An old inquiry from the WAVE - still open.
(From A.R.)
What does it mean to be an artist?
Is it an artifact of lifestyle? Perception? Is it an artifact of the artifacts of your lifestyle borne by your perception? Is it a self-claimed identity (who decides who an artist is)?
If you are not an artist, why not? Who is? Why?
Is dance art? Are dancers artists? How do engineers and scientists fit into this? Are we making artists - why or why not? (@WPI? @SDC?)
How is art different from life? How is being an artist different from breathing?
And where does money fit into all of this?
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Life Project: Dealing with Parents
BBC: Divorcing Parents Can Damage Children
When it comes to general education for life, I would say this is one of the most common experiences - notable others being the value of work and school and the nature of friendships and dating. Educators seem to have a hard time escaping their own perspective when it comes to work and school. Without time to socialize, friendships and dating are a hard topic - especially if students are underage. Relationships with parents are often discussed as an asset missing from the lives of some children - but this is more a complaint on grants that you see mentioned near reduced or free lunch. It's rarely discussed as something that could be fixed. I sometimes see parent reporting, but is there research out there on how best to engage parents? And how best to help children cope with their parents' immaturity? This seems only to worsen as kids grow into adults. For undergraduates, I would say it is their biggest project.
When it comes to general education for life, I would say this is one of the most common experiences - notable others being the value of work and school and the nature of friendships and dating. Educators seem to have a hard time escaping their own perspective when it comes to work and school. Without time to socialize, friendships and dating are a hard topic - especially if students are underage. Relationships with parents are often discussed as an asset missing from the lives of some children - but this is more a complaint on grants that you see mentioned near reduced or free lunch. It's rarely discussed as something that could be fixed. I sometimes see parent reporting, but is there research out there on how best to engage parents? And how best to help children cope with their parents' immaturity? This seems only to worsen as kids grow into adults. For undergraduates, I would say it is their biggest project.
Universities Miss the Point
NYT: Why are colleges so selective?
The situation with Universities seems to require someone to just call the entire situation how it is from a higher perspective - this contrasted with simply being really concrete about details regarding some specific subset of the phenomenon - even if, and perhaps especially if, the subset is large. Attention to big chunks seems to be how we miss the big picture while confidently thinking we're making good observations.
With Higher Education the point seems to be that we have two discussions going on almost completely apart from each other. You have community colleges that take anyone and selective universities that seem to have some scam going on where they charge you more because they are selective. (???) "We are more expensive than the usual guy! Therefore, you should compete to come here!" Maybe they would say that smarter students in one place makes it worth the money, or that the money goes to education, but I think anyone who actually observes reality knows this is bullshit. What does "smart" mean? And when is the last time a place like WPI did something with the motivation to improve education? Look at this new athletic facility at WPI. You could argue that it will improve quality of life for well-rounded students, but we barely pay lip service to that fantasy (which was once the reality of our school) and instead openly embrace the idea that its value is in increasing our national rankings, thereby making us more competitive, thus allowing us to charge more.
Normally if you bring this up to admins or trustees they treat you as if you're being naive. I wonder who is naive, though. Am I foolish for wondering when universities became profit machines instead of just institutions that needed to somehow break even? Is it silly to be puzzled at why we never talk about how to improve education in the form of actual classes, or actual projects, or actual learning materials, instead of just "better facilities"???
If the university side of the higher-ed continuum has lost its purpose, the community college end doesn't seem to be doing much better. Whenever a community college does well, they move their way to the other end of the spectrum. This often goes so far as actually re-classifying as a state university. I have no thoughts against why this shouldn't be called the gentrification of education.
So is anyone looking at the big picture here? It doesn't seem like it, but I wish someone would.
The situation with Universities seems to require someone to just call the entire situation how it is from a higher perspective - this contrasted with simply being really concrete about details regarding some specific subset of the phenomenon - even if, and perhaps especially if, the subset is large. Attention to big chunks seems to be how we miss the big picture while confidently thinking we're making good observations.
With Higher Education the point seems to be that we have two discussions going on almost completely apart from each other. You have community colleges that take anyone and selective universities that seem to have some scam going on where they charge you more because they are selective. (???) "We are more expensive than the usual guy! Therefore, you should compete to come here!" Maybe they would say that smarter students in one place makes it worth the money, or that the money goes to education, but I think anyone who actually observes reality knows this is bullshit. What does "smart" mean? And when is the last time a place like WPI did something with the motivation to improve education? Look at this new athletic facility at WPI. You could argue that it will improve quality of life for well-rounded students, but we barely pay lip service to that fantasy (which was once the reality of our school) and instead openly embrace the idea that its value is in increasing our national rankings, thereby making us more competitive, thus allowing us to charge more.
Normally if you bring this up to admins or trustees they treat you as if you're being naive. I wonder who is naive, though. Am I foolish for wondering when universities became profit machines instead of just institutions that needed to somehow break even? Is it silly to be puzzled at why we never talk about how to improve education in the form of actual classes, or actual projects, or actual learning materials, instead of just "better facilities"???
If the university side of the higher-ed continuum has lost its purpose, the community college end doesn't seem to be doing much better. Whenever a community college does well, they move their way to the other end of the spectrum. This often goes so far as actually re-classifying as a state university. I have no thoughts against why this shouldn't be called the gentrification of education.
So is anyone looking at the big picture here? It doesn't seem like it, but I wish someone would.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Games: A Waste of Time
NYT: Video Games in the Classroom
Tells the story of a transient fad (epidemic?) spread by "feel-the-learning" hippies who are ruining serious education.
Tells the story of a transient fad (epidemic?) spread by "feel-the-learning" hippies who are ruining serious education.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Emerging Adulthood?
NYT: Emerging Adulthood
The phenomena is so obvious as to have become part of our popular culture. Observational studies have shown it to apply generally to current youth, and neuroscience gives perspective to the developmental approach of viewing the phenomena in terms of the individual - but where is the role of culture and the previous generations who are parents and grandparents to those in question?
How far can basic scientific methods serve this inquiry? This example seems to suggest common ground between the social sciences and philosophy that could be explored through notions of modeling.
In particular, what can we say about the effects of Consumerism on this generation? Or even about the state of Consumerism, itself? Or of Modernity and the looming insights of post-modern thinking?
Has the existentialist project progressed? Or have the failings of the 20th Century merely begun to manifest themselves in different 21st Century forms?
Is there a moment for us to seize? A potential inflection point to steer our species in a better direction?
Weigh in!
The phenomena is so obvious as to have become part of our popular culture. Observational studies have shown it to apply generally to current youth, and neuroscience gives perspective to the developmental approach of viewing the phenomena in terms of the individual - but where is the role of culture and the previous generations who are parents and grandparents to those in question?
How far can basic scientific methods serve this inquiry? This example seems to suggest common ground between the social sciences and philosophy that could be explored through notions of modeling.
In particular, what can we say about the effects of Consumerism on this generation? Or even about the state of Consumerism, itself? Or of Modernity and the looming insights of post-modern thinking?
Has the existentialist project progressed? Or have the failings of the 20th Century merely begun to manifest themselves in different 21st Century forms?
Is there a moment for us to seize? A potential inflection point to steer our species in a better direction?
Weigh in!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)