Two Year vs. Four Year Universities

In todays society everywhere you look you can find colleges and universities. With thousands of universities and colleges in America, signs of their presence is often hard to avoid. Colleges and Universities have emerged in all sizes and qualities of education. It seems like their has emerged a college for everyone, whether it be the ivy league universities for those with brilliance or the local community college for those looking for a break. Whether you have realized it or not, their is a major difference between many of these educational institutions. The most notable difference being whether the institution is a non-profit traditional four year or a for-profit two year place of education.

For-profit universities have numerous benefits over their four-year counterparts. At these two-year universities students take only the courses which are necessary for their field of work, skipping classes which are not related to the chosen major. Many of these skipped classes have been traditionally required by four year universities. By doing so students earn a degree in half the time that has been traditionally required, often only two years. Also since these colleges are a business and care about profit, they typically have less waste than the traditional universities. At these institutions you won’t find wasteful multi-million dollar basketball arena’s or fancy under used libraries. This ultimately saves money and places students into the working world faster. However besides benefits, these universities lack many of the elements that come with the traditional four year universities. 

Four year institutions require students to take a large variety of classes, creating well-rounded students. These well-rounded students are often knowledgable outside of their chosen major, a major benefit in the eyes of potential employers. The most substantial element that four-year non-profit educational institutions bring is prestige. Prestige consists of everything from the name on the degree to the alumni networks that come along with the degree. These networks can be of great benefit when it comes to the post-graduation job search. Many schools with outstanding prestige, such as ivy league schools like Harvard, can just about guarantee their students jobs because of this prestige. The name of the school on their degree gets them the job rather than their personal traits. However, traditional for-profit four year universities have a lot of waste. These schools often have multi-million dollar athletic facilities, fancy internet connections, and extravagant landscaping, all which contribute nothing to the education of its students. This waste makes the cost of attending these places of study extremely high. An education at a non-state subsidized private university can often cost $40,000 a year. It is here where many believe that two year for-profit universities are a better choice. 

One of the critics of four year institutions is Reverend John P. Minogue. Within his essay titled “The Twentieth-Century University is Obsolete,” Reverend Minogue believes that all the waste within four year institutions is making them obsolete. John looks upon schools “factories”, where these two year places of study are more efficient. The Reverend believes that eventually people will grow sick of paying for the wasteful four year university. He also argues that the two year universities get students into the working world faster, where they gain experience that is more valuable then the experience gained with two more years of an education. 

I agree with Reverend Minogue to an extent. Eventually people will get tired of paying for the waste within four year universities. Four year universities need to be smarter when it comes to spending their money. They need to quit wasting money on building brand new and remodeling football and basketball stadiums every 20 years, especially when theirs nothing wrong with the previous stadium. However, I do not believe that the four year university will become obsolete and overtaken by two year colleges. These traditional four year universities must be doing something right, just look at the success of the graduates of each version of education. How many CEO’s have you heard of with a degree from a two year university? 

"Watching TV Makes You Smarter?"

Millions faithfully tune in their television sets week after week to television shows such as 24, Entourage, and Grey’s Anatomy. Modern day television has evolved quite dramatically from its predecessor 20 years ago. In todays world, television shows contain complex plot lines, a dramatic shift from the simple plot lines which appeared in television shows years ago. Some believe that this complex plot makes individuals smarter which I agree with. However, I also believe that these shows are also creating individuals who struggle to stay focused and think on their own.

Creators of modern television have created a scheme. A scheme which in an essence hooks viewers into the television shows they watch. By using a complex line of plot, these creators effectively create an addictive form of entertainment. Within modern shows, each episode builds on the previous, both emotionally and intensity wise. It is common for television shows to contain cliff hangers and drastic story “arcs.” Often times shows also will introduce a new problem once a problem is solved. Viewers are addicted and feel an urge to watch every show. In the end, television has evolved into devise which constantly makes its viewers think. Viewers must think both critically and creatively about what will happen next or even what is currently occurring in these shows. This thinking has made these shows more entertaining for individuals to watch. 

Steven Johnson analyzes this shift within television in his article “Watching TV Makes You Smarter.” Steven believes that the “constant thinking” that these television shows require makes viewers smarter. His reason behind this is that people now have to watch TV shows from the beginning to the end and think critically about what is going on, in-order to fully comprehend what is going on. This is because of all the complex situations. Plots of modern television go on for several episodes, sometimes even years. One cannot just watch one episode and fully understand everything that is occurring within the television show. Because of the thinking that undergoes during the viewing of a modern television show, Steven believes that television makes individuals smarter.

I agree with Steven when he says “modern television makes its viewers smarter”. However, I also believe that it is making these viewers more helpless at the same time. These shows make you think subconsciously. Viewers may be getting smarter, but they don't realize it. These shows are addictive and entertaining, which leads to its viewers who area accustomed to being entertained effortlessly. I believed that this creates lazy individuals who only do whats fun. This is often seen in children, one of the major groups of viewers of these television shows, who refuse to do their school work because its “boring.” These viewers are also apart of a growing trend of individuals who need stimulation to critically think, which will hurt them during both their working and educational careers. 

Modern television is creating a lazy society which only thinks in situations that individuals deem entertaining. Creators of modern television create these complex plot lines out of greed. With viewers hooked in and addicted to the plots of the shows, viewings and thus ratings of these shows dramatically increase, which increases the over revenues of these shows. With an increase in profits these creators can build even bigger extravagant Hollywood mansions, all at the expense of society. 

#1 Party School

This American Life’s #1 Party School episode talks about the current college “party” life style and the issues which it has presented to Penn State, the number one ranked party school in the nation. Drinking and other party related activities presents Penn State and many other schools with a wide variety problems. 

Many similarities and differences can be found between the party scenes here at Xavier and Penn State. At both schools, and at just about every school, you can find disrespectful drunk students and underage drinking. However, I do not believe these things here at Xavier have escalated to the levels found at Penn State. Sure some students here at Xavier get “drunk” and do stupid disrespectful things, such as kick over trash cans in surrounding neighborhoods; but I have yet to see neighbors of Xavier’s campus go to the “extremes” that the neighbors have had to gone to at Penn State. A perfect example of these extreme measures would be the situation of Larry Jones, the man interviewed by This American Life. Larry lives by the fraternities at Penn State and comes across problems such as kids kicking his fence, peeing in his yard, and walking through his yard every weekend. The problems have become so severe at Larry’s house that he has had to install a system of motion sensors in his yard. This example demonstrates exactly how bad the drinking problems at Penn State have become. This problem is so severe that the neighbors of Penn State have spent considerable amounts of money to install these technologies, just to protect their property. Penn State has Greek Fraternities, which I believe are the cause of many of its’ problems. These fraternities throw a considerable amount of parties. These parties, which are thrown on Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and Saturday, have majorly contributed to Penn’s “#1 Party School” ranking, 15% alcohol related assault rate, and the 1,700 college students nation wide which die alcohol related deaths every year.

As I said earlier, I believe that we have not yet have reached the “Penn State level” here at Xavier. For the most part, I believe that the neighbors of our campus enjoy living next door to Xavier. The attitudes of our neighbors are a critical component of our schools reputation. If our neighbors think our school is trash, its fair to say that other people outside of our neighborhood will think the same. However if we do not take action, I believe that we will eventually reach the level of problems found at Penn State. If we are not careful we too will have 40% percent of the city’s budget going to the police department, just to deal with drunk students like University Park, PA. If drinking problems grow any further here at Xavier, neighbors of our campus will also have to have to spend large amounts of money to secure their property. I believe that the main reason Xavier does not experience the level of problems Penn State experiences is largely due to our absence of the Greek fraternity system. All the drinking that is promoted within this fraternity system takes away from the educational experience and diminishes the academic reputation of the school. Students who are always drinking are learning absolutely nothing during time when they could be studying and learning a great deal. Parents pay an outrageous amount of money to send their children to college. Shouldn’t these kids take advantage of every part of this education? Why even bother to pay this large amount of money if all these students are going to do is party and waste this money away?

College vs. High School

            College so far is going quite well and believe it or not it has been quite fun. College is really different than high school. Compared to high school, I have a lot more time outside of class as I spend less time in class. I’ve had to learn to manage this extra time. In high school it seems like my parents and teachers helped structure my time, telling me what I should do on assignments and such. This isn’t the case anymore; I’ve had to learn to manage my time. Unlike high school, Professors assign papers that will be due like 3 weeks later and not mention the paper again until its time to collect it. This has forced me to keep on task with my assignments. I now have to plan when I will do various parts of the assignment so that I am not trying to write a 10 page paper the night before it is due.

            The professors here at Xavier are of way higher quality than the teachers I dealt with in high school. In high school it seems like a lot of the teachers hated their jobs and were “counting down the days till their retirement.” Teachers here seem to be passionate about and love the subjects that they teach. Not only do they seem to love teaching, they have work experience in their subject and actually know what they are talking about. The professors here don’t just read straight from a textbook like most of my high school teachers did.

            I haven’t failed any assignments or tests yet and have done decent grade-wise on every subject. All of my mid-term grades where either B+’s or B’s. I’m not satisfied with these grades, but I’m not 100% unhappy with myself either. Especially considering that most of my friends and people in my dorm received lower grades, many of which also have more lenient/easier professors. In high school it was really easy to get A’s, all you had to do is put forth effort and memorize facts and terms. Here at Xavier, It seems like you can work your butt off, know all the facts and terms on the test/exam really well, and still end up with a B. To get an A most of my Professors expect you to make connections, outside of the terms and facts mentioned in class and found in the textbook.

            College up to now has been a learning experience. I have had to learn to manage my time and stay on task. The biggest thing for me so far has been learning to stay “unstressed.” Every week I receive tons of work from my classes. I look at this work and think to myself “theirs no way I am going to be able to do this with the time I have”, and begin to get really stressed out while I sit there wondering how I am going to manage to do all of it. In reality, I have more than enough time to finish all of the work. By sitting there and stressing out I am wasting tons of time, time in which I could have done a considerable amount of the work. Every week I manage to get all my work done. Overtime this has begun to make me realize more and more that I have a lot more time than I first thought. A lot of this “stressing” has to do with the fact that I am still used to my high school days, where I really didn’t have a lot of time outside of school. I have started to realize that I have a lot of time, making it possible to get all of the assignments completed. Continuing in to the second half of the semester, I need to continue to stay on task and start planning on my day better than I am currently doing. I believe that by planning my day better I will more so realize that I have a lot of time to complete everything. By realizing that it’s possible to finish everything I feel that I can eliminate most of this “stress” that I have been dealing with. 

Not Necessarily Happily Ever After

            According to Wikipedia, an arrange marriage is a marriage arranged by someone other than the couple getting married which avoids the process of courtship. Arranged marriages have been around for centuries, with roots that go back as far as Middle Ages Europe. In Middle Ages Europe arranged marriages where necessary for survival. According to Historian E.J. Graff, arranged marriages during this time also “ensured inheritances, and stitched together the social, political, and religious needs of a community.” To this this day arranged marriages can still found in places such as India where it is the prevalent form of marriage. Here in America, marriage is viewed as a product of “love”, where individuals freely choose their partner. Critics of arranged marriage argue that love is a “sensational force that can not be forced,” therefore love marriages are the way to go as the relationships are based on “compatibility.” However, I don’t entirely agree with this point. I don’t necessarily believe that the western tradition of marriage is any better than the tradition of arranged marriage, especially in the context which western marriages are formed.

            I believe that the western romance scene is influenced too heavily by pop culture. Pop-culture has given us a view of marriage whereas two individuals are “struck” by a force of love, become happily married, and thereby live “happily ever after” like a fairytale. Within this, I believe that there lie several issues. First of all, love under this theory is based entirely off of this “impression” of love, where Individuals fall into a “love at first sight”, which is often based of physical attraction. By doing so, individuals fall into a deep state that I would almost consider “coma-like.” These people become so convinced that this person is “the one” that they are willing to do just about anything. Even though, in the back of their minds, they may realize that they are not compatible with this person, many individuals will force themselves into believing that they are “destined” to be together. I am convinced that compatibility cannot be forced. Individuals may be able to produce a “fake” version of themself, however their “true self” will eventually be revealed causing great incompatibility. In addition to this people’s looks change over time, no one will look the same as they do today ten years from now. If the relationship is based entirely off of “physical attraction” it is imminent to fail when the person looks different a decade later.

            In my opinion, arranged marriage as a much more stable version of marriage. Under arranged marriage an elder relative such as your parent pick who you would you marry. This elder relative searches for your mate, looking for individuals who share the same values and characteristics as you and your family. Of course there is always a chance that this “matchmaker” can have other priorities upon their mind, such as bringing wealth into a family. However, often times this is not the case. These individuals are not biased by the “love curse” portrayed in the western tradition of marriage, leading these matching’s to be truly based off of “compatibility” instead arbitrary reasons such as looks.

            By going with arranged marriages we are sacrificing the “freely falling into love” idea. Despite doing so, though arranged marriages we are taking emotion out of the matchmaking equation, which leads to more stable relationships, furthering the “happily ever after” view. Statistics back up my belief, just look at divorce rates. Divorce rates in areas prevalent with arranged marriages are between 0 to 4 percent (Danny). Compare that to the western divorce rate of approximately 50 percent (Danny). The western version of marriage may not necessarily be the “happily ever after” in which it is portrayed.

Sources:

http://www.helium.com/items/234700-the-reality-of-arranged-marriages

http://www.utne.com/2003-05-01/whats-love-got-to-do-with-it.aspx

Gloversville & Richard Russo

High and Dry, a personal narrative by Richard Russo, is centered around his life growing up in the small town of Gloversville. In this essay Richard describes a variety of experiences in which he experienced which make up a part of him today. 

Gloversville, a small industrial american town, was once the glove making “capital”. During the early 1900’s, Gloversville produced some of the finest gloves in the world. However after World War II times began to change and the glove factory, which was at the center of Gloversville's economy, began to suffer. Cheep overseas labor and the introduction of efficient machinery caused jobs within glove factories to disappear. On top of this, a decline in the popularity of the glove as fashion styles modernized occurred, greatly reducing overall demand for gloves. Immediately following factories within Gloversville began to close, bringing the town of Gloversville and its businesses down with them. Before the decline Gloversville was an up-beat and hip place. During the early fifties streets within Gloversville where described as being heavily congested with cars and shoppers. Once the depression hit Gloversville became a ghost town. In his essay Richard describes Gloversville streets as being so empty that “you could have strafed Main Street with automatic weapon fire without endangering a soul” (High and Dry, pg. 209).

In this essay Richard Russo discusses a wide variety of childhood experiences in which we can all relate to. Experiences such as making gloves with his grandfather as a young boy, where his grandfather tried to teach him how to be a “true craftsman”. Russo talks about spending quality time with his grandfather in these lessons which is a point where many of us can relate to such as myself. As a child I remember spending numerous amounts of time with my grandpa in which I learned various skills which he believed would enable me to be successful one day. Other experiences which are discussed include going downtown to run errands with his mom and stopping at a soda shop, playing basketball outside in the heart of winter with his cousins, walking to and from elementary school with his grandparents, and moving away to college; all which are experiences that most of us can relate to.

Through out his childhood and earlier years Richard Russo shows a considerable amount of embarrassment towards his hometown. Richard talks about events such as vacationing with wealthy people in Martha's Vineyard where he tries to “up-play” the place where he is from and “fleeing” from his town and going to college in a distant place. He also heavily discusses his overall “embarrassment” of his downtrodden town in which people “sat shirtless on their sloping porches in warm weather, scratching their bellies and leaning forward when a car they didn’t recognize rounded the corner, wondering out loud who that person was” (High and Dry, pg. 217).

It wasn’t until his later years when Richard began to identify Gloversville as a part of himself. At the end of the narrative Richard receives a book from an author who as also from Gloversville and yet had hope for the town. As Richard read the book he begins to realize that he too agrees with many of the points the author makes. At this moment Richard begins to realizes that even though he escaped from the town, he has went through the same experiences as everyone else who lives and Gloversville. Richard finally realizes that Gloversville is a major part of every experiences which makes up a part of him.

Change in Modern Culture

The article What Is It About 20-Somethings? by Robin Marantz Henig discusses the growing trend where people in their 20s are becoming more dependent than previous generations on their parents for support, and as a result individuals are starting to develop slower than what we saw in previous generations. In previous generations, kids used to follow the “traditional cycle” where immediately following school they would go and get a job, get married at a young age and immediately have children becoming completely dependent from their parents. However, an increasingly large number of kids are waiting to get jobs, waiting to an older age, and even going as far as moving in with their parents and not leaving the house till their 30’s. According to Robin Henig, a large number of phycologists are becoming worried about the growing trend. Despite this, I believe that their is nothing to be worried about. 

Lets face it times have changed, the world is a completely different place than it was when our parents were growing up. New technologies such as cell phones, internet, and the evolution of other computer-like devises has enabled our generation to communicate in ways that where not even thought possible ten years ago. A decade ago, kids were more distant from their parents than the kids of todays world. If you wanted to talk to your parents you would have to wait till you where home to make a call on a conventional telephone and hope the person who you were calling was nearby the phone. In present day everyone carries around cellphone, which enables them to communicate to just about anyone else in a matter of seconds, whether it would be by text or phone. With a computer and software such as skype you can even participate in live face-to-face conversation. These revolutions has enabled the parent and child “relationship” to become closer than ever. Kids away from home at school or wherever they may be can carry on a conversation with their parents whenever they wish. This is where I believe the cause of this slow maturing “issue” lies. Previously kids where completely on their own when they left home and FORCED into adulthood. They could not call whenever they wish and get advise from their mom and dad in a matter of seconds, kids had to make decisions on their own. This had caused kids in modern day to become “over-connected” with their parents. 

Parents who are over-connected with their kids are more likely not to “let go”. I know of kids who are so close to their mom or dad that they consider them their “best-friends”. I believe that this is something that should be frowned upon more so than it currently is. This over-attachment make parents afraid to “let-go”. In fear of losing a “friend” Parents are afraid to say no when their kids are asking for something, such as money, even when they know that it may not be in the best interests of their child. Because of this children remain dependent upon their parents until old age, resulting in the growing trend that is currently being seen.