My group went to the 2nd session of the Conference, on Sunday, from 10am to 12pm. Personally I think the slides are wonderful. The content presented was clear cut, presentable, and not wordy at all. We utilized less writing and more pictures, which is what was suggested to us by the professor and our ITF. Each of our members knows what they talked about and minimized ad-lib talking as much as possible. Yet, some of the materials were glossed over due to the time constraint and strict time keeping by the ITF overlooking the conference. Personally, I think that presenting the succinct content of a 20-page paper would have taken way more than just 10 minutes. Otherwise, I think our group did a great job on the presentation. When the Q&A session came up, we did our best to provide answers for the audience, and they were satisfied.
One of the presentations that stood out the most for me was named “RISE,” about the initiative to improve New York City’s policy on runaway youth. It was interesting because the presentation talked about something of which I have no information about. The group presenting was an enclave of students from 3 different CUNY who took IDC in Macaulay Honors College. Their communication was impeccable, reflecting what I suspect is a more special kind of education you could receive at the Honors College’s headquarter. What stood out to me the most are two things. First, the annual cost of taking care for a runaway youth in a shelter is $90,000, which is a lot, considering that I, living by myself, spend only $30,000 at a maximum, taking into account the scholarship that I have received from the college. Second is how the government, with their R.I.S.E initiative (of which abbreviation I cannot remember), plan to do for the kids. Besides providing food and shelter, the government is thinking of providing psychotherapeutic counseling for these youths in the form of a mix between Addict Anonymous and extracurricular activities. The kids get to talk about how they feel about their situation and engage in meaningful and cognitively changing activities. Sustaining the kids for the very long-term would be really inconsequential whereas helping them thinking about a better future ahead and how to attain it seems like a very good idea.
