paper discussed my Dr. Noakes concludes, most athletes are, 'physically overeducated but emotionally undereducated'" (Tutko and Tosi 1976, page 11 in Noakes, Lore of Running, 517). Correcting this imbalance may do much not only to improve performance, but also improve athletes' emotional well-being, and long-term interest in sport. Something to consider anyway.
Happy Thursday, friends :)
The recent posts to which I referred above discuss a paper by Dr. Tim Noakes which suggests that the sensation of fatigue is not a "physical event" in the working muscles so much as a brain-based emotion, the appraisal of which affects the way athletes decide how hard to push themselves in a race setting. The paper provided the conscious element of Dr. Noakes' otherwise unconscious Central Governor Theory for which I had been searching since writing an earlier discussion on the role of expectation in exercise performance. Accordingly, I'm beginning to think that "peaking" involves a mental as well as a physical progression from general to race fitness.
I admit ignorance when it comes to the specifics of mental racing fitness, but Dr. Noakes' paper offers one possible way of better understanding its nature. As he describes:
"...somewhere in the final section of the race, the brains of the second, and lower placed finishers accept their respective finishing positions and no longer choose to challenge for a higher finish."
Accordingly, a conscious mental decision regarding some variation on the question "Am I going to win this race?" would seem to be the final step of several in the termination of exercise in races. Admittedly some athletes push beyond the physical capacity of their bodies and pass out (making their conscious choice moot), but having the ability to keep affirming "yes" to the question stated above--even under the most intense sensations of fatigue brought on by racing--may indicate the chief mental component of peak racing performance. For simplicity's sake, we might call this component mental toughness.
How does one go about bringing mental toughness to a peak? As we described in an earlier post on the effect of expectation on performance, changes in the way an athlete appraises available information alters the level of performance they can achieve. In the experiment discussed in that post, cyclists who believed they were racing an avatar of equal ability to themselves managed to race 1% faster over 4km than previous time-trials suggested they could go. While the effect was limited, it suggests that the mental component of fitness is, at least in part, derived from the way athletes interpret information during a race.
In his book Lore of Running, Dr. Noakes presents a model describing how stimuli interact with aspects of the mind to yield behavior. An incoming stimulus is interpreted by a belief system, which through the positive or negative interaction between thoughts and emotions yield behaviors. Thoughts, emotions, and behaviors all provide feedback to the belief system, which undergoes changes as a result (Lore of Running, 529). The belief system then, appears to be the vanguard of the mind's capacity for toughness under rigorous circumstances.
According to Dr. Noakes, "The difference between a strong or weak belief system is determined by your self-concept," which he defines as, "what you believe about yourself" (532). Furthermore, the "self-concept is not static: every day [it] faces new challenges that will either enhance or detract from it."In this way, self-concept is analogous to physical fitness, in that it changes over time depending on circumstances. One big difference I see is that while physical fitness tends to change gradually, the self-concept has the potential to change daily. One should expect individual variation in this regard, but it seems important to bear in mind that how we interpret stimuli is always responding to feedback from our thoughts, emotions, and experience.
This points to an important element of preparing the mind for a peak performance; namely, by establishing a positive feed-back loop between emotions, thoughts, and behaviors as a way of strengthening the belief system, and thereby increasing our capacity for mental toughness in racing. In general this seems to mean helping athletes develop habits of positive self-talk, in which the mind habitually encourages itself when faced with adversity. For some athletes this will probably come quite naturally, but for others I suspect it would require much effort. The rewards of a strong self-concept would most likely extend beyond the bounds of sport, and as such is a valuable skill for any athlete to cultivate.
The basic takeaway from the preceeding discussion is that mental aspects of performance play an important role in peak racing. As such, any program seeking to bring athletes to a peak on at the desired moment would do well not to neglect this modest but potentially decisive component of fitness. As one paper discussed my Dr. Noakes concludes, most athletes are, 'physically overeducated but emotionally undereducated'" (Tutko and Tosi 1976, page 11 in Noakes, Lore of Running, 517). Correcting this imbalance may do much not only to improve performance, but also improve athletes' emotional well-being, and long-term interest in sport. Something to consider anyway.
Happy Thursday, friends :)
Saturday, May 19, 2012
Having a closer look
When two people, or groups of people, start liking the same things, there is sometimes a tendency to believe they like those things for the same reason. Yet a closer look suggests that is not always true.
This is the main idea of Mr. Tom Doctoroff Saturday Essay in this weekend's The Wall Steet Journal. Entitled "What the Chinese Want," Mr. Doctoroff's essay seeks to refute the notion that Chinese consumers are becoming "western" due to their interest in western products. Rather, a careful examination of Chinese consumer culture reveals the continuation of distinct cultural patterns that western marketers should not ignore. As Mr. Doctoroff relates:
"If I've learned anything from my 20 years working as an advertising executive in China, it is that successful Western brands craft their message here to be "global," not "foreign"—so that they can become vessels of Chinese culture."
Accordingly, Mr. Doctoroff believes brands seeking to make their way in China should follow three basic rules. They are briefly:
1.) "...products that are consumed in public, directly or indirectly, command huge price premiums relative to goods used in private."
2.) "...the benefits of a product should be external, not internal."
3.) "...products must address the need to navigate the crosscurrents of ambition and regimentation, of standing out while fitting in."
For further details, consult the link.
I don't write about the rules because my interest in this essay isn't the specifics of marketing in China, so much as the broader idea that subtle but important differences between two cultures' perspectives can be shrouded by shared interests, particularly with shared consumer goods. In short, it's possible to like a lot of the same things, but for vastly different reasons. The examples in the essay are numerous, but my favorite is:
"[In China]...Spas and resorts do better when they promise not only relaxation but also recharged batteries. Infant formulas must promote intelligence, not happiness. Kids aren't taken to Pizza Hut so that they can enjoy pizza; they are rewarded with academic "triumph feasts." Beauty products must help a woman "move forward." Even beer must do something. In Western countries, letting the good times roll is enough; in China, pilsner must bring people together, reinforce trust and promote mutual financial gain. "
Spas, baby formula, pizza, and beer; all things with which many Americans can relate. Yet in China--and other countries perhaps--these products serve a different utility. They have their uses obviously, but they aren't the same as people from a different culture might at first assume. As such, there's a good chance of misunderstanding. From a business perspective, that may mean low sales. From a personal perspective, that may lead some to declare others as "weird" in a negative light. From a foreign policy perspective, that can mean a spike in tension, and possibly even war.
Therefore a lesson from Mr. Doctoroff's essay is the value of paying close attention to the different ways cultures use similar things. The assumption that the utility of product is the same no matter where (or by whom) it's used appears to be dubious at best. A closer look may reveal a world of difference. Something to consider anyway.
Happy Saturday, friends :)
This is the main idea of Mr. Tom Doctoroff Saturday Essay in this weekend's The Wall Steet Journal. Entitled "What the Chinese Want," Mr. Doctoroff's essay seeks to refute the notion that Chinese consumers are becoming "western" due to their interest in western products. Rather, a careful examination of Chinese consumer culture reveals the continuation of distinct cultural patterns that western marketers should not ignore. As Mr. Doctoroff relates:
"If I've learned anything from my 20 years working as an advertising executive in China, it is that successful Western brands craft their message here to be "global," not "foreign"—so that they can become vessels of Chinese culture."
Accordingly, Mr. Doctoroff believes brands seeking to make their way in China should follow three basic rules. They are briefly:
1.) "...products that are consumed in public, directly or indirectly, command huge price premiums relative to goods used in private."
2.) "...the benefits of a product should be external, not internal."
3.) "...products must address the need to navigate the crosscurrents of ambition and regimentation, of standing out while fitting in."
For further details, consult the link.
I don't write about the rules because my interest in this essay isn't the specifics of marketing in China, so much as the broader idea that subtle but important differences between two cultures' perspectives can be shrouded by shared interests, particularly with shared consumer goods. In short, it's possible to like a lot of the same things, but for vastly different reasons. The examples in the essay are numerous, but my favorite is:
"[In China]...Spas and resorts do better when they promise not only relaxation but also recharged batteries. Infant formulas must promote intelligence, not happiness. Kids aren't taken to Pizza Hut so that they can enjoy pizza; they are rewarded with academic "triumph feasts." Beauty products must help a woman "move forward." Even beer must do something. In Western countries, letting the good times roll is enough; in China, pilsner must bring people together, reinforce trust and promote mutual financial gain. "
Spas, baby formula, pizza, and beer; all things with which many Americans can relate. Yet in China--and other countries perhaps--these products serve a different utility. They have their uses obviously, but they aren't the same as people from a different culture might at first assume. As such, there's a good chance of misunderstanding. From a business perspective, that may mean low sales. From a personal perspective, that may lead some to declare others as "weird" in a negative light. From a foreign policy perspective, that can mean a spike in tension, and possibly even war.
Therefore a lesson from Mr. Doctoroff's essay is the value of paying close attention to the different ways cultures use similar things. The assumption that the utility of product is the same no matter where (or by whom) it's used appears to be dubious at best. A closer look may reveal a world of difference. Something to consider anyway.
Happy Saturday, friends :)
Monday, May 14, 2012
An improving job market for the Class of 2012
Lately, the first few weeks of May have proved a popular time for reporting on the job market, student-debt, and the rising cost of higher education. Since 2008, the news has been mostly bad: "Ninety-four percent of students who earn a bachelor’s degree borrow to pay for higher education — up from 45 percent in 1993," reported Andrew Martin and Andrew Lehren in The New York Times two days ago(link). "For all borrowers," they cite from a report by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, "the average debt in 2011 was $23,300, with 10 percent owing more than $54,000 and 3 percent more than $100,000." Coupled with a national unemployment rate that remains stubbornly above 8%, many believe student loan debt (almost $1 trillion) for higher education could be the next debt-bubble to pop.
Fortunately, there is good news. As reported by the Associated Press in this morning's newspaper, "This year's college seniors are seeing more job opportunities than graduates in the previous three classes."
In some ways this should come as no surprise, since employment has been growing (however slowly) for the last year and a half. "3.1 million jobs,"according to the report, were created in that time, compared to the loss of 6.9 million jobs "between September 2008 and August 2010."
For a number of reasons, it is believed this year's class will have a better (but by no means easy) chance of finding a job. For one thing, the class of 2012 spent the worst years of the recession in school. This meant they were more protected from the down-turn than those already seeking work or trying to get by while repaying loans. In addition, the Associated Press report suggests that the class of 2012:
"...used their college years to prepare for the brutal realities of the job market that would await them. They began networking for jobs much earlier, as freshmen in some cases. They pursued summer internships not simply as resume boosters, but as gateways to permanent jobs. And they developed more realistic expectations about landing a job in the ideal place and at the ideal salary."
In short, the student loan problem remains a major issue, but adapting students and improving labor markets together offer hope that a major crisis can be avoided. Let us hope that a growing economy, better loan counselling, and greater public-university cost-reform will help graduates and society continue to benefit from quality higher-education.
Happy Monday, friends :)
Fortunately, there is good news. As reported by the Associated Press in this morning's newspaper, "This year's college seniors are seeing more job opportunities than graduates in the previous three classes."
In some ways this should come as no surprise, since employment has been growing (however slowly) for the last year and a half. "3.1 million jobs,"according to the report, were created in that time, compared to the loss of 6.9 million jobs "between September 2008 and August 2010."
For a number of reasons, it is believed this year's class will have a better (but by no means easy) chance of finding a job. For one thing, the class of 2012 spent the worst years of the recession in school. This meant they were more protected from the down-turn than those already seeking work or trying to get by while repaying loans. In addition, the Associated Press report suggests that the class of 2012:
"...used their college years to prepare for the brutal realities of the job market that would await them. They began networking for jobs much earlier, as freshmen in some cases. They pursued summer internships not simply as resume boosters, but as gateways to permanent jobs. And they developed more realistic expectations about landing a job in the ideal place and at the ideal salary."
In short, the student loan problem remains a major issue, but adapting students and improving labor markets together offer hope that a major crisis can be avoided. Let us hope that a growing economy, better loan counselling, and greater public-university cost-reform will help graduates and society continue to benefit from quality higher-education.
Happy Monday, friends :)
Friday, May 11, 2012
A brief reflection
My old college graduated a new class today, the class of 2012. I suppose for these new graduates, the school is also now their "old college." Funny how that works, but much luck to them all.
Today's graduation means it's been a year since my own, more or less. The interveneing year has proved quite a journey, full of adventures both fascinating and terrifying. In some ways, it's hard to believe a full year has gone by, while in others it's hard to believe a full decade hasn't. How is it possible for time to move so quickly yet so slowly as well?
I've learned a lot in the last year, and with any luck I'll learn a little more in the year to come. Schooling, it seems, doesn't end with school, and learning becomes a bit more diverse, self-directed, and hands-on than before. It's not always clear who the teacher is, or which answer is "right" in a given circumstance, but there are usually ample opportunities for engagment (even when you don't want them).
Taking a little time to think about these things can be helpful, but everyone seems to have their own way of doing it. Mine is writing, among others, which I discovered after graduation. Maybe you have one too.
At any rate, congratulations to all the various classes of 2012.
Happy Friday, friends :)
Today's graduation means it's been a year since my own, more or less. The interveneing year has proved quite a journey, full of adventures both fascinating and terrifying. In some ways, it's hard to believe a full year has gone by, while in others it's hard to believe a full decade hasn't. How is it possible for time to move so quickly yet so slowly as well?
I've learned a lot in the last year, and with any luck I'll learn a little more in the year to come. Schooling, it seems, doesn't end with school, and learning becomes a bit more diverse, self-directed, and hands-on than before. It's not always clear who the teacher is, or which answer is "right" in a given circumstance, but there are usually ample opportunities for engagment (even when you don't want them).
Taking a little time to think about these things can be helpful, but everyone seems to have their own way of doing it. Mine is writing, among others, which I discovered after graduation. Maybe you have one too.
At any rate, congratulations to all the various classes of 2012.
Happy Friday, friends :)
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
The 8th of May
While studying history in college, one thing that interested me was the way certain days gained significance due to something historical happening on them in the past. It's interesting in part because for some groups, the most important day of the year is an ordinary day for others. In other cases, one group remembers a day because of a triumph, or the birth of a hero, while another remembers the day for a defeat.
Take today, May 8th, for instance. On this date in 1945, Germany surrendered to the Allies, ending the Second World War (1939-1945) in Europe. From that day forward, some people called it "V-E Day," or "Victory in Europe," to commemorate the end of the war in that theatre. It also happens to be the day on which Harry S Truman (1884-1972) and Fredrich Hayek (1899-1992) were born. For both of them, V-E Day was simultaneously their birthday. I wonder how they celebrated...
A similar but different (and interesting) example took place during the Iranian Revolution in 1977-78. Following traditional Shi'ite memorial practices, services were held for protestors killed in the initial demonstrations 40 days after their death. The services served as national rallies in support of the original demonstrations, to the point that they exacerbated tensions further and yielded more protests, more fatalities, and more memorial services The ensuing cycle is an interesting facet of the Iranian Revolution.
The point is that in either case, particular days-- be they a specific day each year or a specific day in reference to another--become significant for historical reasons, and influence the way we understand the world. Perhaps it is true that you can learn a lot about a culture by knowing their significant days. Something to try, maybe.
Happy Tuesday (and V-E Day) friends :)
Take today, May 8th, for instance. On this date in 1945, Germany surrendered to the Allies, ending the Second World War (1939-1945) in Europe. From that day forward, some people called it "V-E Day," or "Victory in Europe," to commemorate the end of the war in that theatre. It also happens to be the day on which Harry S Truman (1884-1972) and Fredrich Hayek (1899-1992) were born. For both of them, V-E Day was simultaneously their birthday. I wonder how they celebrated...
A similar but different (and interesting) example took place during the Iranian Revolution in 1977-78. Following traditional Shi'ite memorial practices, services were held for protestors killed in the initial demonstrations 40 days after their death. The services served as national rallies in support of the original demonstrations, to the point that they exacerbated tensions further and yielded more protests, more fatalities, and more memorial services The ensuing cycle is an interesting facet of the Iranian Revolution.
The point is that in either case, particular days-- be they a specific day each year or a specific day in reference to another--become significant for historical reasons, and influence the way we understand the world. Perhaps it is true that you can learn a lot about a culture by knowing their significant days. Something to try, maybe.
Happy Tuesday (and V-E Day) friends :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)