Author: alexamoreno2396

I recently came across this piece, first published electronically and to be published in the New Yorker magazine, which discusses student activism in an era of new socially aware movements like Black Lives Matter in both an on and off campus context. The piece focuses on students at Oberlin College, a traditionally liberal institution, but also includes commentary from the school’s president. It is a very in-depth article that highlights contemporary issues for both students and professors in higher education.

The overall student outlook was that  they were sold a college dream of complete happiness, but are in actuality incredibly alienated and frustrated with their education and the structure, especially concerning student activism. Many Oberlin students were active in the Black Lives Matter movements after a nearby shooting and their studies suffered. They felt that the school focused on the wrong things, not accepting their demands or appreciating the importance of activism. Disillusioned, some were clinically depressed, some dropped out, some plan to move away from the US and the “broken” higher education system.

Faculty had a different view on the topic, dismissed by their students, they were not able to understand their convictions. Many were alarmed at the general lack of interest in the classroom and the college environment. After decades of teaching, one theatre professor couldn’t understand his students demand for a feeling “safety” in his classes. This unevenness is promoting singular study or simply not promoting learning at all, especially with real-world opportunities in activism.

Although lengthy, I recommend this piece as it touches upon a lot of interesting information on millennial students without too much bias. It also enlightens us on an institution different than Brooklyn College, with different values and modes of communication between power structures. Student activism is on the rise and deserves some further investigation on its purpose and effects.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/30/the-new-activism-of-liberal-arts-colleges

Prediction: No commencement speaker will mention this – the huge ‘gender college degree gap’ favoring women

As soon as a read a headline that included “favoring women” I had to click and read, because that is not a headline that comes up often in my day to day browsing. This article focuses on the data published by the US State Department that shows women are earning more degrees than men on a consistent basis from associates degrees to a doctoral degrees. Although hearing these numbers at first made me happy, the author goes further saying that it is possible that women have reached equality, at least in degree earning potential.

I see how at first glance that may be a reasonable conclusion. However, upon further inspection these numbers do not indicate equality. Looking through an intersectional lens, I ask, how many of these women are women of color? How many come from a low socio-economic status? So yes, perhaps a certain type of woman has reached some level of degree equality, but to surmise that universities should begin defunding their women’s success centers is naive. Women’s Centers can provide safe spaces, progressive programming and wonderful network opportunities that women are often informally barred from.

Stepping even further, I would like to ask why this gender gap is so large. Perhaps because of a wage gap that favors men, and disadvantages, women, and even further disadvantages women of color and queer women, women are forced to seek out more credentialing so that they can compete with men in the job market. By looking solely at this degree gender gap, we’re ignoring all the other factors at play, like why people seek accreditation in the first place. We cannot conflate all women into one statistic about higher learning because many voices are missing.

This article discusses how women studying in Asia are increasingly specializing their business graduate programs and are entering and finishing their programs much earlier compared to their male counterparts. Studies conducted by the Global Alliance in Management Education show that women represent 72 percent of the master’s international management course.

The article speculates that women are better suited for this specialized masters program because they are often more interested in an international career, have no real difficulty with language, tend to be more sociable with non-Chinese students and work better on teams. They are unafraid of assimilation and therefore often do better in the program.

I think it is interesting to note, even if on a more global scale, the types of majors and concentrations that are more geared to women or more inhabited by women. I would love to know why that is and how that became. My main concern about majors geared toward women is the preferential treatment, and therefore funding, that some majors receive versus others. For example, Brooklyn College severely underfunds the Women’s and Gender Studies Department compared to other departments. Perhaps not particularly popular, this growing academic area is becoming more and more relevant to our lives, especially as citizens of New York City. I cannot tell you specifically how a department becomes great, but better funding I am sure would help.

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/women-in-asia-better-at-planning-a-business-education