Summer Employment - The Empire

So after reading Michael's post about his summer employment, I thought I would share a few things with all of you about my time so far working as a storm trooper for the Empire. (I am going to refrain from using the company name - I would appreciate if you all did the same.)

Well, I should rephrase: my time at what I THOUGHT would be analogous to working as a storm trooper for the Empire. It's actually really enjoyable here. I love everyone I'm working with - they are (mostly) very upbeat, funny, easy to be around, and very patient with their teaching. Everyone also seems (although I am beginning to see idosyncracies in this already) to be very flexible and easy going with schedule changes, the major renovations and construction about half of the building is going through, and with helping each other out when it's needed. I was hired as part of the Systems Improvement group, which is really glorified experimental optimization for each step of the process, but I'm getting to know a lot of people in the Production and Transformation groups. I'm not sure if those are different groups or if one is a sub group of the other, but regardless, I'm getting along just fine.

One thing that has not come up, ever, is the fact that we work for what many in the world consider to be an evil agricultural organization that monopolizes seeds and financially ruins small farmers for inadvertantly growing their crops. Most people outside of my Colby friends actually don't recognize the name of this company, don't know what the company does, what their history entails, or even realize how ubiquitous their GM crops are in our grocery stores once I explain everything to them. This also means they don't know why I'm slightly embarassed to openly share where I work. But so far no one at work has even hinted at the fact that they are aware of how the company is viewed by many. (Interestingly enough, I was trained in what to do incase we are ever greeted by protesters on-site. Their policy was specific enough that they probably are experienced in the subject.)

But I really have been impressed so far: the science here is viewed as science. Not as a way of solving world hunger, not as a way of producing tons of money, not as a way of working for good or evil. It's instead just science: How can we make this work? How can we make it work better? What does this exactly mean? How do we address these potential problems? No one has shared with me what particular genes do, which makes me wonder if that is only known by the people who are organizing the projects on the highest level. I don't know for sure.

Additionally, on the company home page, there is a section labelled "Issues/Critics" that links to articles written around the country about the company/practices and the problems people have with them. I find it really interesting that they are so open about sharing this information. On the public home page they address each issue, past and present, from toxic agents to genetic modification to legal matters - all in a very open way. After reading it, I thought they were as truthful as they could be - you should all go poke around the website and tell me what you think about those sections if you have 20 minutes to spare.

After looking at all of these issues, how much of the problems with this organization can be blamed on the employees? Is it apathy towards these issues that makes them guilty? Does focusing on your science make you exempt to the company's objectives and decisions in questions of ethics? How do you interpret their openness about the problems and criticisms they face from the public and the media?

Have I really sold my soul, or could it be true that the dark side isn't all that dark?

Finding Equality Through Education? "An impossibility" says Guare X. What say YOU?

My colleague (the one that's 65 years old, an ex-drug addict, and has a first name meaning "sir/madam/it" and a last name consisting of just one letter because he wants to remain nameless-- the letter is x if you were wondering-- aka his name is "sir nameless") is one hell of a character. If the background description of him didn't scream it, he, to put it quite mildly, probably has the least amount of trust for any institutional system that is in place out there (unless, that is, the system resembles a family, where each person supports the other through the fine balance between unconditional love and merciless discipline).

In being part of a very systematized workplace, he is a very prominent role model for me, a person who fights to secure unconditional love for all human beings to pursue their potential, and a fervent disbeliever in "quitting on a person in the name of a program's security." On the other hand, my desire to resolve conflicts through a dialogue is completely affronted by his tenacity to defend his viewpoint without mercy.

In a phrase, he truly is "sir nameless," in that, there is no name for him. It's quite a lesson really-- that all humans, regardless of their name, certainly have a name, though it is not the name's character that solely defines him.

Anyway, I'm going to stop playing in theoretical la la land. Here's what this post is really about. My colleague likes to post news articles on a bulletin board inside of the school that show examples of ignorance, oppression, and inequality within the institutional systems we seek to guarantee democracy and freedom. Here's the article he posted up today:

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2011/06/19/2011-06-19_schools_will_never_fix_inequality.html?print=1&page=all

As he tacked it up, he commented that schools will never solve equality, as schools cannot hope to teach parents to be good parents when the kids are away from school. I was pretty adamant about responding to him that yes, equality can't completely be reached through a reworking of the school system, as I believe it is the combination and collaboration of humanitarian driven minds specializing in a variety of different arenas (i.e. psychology, econ, public health), but that you must not shut the school system out completely. In fact, to me the value of education lies in the potential to bring together many different doctrines into the school institution so as to achieve the common goal of providing the best education for our future leaders. Maybe if we started to see education as not just solely about teaching, but about creating the environment in which each student has the ability to thrive (aka, that teaching education is to ask where a student is psychologically, anthropologically, medically, economically, socially, etc., and create the environment around them that will cater to each individual's learning style, while also encouraging them to explore others as well) then perhaps we could stop blaming it on teachers, families, and students and start getting to the "how the hell do we fix this system." Education is a wee bit unpopular in the governmental budget (along with every other social service... see here for how many services got shut down in NYC because of the budget cuts: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=204719676368226438072.0004a01a5ddc0ff7e83ec&ll=40.720201%2C-73.946228&spn=0.364288%2C0.549316&z=10&source=embed), but it seems there must be some serious rethinking that needs to occur.

Speaking of rethinking, Mr. John C. Baier (Kev's dad) sent me a link that could explain exactly what we're missing here: the ability to see beyond the system we've created. Check it out-- this guy has the hot hand (and killer speech writers): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U.

What do you think? Can we, the next generation, stop the looming trend in mal-education? If so, what's required right now to reform the education system? Is it the no-excuses charter ethic, the divergent thinking within school administration that RSA suggests? Mayhaps something else?

And--dare I say it--if this system is indeed unsalvagable, what should we do now?

Summer Employment and Best Texts Ever, Pt. 1 & 2

Hello everybody! Happy summer time! Although choosing to continue my education, rather than goof around or find work, was a particularly difficult decision, I do have the added bonus of getting some summers off. As the summer was approaching, it was appearing as if I wasn't going to be able to find work. I had really wanted to work with preschoolers, teaching them both academic and social skills in their transition to kindergarten. Unfortunately, I didn't get an interview at all, which I thought (frankly) was a bit shocking. I'm probably a bit too overqualified to work with young children... so I was chalking it up to the fact that they received a flood of applications. When my academic adviser followed up with the potential employers, however, they basically said that I was too honest with my application, and that the fact that I mentioned that I wanted to have a couple of nights and weekends to myself didn't give them the best impression of me.

This was going to inspire a long-winded post about how I thought some college and graduate school education didn't seem to be worthwhile, if perfectly qualified people weren't getting jobs they likely should be able to get... but sometimes things work out for a reason.

With the end of the academic term approaching, it looked like I was going to have to choose between a) taking more classes or b) trying my hand to find some sort of job outside of my field. The first choice didn't seem too appealing, as I was mentally drained by my past term (never have such good grades ever felt worthwhile... I took 16 credits but it felt like 20). The second choice didn't feel promising either... I feel like it is very difficult to get a job outside of any sort of social contact (I've only really had to do it once), and Oregon's unemployment rate is about 12% (putting it behind Nevada and California, I believe). Fortunately, I applied for a research assistant position for the summer. They gave me an interview, and they told me that I was one of two people that they interviewed for the position and they were only looking to hire one of us. And then, two days later, I was told that they hired both of us. PHEW.

The project that I'm going to be working on is very intriguing for me both personally and academically. The project is entitled the Middle School Intervention Project, and we are generally evaluating how middle schools are providing reading services and interventions for their students, and if that is related to both academic improvement and academic engagement (e.g. how attached students become to their school, if the students become more involved, etc.). The other component of the project is that there are decision making teams that help select which services students may be receive... If the teams make decisions based on direct data of student performance, it is believed that this will also lead to improved academic performance, as the students are receiving appropriate support/help/training. Anyways, I find this project to be really interesting, and I had a solid first day, outside of feeling somewhat overwhelmed with the project that I was handed, feeling like a deer in the headlights, and a lost puppy, all at once. But... I think I'll catch on quick, as I get to play with a data set and help produce a report from it. Should be interesting work during a hopefully chill summer!


Also, two texts that I want to pass on:

June 10, 6:30 P.M. (-ish)
Isaac: I am! And I am drunk!

Celebrating the fact that he was done with his comprehensive exams...


June 18, 8:36 P.M.
Olivia: We are singing flight of the chinchords to you

Wishing I had been in Vermont this weekend. 
 

A Definition of Success

When I’m hanging out with people on the West Coast and explaining about some of my experiences living in New England, I joke that there are two, daily habits that I’ve picked up as a result of being there: Sea Salt and Vinegar Chips and The New York Times. This joke apparently excludes ultimate frisbee, but I would argue that ultimate is more of a lifestyle choice.

One of my favorite columnists from the Times is named David Brooks, and I like him because he does a good job of presenting thoughtful, conservative viewpoints as well as topics covering the human condition. When the Tapping the Die Table was started, Brooks came out with an article entitled: “It’s Not About You” (http://tinyurl.com/3qcgclk)*. I wanted to write about it… but it didn’t seem like quite the time. An introductory post seemed sufficient. (I also wrote that post at about 10:12 P.M. in the middle of a) a conversation over gchat with Isaac b) figuring out Blogger’s formatting and c) trying to make it through finals week. So I was already being productive enough… no need to complicate things that night.) 

Anyways, the article brings up a few good discussion points. As the article discusses recent college graduates, I felt it was relevant for us to discuss.

• The article begins by saying how lucky we all are by being able to start life right now, as many adults would give a lot to start over at our age.
• It points out that we have been failed by our elders, specifically pointing to the excessive borrowing and the “ruinous federal debt” that we will “inherit.”
• Our generation has been supervised, monitored, and guided unlike any before us. Upon leaving college, all of that supervision is lifted, and we get to face the wild wide, open, and unrestrained real world.
• This idea is then linked to a typical graduation/commencement address—one that likely emphasizes that we follow our dreams/passions. However, “successful” adulthood doesn’t necessarily mesh with these dreams/passions. Brooks defines “successful” as having a house, finding a spouse, being a part of a community…
• And then Brooks notes that most people don’t find themselves and then start a life, but rather, find a problem a devote themselves to solving it.

The reason that I found this article so interesting is that I found myself agreeing and disagreeing with it at many points during the article. I definitely feel lucky to be living in Oregon, to be able to pursue the dream of working professionally to help children in school, to live in a solid apartment with great friends. I definitely agree that I was one of those children that was monitored, guided, and supervised to earn a degree from a tremendous college, and that the idea of stepping out into the “real world” definitely seemed like a challenge. (Personally, I wish I had been taught more officially how to fix shit and how to cook better… I guess those will be some lessons I will be learning from here on out). And I agree that the reason I am here, in Oregon and in life, is that I want to be able to help other children out to provide them with the most successful educational experience that they could possibly have—that is, I saw a problem and have decided to dedicate myself to it.

I guess what I’m most frustrated with is the idea of “success” in adulthood. It really seems like that idea is too standardized and rigid for my liking. We, as a generation in our early twenties, have experienced what the adults of the white-middle-to-upper-class-world define success as: getting a fancy college degree, finding some sort of employment directly out of college, eventually obtaining a high-paying job, etc. etc. However, if/when we face the struggles of the real world (which Brooks admits we likely have not been prepared adequately enough for) and do not “succeed,” immediately, it is our fault, and not some symptom of the larger society or the current economic times. For some friends (both inside and outside of Colby) it has been a struggle to find something (or anything for that matter). And if we find it necessary to move back home temporarily, that, too, is frowned upon. I guess I’m failing to see why not having those “successes” is a problem. While I am grateful for an opportunity to be in a tremendous grad program (thereby having what Brooks might define as a “successful” beginning to my post-college career), parts of me would a) join the Peace Corps b) be a Camp Counselor in Australia c) generally explore the world a little bit more or d) choose friends/family over traditional, successful employment. (I’m banking on having time to do some of those things once graduate school is over.) Had I done these things, would I have been considered “successful?” What if I felt personally fulfilled while not pursuing traditionally “successful” opportunities? Would finding a fulfillment in my daily life mean that I was “successful,” even if it is non-traditional? I’m not convinced that the definition of success, as the overbearing/overwhelming majority states, is flexible enough to include personal fulfillment—only when that fulfillment leads to tangible/observable/material rewards does our society finally designate it as success. And that, to me, is too limiting.

*I am not a big fan of the NYTimes’ 20 article limit. I really dislike that one of the sources that I’ve become dependent on for (reliable?) news limits me from viewing them. Is it really a sustainable business strategy? I’ll check their front page once in a while, but I’m no longer immersing myself with the Times when I’m online… 

Adventures in Living, Pt. 1

So there are some times where the daily routines of modern life are thrown the largest 6 to 12 curveball. I had one of those experiences yesterday, which I think constitutes an important lesson for all of you out there.

Gill and I had the idea of making a really nice dinner to celebrate the fact that the term from hell (otherwise known as Spring of 2011) was finally over. We decided on jerk chicken--I was inspired by my grad school friend Shawn who had put up a delicious looking picture on Facebook of a jerk chicken dinner he had made, and Gill said that her father made especially good jerk chicken during the summertime. Sometimes naivete is so wonderful. We tried using a recipe from the Food Network, but I quickly felt overmatched (e.g. not having the right ingredients, etc.). But we  forged through with the meal plan...

Jerk chicken, when done right, can be an especially spicy meal. One of the ingredients that gives it such a tremendous kick is the habanero pepper:

Secretly Dangerous Mofos

 These bad boys pack one hell of a punch. According to Wikipedia, it registers 100,000 - 350,000 Scoville Heat Units. I didn't have any sort of means of knowing how spicy that was... but just trust me when I think that range of heat units is appropriate.

Anyways, I was given the task of removing the seeds, which went fine enough. Apparently, though, I didn't have the brains to wash or wipe my hands after using the peppers. I brought my hand up to stifle some sniffles that I had been having, and it hit me instantaneously.

My nose was on fire. The inside of my nose. Holy crap. I couldn't even function. Fortunately, Gill was in the kitchen and looked up the best remedy for "peppers in the nose" (approximate Google search). The first response to it was to drink some alcohol, so we cracked open a beer. It provided only temporary relief. The second response was to put some sort of item (cotton ball, q-tip) covered with milk into the nostril. So while I went to the bathroom trying to flush out my nose with water, Gill brought some milk over. And, as you can probably guess, yes, I went and stuck milk covered q-tips into both of my nostrils (by this point, the sensation had spread from one nostril to the other, and it was getting to the point to where the outside of my nose felt like it had the worst sunburn ever).

The solution to the pepper in the nose problem worked well enough. The worst of the fiery sensation was over, but it still remained for the next hour to an hour and a half.

But the experience made me wonder... who was the first person to think "Lemme stick some milk in my freakin' nose to make this pepper fire go away?" I'd like to meet them and thank them personally.

Fun Fact of the Day

Turns out that China is the happiest place on earth! They alone managed to a perfect score of 100 points on a new global happiness index, with the U.S. coming in at 203rd place with only 3 points. Of course, the study was done by the North Korea's Chosun Central Television, so it might be a bit biased... I actually do think it is interesting that China was ahead of North Korea, which came in second with 98 points. Even more interesting to me is that the U.S. was ranked below South Korea in the rankings, which came in 152nd. What does it say, if anything, about the U.S.'s standing in the world that a blatantly biased study done in one country would rank us worse than that country's main "rival?" Is it a good thing, representing the fact that America is a symbol of freedom and democracy, neither of which are particularly embraced by the North Korean regime? Or is it a bad thing, representing the fact that in the eyes of many the United States is nothing more than the world's bully? Or does it mean nothing at all, just a random fluke of a BS "study"?

A Year Ago

I had a couple of moments of reflection yesterday. It was my last day of class for the Spring Term here at the University of Oregon (woohoo!), and the School Psychology program puts on an annual showcase. The showcase involves bringing all of the students and faculty together, along with any of our community partners and faculty from other departments. It is a celebration of how productive of a year we have had, and a final way for all of us to come together before peace-ing for summer. We meet the new student body executive board, celebrate any awards garnered by our faculty, and salute everybody that is going off for internship the next year.

The reflective moment from yesterday occurred once I realized that I had stood in the spot a year ago, not necessarily knowing what was going to happen for me in the upcoming year but hoping for the best. Through sheer coincidence, I happened to be at the showcase. My mom and I had made a trip to Eugene to become familiar with the neighborhood, to learn about different apartment complexes, and see if anything was going to be available for me for the upcoming school year. All of the incoming first years had been invited to see the showcase--I just happened to be in town at the exact right time. I remember being in a complete state of nervousness, as I was about to re-introduce myself to all of the students and faculty as a member of the UO SPSY program. I talked briefly with our program director and my potential advisor. I was a bit too shy to introduce myself to some of the students that I hadn’t met at a social during Candidate’s Day. I talked with Tracy, a member of my cohort who was living in Eugene at the time, because we had been in the same student group during all of the interviews… it was nerve wracking but somewhat exhilarating at the same time because I wasn’t entirely sure what the future would hold for me.

And there I was, yesterday, in a spot that I probably would never have imagined. I do feel as if I’ve become a part of the program. I’ve slowly figured out my identity, as a student, a potential researcher, and as a member of a (great) cohort. (Also, I understood all of the terminology mentioned by the research teams, which I definitely had no idea about last year... sometimes I think the program took to big of a gamble on me, as I had no idea what school psychology was like looking back on it). While many things have changed and the program was different than what I expected it to be like (e.g. practicum—working in schools—for first years was changed, my advisor having been diagnosed with cancer—a different story for a different time), it had been a solid year overall. That isn’t to say there weren’t ups and downs (which I will document in future times), as there were many, I could finally say yesterday that I was happy where I was.

Grad school has the ability to suck the life out of you, but I think I needed the reminder of why I was here, why I enjoyed the program, and how much I enjoyed the members (students and faculty alike) of the program. So with that, I had some momentum to work on my last final last night… and I can now an 80+ degree weekend in Eugene. There will be barbecues, beer, and ultimate, and it will be goooood. =)