https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/05/13/allowing-devices-classroom-hurts-academic-performance-study-finds

I found this article and found it interesting. It explains how a West Point study found that slowing technology in the classroom is detrimental to a student’s learning ability. The reasons why are unclear, according to the study, but they feel it can either be that students are distracted, or typing notes isn’t as effective as writing them down.

I feel that a combo of both are true. Having a laptop in class presents the opportunity to go on Facebook and other sites (not with Brooklyn college wifi but in other colleges this remains true). However, I do feel whenever I type out my notes I don’t remember them as well as when I write them in a notebook. So I want to ask you guys, which do you think is the cause of the adverse effects of having technology in the classeoom?

Fighting Freedom with Freedom?

A topic that comes up a lot on campuses a lot is this idea of protesting events that may be offensive or unfavorable to some groups of people under the guise of freedom of speech. The controversy comes in when one asks the question “Aren’t the protesters violating the others’ freedom of speech?” This apparent paradox is the center of a lot of dispute in many colleges throughout the country.

Recently, in DePaul University, protesters obstructed a speech given by a rather controversial figure. They stormed the stage and started blowing whistles and drowning out the speaker because of his offensive and usual “troll-like” comments. The speaker is known for his controversial remarks, yet he was asked to speak at the school. As the article (posted at the bottom) says, the school should’ve been prepared for a protest or something of this caliber to occur. Honestly, in today’s society with such a controversial speaker, wouldn’t you have to expect there to be a riot or some public display?

Something similar happened at UC Irvine. There was a screening of Beneath the Helmets about 5 Israeli soldiers. In the middle of the movie, protesters barged in and started screaming. They wouldn’t let anyone in or out. Eventually, the woman in charge, and a scared student outside the room who wasn’t allowed to reenter, called the police who came and allowed the students to finish watching the movie. The vice chancellor of student affairs for UC Irvine released a statement that I strongly agree with: “We do not approve of free speech that seeks to shut down anyone else’s right to free speech.”

These stories raise two points that I’d like to discuss. The first is that colleges and any higher education institutions (as well as anywhere but that’s not what I’m focusing on) should be able to predict when a speaker they are hosting is controversial and brings with him/her the possibility of protest. Preventative measures should be taken against protests or acts of violence or something similar. Now I’m not saying that controversial speakers shouldn’t brought in. But if there is a known controversy surrounding a certain person, the college should step up security and make sure that everyone is safe throughout the whole event. I actually believe more controversial speakers should be brought in so that we can hear all viewpoints and broaden our horizons. But in order to do this, we must ensure that the speaker has the ability to present his or her ideas. We can’t have protesters claiming freedom of speech stopping others from invoking their right to free speech. Therefore, colleges should recognize the ramifications bringing in a certain speaker may have and plan accordingly.

I actually touched upon the second point I was trying to make, too. It was that freedom of speech shouldn’t be used to stop freedom of speech. If we are going to continue fighting for equal rights, people can’t stop others from speaking. Otherwise, we will become what we are fighting against: we will become our own enemies. I’m not trying to be profound; I’m simply pointing out that our society is changing quickly and becoming ultra-liberal (don’t mind my wording I’m the least political person you’ve ever met, I just don’t know how to describe the sentiment), and fighting freedom with freedom is not the way we should be going about things.

Let me know what you guys think!

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/05/26/two-colleges-what-happens-when-protesters-obstruct-free-speech

More Controversy in College Athletics

So as many of you know, I am a college athlete so this topic is very relevant to me, and I find it extremely interesting. Being a Brooklyn College athlete, we don’t face many of these dishonest practices where coaches, students, and administrators place athletics over academics. The closest we come is being allowed to leave a class early for a game/match, but even then, it’s not always the whole class period that we miss.

However, I am aware of, and am angered by, the continuous dishonesty and fraudulent practices connected to college athletics. Obviously for big Division 1 sports schools, it makes sense that athletes, especially top recruits, pay attention to their sport more than schoolwork, especially if they play the more popular sports. (I said it makes sense; I didn’t say I agree with it.) Often these top recruits are looking to make it into the professional leagues. This is only one of the problems.

Another issue, which was brought up with the readings from last week, was that of whether or not student-athletes should be paid. I, personally, don’t believe athletes should be paid. If anything, they could receive equipment and money for travel (many teams have games that require bus and/or plane). However, the primary purpose of college/university is to get an education, whether or not someone plans to go into a professional sport. I think this because there are no certainties in sports. An all-star player who is expected to be drafted in the first round can suffer a career-ending torn ACL injury. What team would take him/her then? For this reason, I believe that athletes should focus on their education. And I’d like to think this is the reason the NCAA doesn’t want athletes to be paid either. I give them the benefit of the doubt because there are some, such as Joe Nocera in his article “A Way to Start Paying College Athletes,” who believe the NCAA exploits athletes by considering them “amateurs.”

Whatever the reasons, there are rules saying NCAA athletes are not allowed to be paid. But cases keep coming up of athletes accepting payment! Most recently, a newly drafted NFL player Laremy Tunsil admitted to accepting money from his coach at Ole Miss. (article posted at bottom) The funds were apparently given so that his mother could pay utility fees. On the day he was drafted, Tunsil’s Instagram and Twitter accounts were hacked, and a screenshot of the text messages to his coach, John Miller, was posted on Instagram. Tunis was asked about accepting money at a press conference immediately following his being drafted and he responded, “I would have to say yeah.” Earlier on, Tunsil was investigated and suspended for accepting and using “improper benefits.” Namely cars and hotel rooms.

In Laremy Tusil’s case, I can overlook the most recent news concerning his accepting money for his mother’s utilities (if that is the real story; it has yet to be confirmed). But accepting the improper benefits is inexcusable. NCAA athletes of his caliber (he was expected to be drafted first round) and NCAA athletes in general should be aware that they are the public face of their school and should not violate the rules of the NCAA, if not for moral reasons.

Student Government

Hey everyone!

So I know we’ve talked a lot about college and university administrators and how much they do/don’t do for their respective institution. But have we thought about how big a say student governments have? I know that both Macaulay and Brooklyn have student governments, and we even have classmates in them (Chris Cali is on the Macaulay Scholars Council and I am in the BC student government assembly).

I’m just wondering if anyone knows how much power we have or would like to know what we can do? Personally, I am not 100% sure what the Macaulay Scholars Council does (though I am 100% sure that they do a lot). But I know that BC student government controls budgets, holds events, and much more.

So what I’m asking is, do you think student governments can help solve a lot of the problems we seem to be having with our schools? Obviously there are many things we can’t deal with as a student body (applications, building appearance, financial aid, etc.), but we can fix the wifi, build facilities for Access-a-Ride, and much more! So does anyone want to discuss what we, as students, can do?

Chapter 2 Questions

Do you think that there are any positives to treating colleges and universities and businesses?

 

Do you agree with Selingo when he says that the Millennials are part of the “Me Generation?”

 

As a student I don’t believe that the teachers owe the student anything just because the student pays an exorbitant rate. I believe that the student should be performing well because they are paying so much money. Do you agree?

 

Do you feel Macaulay as program diverges from the whole “college as a business” mantra because all students are given full scholarships?

 

Do you think Macaulay is better suited for education because it’s free?