So, I’m going to be honest here… when the professor assigned this “personal blog,” I was not too amused at all. I am not a fan of writing about myself or writing about any personal information about myself for that matter on the internet. I do not like allowing strangers to find out personal and confidential information that they would not have known otherwise. And I would be the one providing it to them, knowingly or not. But these thoughts triggered a couple others in my head and then the wheels just started turning full force.
One question that really stuck out in my head was this: why do people leave their phone numbers on their myspace or facebook pages?! I think that is so ludicrous! And my friends who have their phone numbers up there, are the ones who freak out when they get private calls and calls from random people they don’t know! Well, DUH! Where do you think they got it from? Oh, I wonder….
Another question that went along with the phone number was: why do people leave their addresses on their myspace and facebook’s too?! Now phone number, you can change easily if too many people get it… but your address! Come on now! You have to be joking! I have one of my really good friends who attend UM in Ann Arbor and she has her dorm room number and building listed. She is just giving the opportunity to all the creeps out there to find where she lives.
There are just so many ways to provide your personal information on the internet without you knowing. If you are a UM student, you address and phone number is on the internet. Yep, you are probably thinking, “No, no way. I didn’t put it up there…” Well, you didn’t, the school did. And to top it all off, anyone can access it! All you have to do is go to umich.edu, choose directory and type your name in. And there you have it! Ta-daa!! Right there in front of you is all the names the university has you registered under (many of which include your middle name), your address, phone number, and a few other pieces of information about you. This is a true example of how you are exposed to the internet, and ultimately you provided the university with all of your information so you did this to yourself…. But before you “X” out that page and freak out, there is a way to make it private and delete it J all you have to do is to choose “modify” and a log in page for ctools will appear. Log in, and you can choose to delete your personal information, and to make it private. Just make sure you SAVE SAVE SAVE!!
Now that we all know the dangers and all the other ways that you are exposed on the internet, what are you going to do about it? Are you just going to leave your phone number and address posted on your myspace or facebook? ?? Law and Order and CSI don’t just make up their material…. They get their inspiration from people like you…
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Activity 3: Critical Essay
In my Comp 106 class at the University of Michigan- Dearborn, we were all handed an article to read titled “Generational Myth” written by Siva Vaidhyanathan. This article is about the assumption by older generations that all young people must be tech-savvy because they grew up during the rise of technology. The author’s opinion differs against this assumption. Adding the opinions and voices of young people into “Generational Myth” will only support the effectiveness of the article Vaidhyanathan wants to portray.
The same claim can be made for Vaidhyanathan’s “Generational Myth” as for Bauerlein’s “The Dumbest Generation.” This claim is: It is “strongly argued but the voices of those who concern the author are curiously absent.” In the case of “Generational Myth,” the voices of those who concern the author” are voices of people in the age range of 18-23 year olds. Vaidhyanathan acknowledged that he is a college professor and the only evidence he provides from outside sources is that of other professors and authors who are obviously not in the college age range. The only voices heard in this article are those of scholars who are a part of an older generation. Although he believes that not all college-aged people have an extensive knowledge of computers, cellular phones, or any other types of technologies for that matter, it would have been even more effective if there were actual quotes provided by his students to back his statements and arguments up.
There are many things that could have come in the author’s advantage if he would have added the opinions of the generation being discussed. By simply adding the viewpoints of “those who concern the author,” the article would have been more convincing for those who were not impressed with reading it the first time. It is unfair and inadequate for anyone other than the people in the age group of 18-23 to speak for them. All of the voices heard in the article are those of scholars who are professors and are only providing their own personal opinion based on their observances and assumptions of their students. No one knows the facts and the opinions of 18-23 year olds better than 18-23 year olds themselves. Also, by adding the voices of that generation, Vaidhyanathan’s argument would have proven many of the scholars wrong, and that was the goal he was trying to achieve in his article. Vaidhyanathan’s article could become immensely stronger with the add-in of those different viewpoints.
Excluding the voices of “those who concern the author” has little, if no value to the article. If Vaidhyanathan’s opinion was that of those who think that all young people have an assumed knowledge of all kinds of technologies, then not providing the voices of his students would be beneficial to his argument. But Vaidhyanathan’s opinion is truly the opposite of those scholars who he quoted in this article. By excluding these voices, his article remains the same and has no extra influence on my view of it. If Vaidhyanathan did include the voices that represent my generation (people in the age group of 18-23), then I really do think that I would have agreed with all of the points that he tries to argue. Those points would have been well rounded and researched to the fullest. But Vaidhyanathan’s argument is not weakened at all by his choice not to include the voices of “those who concern the author.”
“Generation Myth” was an article written by Siva Vaidhyanathan with the intention to open up the eyes to all who read it about the assumptions that the younger generations are all tech-savvy. The voices of this generation are not heard once in this article. Although it would have only been more support for the author’s argument, it did not damper the article at all.
The same claim can be made for Vaidhyanathan’s “Generational Myth” as for Bauerlein’s “The Dumbest Generation.” This claim is: It is “strongly argued but the voices of those who concern the author are curiously absent.” In the case of “Generational Myth,” the voices of those who concern the author” are voices of people in the age range of 18-23 year olds. Vaidhyanathan acknowledged that he is a college professor and the only evidence he provides from outside sources is that of other professors and authors who are obviously not in the college age range. The only voices heard in this article are those of scholars who are a part of an older generation. Although he believes that not all college-aged people have an extensive knowledge of computers, cellular phones, or any other types of technologies for that matter, it would have been even more effective if there were actual quotes provided by his students to back his statements and arguments up.
There are many things that could have come in the author’s advantage if he would have added the opinions of the generation being discussed. By simply adding the viewpoints of “those who concern the author,” the article would have been more convincing for those who were not impressed with reading it the first time. It is unfair and inadequate for anyone other than the people in the age group of 18-23 to speak for them. All of the voices heard in the article are those of scholars who are professors and are only providing their own personal opinion based on their observances and assumptions of their students. No one knows the facts and the opinions of 18-23 year olds better than 18-23 year olds themselves. Also, by adding the voices of that generation, Vaidhyanathan’s argument would have proven many of the scholars wrong, and that was the goal he was trying to achieve in his article. Vaidhyanathan’s article could become immensely stronger with the add-in of those different viewpoints.
Excluding the voices of “those who concern the author” has little, if no value to the article. If Vaidhyanathan’s opinion was that of those who think that all young people have an assumed knowledge of all kinds of technologies, then not providing the voices of his students would be beneficial to his argument. But Vaidhyanathan’s opinion is truly the opposite of those scholars who he quoted in this article. By excluding these voices, his article remains the same and has no extra influence on my view of it. If Vaidhyanathan did include the voices that represent my generation (people in the age group of 18-23), then I really do think that I would have agreed with all of the points that he tries to argue. Those points would have been well rounded and researched to the fullest. But Vaidhyanathan’s argument is not weakened at all by his choice not to include the voices of “those who concern the author.”
“Generation Myth” was an article written by Siva Vaidhyanathan with the intention to open up the eyes to all who read it about the assumptions that the younger generations are all tech-savvy. The voices of this generation are not heard once in this article. Although it would have only been more support for the author’s argument, it did not damper the article at all.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Visual Advocacy Project (Project #1)
When this project was first described in class, I immediately asked myself, “What issue am I passionate about?!” That same day, I was going to my old high school to have lunch with a few of the art teachers. As I walked into the photography classroom, I realized how much I missed taking those classes. But at the same time I was having all those old memories flood my head, I remembered how many students were underappreciated and were never acknowledged from the school for their talents. While waiting for the lunch bell to ring, I wandered off into the art supply closet. To my surprise, it was practically empty! At lunch, I asked all three teachers what was the deal with the lack of supplies. All of them responded simultaneously with one word: BUDGET! They proceeded to tell me about the number of students in their classes and how they do not know what to do because there are not enough supplies for them. Enrollment has been rapidly climbing with each year and that absolutely thrills them. But I found out that just because enrollment it up, it does not necessarily mean their budget goes up too. After lunch, I was invited to stay after to look at some of the artworks produced by the students. I was blown away by how talented these kids are! Everywhere I looked there was a different style of art being executed. From manual photography photo shoots with black and white film, to a pallet of pastels on canvas, beautiful art was being produced right before my eyes! Being a former photography student, I was ecstatic when the option to take pictures as the visual was offered. I asked the art teachers if I could come back another day to capture some of the beautiful artwork created by their students, and they agreed to let me.
I observed at least one hour of every class offered. Painting and drawing was the first class I sat in on. I grabbed a stool and sat on the side of the teacher’s desk. I looked to my left and noticed that there was a painting being covered by a bunch of books and papers. This painting was very colorful and just had so much life to it. To me, it represented the hidden beauty and talent art and the students have to offer. At the end of the hour, I walked around and noticed a familiar face. This face was of one of my unfocused and disobedient softball players I coached last spring. I was absolutely shocked that she was in an art class. Not only was she in an art class, but she was being quiet and was focused on her assignment. I sat in the chair next to her and it took her a good five minutes to notice it was me. I praised her on her finished artwork because I did not expect her to find her outlet in art and because it was amazing!
The next class I visited was ceramics. I walked into the “fire room” and just as I walked in, there was a foot in my face! A foot made from clay! This foot was very realistic and had a great resemblance to a human foot. All the detail put into it was astonishing and how it was just set there at eye level at the door as if it was purposely put there for all who entered to see. The next picture I took was of a shelf full of clay pieces, completed by first year students, which were already fired. This self just caught my eye for two reasons: one, because it was full of versatility and different techniques, and two, because the composition and layout of this photo was pleasing to the eye.
Photography was the last classroom I visited. The darkroom is a very frightening place to be if you are by yourself. There are a few small red safelights on so you can see your way around, but other than that, it is completely dark! I felt the need to take this picture because it shows the extra work needed to make an original black and white photograph. In the corner of the classroom were two first year students learning how to use lighting to their advantage in a photograph. I actually helped them out with their photo shoot. The two girls were happy to receive all the help they could get from someone with a little more experience.
Saving art in public schools is a cause near and dear to my heart. The students in these classes deserve to be acknowledged and respected by the school. Only if there was enough money in the art budget to accommodate all the eager, newly enrolled art students.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)