I went to all of the lectures of the Brown Symposium, so it is kind of hard for me to choose two lectures to write about. Instead I will write about my three favorite; Christopher Bader and Paul Froese’s “Images of God and Views on Science: Findings from the Baylor Religion Survey, Simon Conway Morris’ “Darwin’s Compass: How Evolution Discovers the Songs of Creation”, and David Sloan Wilson’s “Evolution as the Theory of Choice for the Study of Religion”. I think the reason I found these lectures interesting because some of the information in the lecture (and/or the discussion it prompted) surprised me.
During the Baylor Religion Survey lecture I was particularly interested (although not surprised) to learn that individuals who do not believe in God are more uncomfortable with an interaction or dialogue between science and religion than are individuals who do believe in God. I did not find this fact unusually surprising because my experience suggests that individuals who are not religious tend to have rather negative views of religion. I was also interested to hear that in higher-level education religious people are more likely to be discriminated against than are non-religious people. A third thing that interested me was the audience’s reaction to having their image of god categorized and analyzed. I felt that various individuals felt uncomfortable about the generalizations made about them and other individuals sharing their image of god. I guess it is part of our nature as humans to wish to avoid being categorized, with the hope of instead being able to justify our beliefs and actions. However, the extent to which the audience expressed discomfort with their categorization surprised me. I would like to add here that the thing I personally found most upsetting in their lecture was when they said that the average American has a good chance of not knowing that the earth revolve around the sun!!!
I particularly enjoyed Simon Conway Morris’ lecture from the perspective of (hopefully) a future scientist. I was interested to learn that the ideas Morris lectured on were in fact the exact opposite of those he held earlier in his career. I felt his lecture provided insight to the process of science and how researchers must be open to the feedback provided by their research. (Obviously my field of interest wouldn’t have gotten very far if we listened solely to Freudian thought.) I plan to try to keep Morris in mind during my future study of science as a hint to be open to theories that are new and/or different from my own. I suspect this hint will help me to be a better researcher and student, and maybe in a few years some one will finally convince me and I will believe all human behavior is a result of conditioning. :) One last item from Morris’ lecture that I found truly fascinating was the idea that one’s consciousness lies (at least partially) somewhere other than the brain. I am not prepared to comment on this presently because I’m not quite sure I understand it and I am still devoting a great deal of thought to the subject. However, this idea certainly had an impact on me.
I was similarly surprised by the reactions of the audience to David Sloan Wilson’s lecture. I particularly enjoyed the lecture because I thought it was extremely thought provoking and raised a number of questions I had never thought to consider. However Dr. Wilson did not hesitate in the slightest to boldly challenge traditional Christian thought. On example of this is the idea that religion is 100% a social construct. This is not a fact that surprised me (I think it is fairly obvious that God did not reach down and hand religion to humanity), however it clearly rattled a number of audience members. While I understand how this could rattle someone (my mother, who has done master level work in religion used to shock me with such statements when I was a little girl) I was surprised by the number of people who took this statement to mean God isn’t real and religion is useless, particularly considering the fact that Wilson made a point of focusing on a number of the social benefits provided by religion. Additionally, comments from the audience indicated a similar reaction to Wilson’s assertion that it is scientifically proven that there is no such thing as an active God. Clearly he meant that a God who (for example) reaches down to earth to prevent a car accident. (I know that is what he meant because he said as much.) Again audience members seemed to take this as no God, divine being, or spiritual force in the universe exists. I think this interpretation may have occurred so that people could simply decide that Wilson was ill informed and simply ignore him. That would surely be easier than reexamining their own spiritual convictions. One last item from Wilson’s lecture that I found truly fascinating was the idea that one’s consciousness lies (at least partially) somewhere other than the brain
I would like to note at this point that I do not by any means think that all (or even most) of the lectures' audience members share the views of audience members I represented above. I take these representations from both the questions that were asked during the lecture and discussions I have had with friends and acquaintances about their reactions to the lectures.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Friday, January 23, 2009
Tuesdays with Morrie
To be honest I wasn’t super excited about reading Tuesdays with Morrie for this semester when I first got the email about it. I was familiar with the book’s storyline because I had seen both the movie and play that it inspired. The main reason that I wasn’t so interested in reading the book is that I thought it would be the same tired old sermon about how we only have a limited time to live and we should all cherish each moment. Tuesdays with Morrie is about that, but it’s not preachy and it also really does connect into the goals of Paideia and our cohort’s theme.
Being more reflective about experiences
This Paideia goal is very central to Tuesdays with Morrie. In fact, Morrie and Mitch spend a great deal of their time together reflecting on their experiences. This goal is important (both in the memoir and in Paideia) because it allows an opportunity for us to learn from past mistakes and successes, develop a deeper understanding of how we process and function, and examine the direction which our lives have taken. Moreover, in the context of the book Mitch is given the advantage of hearing Morrie reflect on his experiences, thus benefiting from the life experience of someone who has seen and done a great deal. Upon reflecting about his experiences Mitch discovers that he is not as happy as he might be and that he is very much caught up in a vacuous and materialistic life. Mitch’s realization leads him to “be more intentional about [his] choices” another Paideia goal.
Being more intentional in choices
By being more intentional in his choices Mitch regains control of his life, instead of allowing his work to control him. He also rearranges his priorities, placing spending time with a dying friend above work (granted this choice was made easier by a union strike). Mitch also chooses to let go of the things that might normally upset him (such as bad smells, uncomfortable situations, and upsetting episodes of Morrie’s illness) in order to be the best friend that he can be to his dying professor. Mitch reaches out to Morrie in a way that he would have never expected to, because he chooses that learning from, spending time with, and comforting a friend is the most important thing he can do. Morrie teaches Mitch to use intentional choices not only to free himself from the unreasonable burdens Mitch had accepted from his career, but also to build a more fulfilling future for himself (for instance by realigning his priorities and beginning to rebuild his relationship with his brother).
Understanding human behavior
Morrie is first and foremost a student of humanity; consequently Tuesday with Morrie acts much like a textbook on humanity. In fact, one of the first questions Morrie asks Mitch upon seeing him for the first time in about sixteen years is “Are you trying to be as human as you can be?”. In fact during the rest of their time together Mitch and Morrie discuss the most essential, valuable, and frightening things that are a result of being human, such as aging, regrets, love, family, death and forgiveness. I find Tuesday s with Morrie to be an excellent text for a course that seeks to explore and understand human behavior.
Being more reflective about experiences
This Paideia goal is very central to Tuesdays with Morrie. In fact, Morrie and Mitch spend a great deal of their time together reflecting on their experiences. This goal is important (both in the memoir and in Paideia) because it allows an opportunity for us to learn from past mistakes and successes, develop a deeper understanding of how we process and function, and examine the direction which our lives have taken. Moreover, in the context of the book Mitch is given the advantage of hearing Morrie reflect on his experiences, thus benefiting from the life experience of someone who has seen and done a great deal. Upon reflecting about his experiences Mitch discovers that he is not as happy as he might be and that he is very much caught up in a vacuous and materialistic life. Mitch’s realization leads him to “be more intentional about [his] choices” another Paideia goal.
Being more intentional in choices
By being more intentional in his choices Mitch regains control of his life, instead of allowing his work to control him. He also rearranges his priorities, placing spending time with a dying friend above work (granted this choice was made easier by a union strike). Mitch also chooses to let go of the things that might normally upset him (such as bad smells, uncomfortable situations, and upsetting episodes of Morrie’s illness) in order to be the best friend that he can be to his dying professor. Mitch reaches out to Morrie in a way that he would have never expected to, because he chooses that learning from, spending time with, and comforting a friend is the most important thing he can do. Morrie teaches Mitch to use intentional choices not only to free himself from the unreasonable burdens Mitch had accepted from his career, but also to build a more fulfilling future for himself (for instance by realigning his priorities and beginning to rebuild his relationship with his brother).
Understanding human behavior
Morrie is first and foremost a student of humanity; consequently Tuesday with Morrie acts much like a textbook on humanity. In fact, one of the first questions Morrie asks Mitch upon seeing him for the first time in about sixteen years is “Are you trying to be as human as you can be?”. In fact during the rest of their time together Mitch and Morrie discuss the most essential, valuable, and frightening things that are a result of being human, such as aging, regrets, love, family, death and forgiveness. I find Tuesday s with Morrie to be an excellent text for a course that seeks to explore and understand human behavior.
Saturday, January 10, 2009
Boys and Girls Club Project (First Blog of 2009)
Although working with the boys and girls club was not my first choice for a civic engagement project I am getting really excited about it. My main goal for this project is to provide help and support to the boys and girls club and the kids that utilize their services. I also hope to be able to develop at least one meaningful relationship with a kid I meet at the club. I expect this relationship to be as beneficial for me (and quite possibly more beneficial for me) as it is for the kid I befriend. I expect to learn a whole lot form all the kids I meet at the club.
I am very open to suggestions as to how our civic engagement should play out, however I do have a couple of possible scenarios in mind. I see a number of advantages to allowing individual or small groups of Paideia students to develop their own activities, projects, programs, etc for the club. The main advantage of this is that it will allow each Paideia student to share with the club the skills that are unique to them. This method of organization is also advantageous because it will help us to engage and meet the needs off all different kids (and consequently a larger number of kids). Some of us may be interacting with students that enjoy sports and physical activities, while others of us may be forging relationships with students who prefer more artistic pursuits. A third advantage to this scenario is that it eliminates the need for us all to agree on a specific area of project that we wish to pursue. As we learned in choosing an agency to work with it is very difficult (if not impossible) for us all to agree on any one thing. I understand that this idea may meet some resistance, as many members of the cohort believe it is important that we all share a common experience for our civic engagement project. However, I feel that the scenario I have proposed is the “best of both worlds” because we will have a common environment in which our experiences take place, but we will all have sufficiently different experiences that we can share these experiences with each other and learn from others’ experiences. I am particularly interested in (and somewhat bias towards) this way of organizing our project, because I have already made some preliminary plans for my own individual project at the club. I plan on tutoring a girl in geometry this semester.
If we choose to utilize the method of organization I’ve proposed most of the parameters of our project are flexible according to what individual or groups of Paideia students choose to do. In other words, some students could organize structured activities while others do non-structured activities; some could work with kids one at a time while others work in groups; some of us could go to the club alone while others go with other cohort members. I think that in order to prevent “social loafing” and so that our efforts remain at least somewhat united we should all present what we plan to do and how it works out to each other at our cohort meetings. As for how often and how long we should do our projects I think one hour every other week might work well. This way students could go on the Tuesdays we don’t have Paideia so our schedules remain fairly consist. Also students could choose if they would rather go every other week or once a week for roughly 30 minutes.
As for questions and concerns, I will be very interested to here from the club representative at our next meeting about what he sees as the primary need of the club, as well as his ideas of how we can meet those needs. I would also be interested to hear the opinions of the kids who use the club. What activities do they like and not like? What are things they do now at the club (and have done in the past) that they really like and want to do more of? What are things that they haven't liked so much? I also wonder what are some mistakes that previous volunteers at the club have made (so we can avoid those mistakes), and what types of projects and programs have had the greatest success (so we can consider incorporating some of those aspects). At this point I am feeling pretty confident and I don't really have too many concerns about the project; I'm excited to begin.
I am very open to suggestions as to how our civic engagement should play out, however I do have a couple of possible scenarios in mind. I see a number of advantages to allowing individual or small groups of Paideia students to develop their own activities, projects, programs, etc for the club. The main advantage of this is that it will allow each Paideia student to share with the club the skills that are unique to them. This method of organization is also advantageous because it will help us to engage and meet the needs off all different kids (and consequently a larger number of kids). Some of us may be interacting with students that enjoy sports and physical activities, while others of us may be forging relationships with students who prefer more artistic pursuits. A third advantage to this scenario is that it eliminates the need for us all to agree on a specific area of project that we wish to pursue. As we learned in choosing an agency to work with it is very difficult (if not impossible) for us all to agree on any one thing. I understand that this idea may meet some resistance, as many members of the cohort believe it is important that we all share a common experience for our civic engagement project. However, I feel that the scenario I have proposed is the “best of both worlds” because we will have a common environment in which our experiences take place, but we will all have sufficiently different experiences that we can share these experiences with each other and learn from others’ experiences. I am particularly interested in (and somewhat bias towards) this way of organizing our project, because I have already made some preliminary plans for my own individual project at the club. I plan on tutoring a girl in geometry this semester.
If we choose to utilize the method of organization I’ve proposed most of the parameters of our project are flexible according to what individual or groups of Paideia students choose to do. In other words, some students could organize structured activities while others do non-structured activities; some could work with kids one at a time while others work in groups; some of us could go to the club alone while others go with other cohort members. I think that in order to prevent “social loafing” and so that our efforts remain at least somewhat united we should all present what we plan to do and how it works out to each other at our cohort meetings. As for how often and how long we should do our projects I think one hour every other week might work well. This way students could go on the Tuesdays we don’t have Paideia so our schedules remain fairly consist. Also students could choose if they would rather go every other week or once a week for roughly 30 minutes.
As for questions and concerns, I will be very interested to here from the club representative at our next meeting about what he sees as the primary need of the club, as well as his ideas of how we can meet those needs. I would also be interested to hear the opinions of the kids who use the club. What activities do they like and not like? What are things they do now at the club (and have done in the past) that they really like and want to do more of? What are things that they haven't liked so much? I also wonder what are some mistakes that previous volunteers at the club have made (so we can avoid those mistakes), and what types of projects and programs have had the greatest success (so we can consider incorporating some of those aspects). At this point I am feeling pretty confident and I don't really have too many concerns about the project; I'm excited to begin.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
End-of-Semester Reflection
It’s really hard to believe that the semester is over already, although the break will be welcome. I feel like so much has happened in our cohort and I’m not quite sure where to start.
I guess I have mixed feelings about a couple of aspects of Paideia so far. I think it has overall been a REALLY beneficial experience (and yes, a stretch too), but there are also things I might wish to see change a bit.
I feel like our cohort operates on two extremes and that makes the meetings kind of difficult to manage and maybe less productive than they could be. It seems to me that about half the group is really opinionated and verbal, while the other half doesn’t voice opinions at all. This dynamic is particularly frustrating for me because I feel that the more verbal half gets into heated debates/discussions (sometimes a fair amount more heated than I would like) while the other half doesn’t seem engaged at all. Although I am guilty for talking way to much I REALLY want to know what the more quiet people think about the issues that we talk about and why they think this. I don’t want anyone to read this to think I’m blaming people who are maybe more shy or quiet by nature for being that way, but I would like to see the more verbal of us (me included of course) to be more welcoming to comments from the less verbal. For anyone who feels like responding (if you all read other's blogs), can you think of other ways we could structure the meeting to facilitate this? I haven’t come up with anything yet, but I’m racking my brain! :)
First, I just want to start out this next point by saying I am as guilty about this critique as anyone and probably guiltier of this it than many. So here’s the critique: I feel that we are not as responsive to one another as we should be some of the time. For instance, I came up with a couple of different I ideas about our civic engagement project and asked for feedback on them that no one ever did discuss with me (or not until they were forced to do so). One of these situations was with ROCK, AI and LSCC. These were agencies I suggest we explore for our civic engagement, but no one ever talked about how they felt about these agencies until we had some one from ROCK come in and talk to us about their program, and I still never heard feedback about the other two. It’s not that I want every one to agree with me, but I would like to have a discussion (that’s why I came up with these ideas in the first place) and I would even LOVE to hear why you think these may be bad ideas, just so I can understand where you are coming from. It is also really frustrating to spend time doing a bit of research on and presenting these ideas in my blog, just to wonder if people even noticed them (even after we were assigned to read each other’s blog entries). I also felt as if my suggestion for a one-time event was ignored as well. The lack of response made me wonder if I even sent the email correctly. I know that every one is pretty busy and I sent it at a less than opportune time in terms how busy we all are, but I sent it because I wanted to hear why you did (or more importantly) did not like that idea. Like I said before I’m sure I am VERY guilty of being non-responsive as well, but these are just the examples that I have been able to come up with.
I feel bad that my blog so far has been so full of complaints and negativity, because I really do think that Paideia is a great program and I think that we as a cohort are off to a really good start. I feel like I have learned a great deal so far from EVERY individual in the cohort. Also, I want you all to know that I would honestly value any criticism you might have as well – I think that is how we can improve the way we function as a group. I’m looking forward to working on our civic engagement project and learning about what skills and knowledge each of us can offer. I’m also going to be very intrigued to see how to group dynamics change as we have group members absent to study abroad programs.
I just wanted to end by thanking everyone for the contributions that they do make, because (although you probably wouldn’t guess it after observing me talk so excessively this semester – sorry about that by the way) I am infinitely more interested in hearing what you have to say than just hearing myself talk.
I hope everyone has an awesome break! Dr. G, thank you for your holiday wishes by the way, the card is lovely!
I guess I have mixed feelings about a couple of aspects of Paideia so far. I think it has overall been a REALLY beneficial experience (and yes, a stretch too), but there are also things I might wish to see change a bit.
I feel like our cohort operates on two extremes and that makes the meetings kind of difficult to manage and maybe less productive than they could be. It seems to me that about half the group is really opinionated and verbal, while the other half doesn’t voice opinions at all. This dynamic is particularly frustrating for me because I feel that the more verbal half gets into heated debates/discussions (sometimes a fair amount more heated than I would like) while the other half doesn’t seem engaged at all. Although I am guilty for talking way to much I REALLY want to know what the more quiet people think about the issues that we talk about and why they think this. I don’t want anyone to read this to think I’m blaming people who are maybe more shy or quiet by nature for being that way, but I would like to see the more verbal of us (me included of course) to be more welcoming to comments from the less verbal. For anyone who feels like responding (if you all read other's blogs), can you think of other ways we could structure the meeting to facilitate this? I haven’t come up with anything yet, but I’m racking my brain! :)
First, I just want to start out this next point by saying I am as guilty about this critique as anyone and probably guiltier of this it than many. So here’s the critique: I feel that we are not as responsive to one another as we should be some of the time. For instance, I came up with a couple of different I ideas about our civic engagement project and asked for feedback on them that no one ever did discuss with me (or not until they were forced to do so). One of these situations was with ROCK, AI and LSCC. These were agencies I suggest we explore for our civic engagement, but no one ever talked about how they felt about these agencies until we had some one from ROCK come in and talk to us about their program, and I still never heard feedback about the other two. It’s not that I want every one to agree with me, but I would like to have a discussion (that’s why I came up with these ideas in the first place) and I would even LOVE to hear why you think these may be bad ideas, just so I can understand where you are coming from. It is also really frustrating to spend time doing a bit of research on and presenting these ideas in my blog, just to wonder if people even noticed them (even after we were assigned to read each other’s blog entries). I also felt as if my suggestion for a one-time event was ignored as well. The lack of response made me wonder if I even sent the email correctly. I know that every one is pretty busy and I sent it at a less than opportune time in terms how busy we all are, but I sent it because I wanted to hear why you did (or more importantly) did not like that idea. Like I said before I’m sure I am VERY guilty of being non-responsive as well, but these are just the examples that I have been able to come up with.
I feel bad that my blog so far has been so full of complaints and negativity, because I really do think that Paideia is a great program and I think that we as a cohort are off to a really good start. I feel like I have learned a great deal so far from EVERY individual in the cohort. Also, I want you all to know that I would honestly value any criticism you might have as well – I think that is how we can improve the way we function as a group. I’m looking forward to working on our civic engagement project and learning about what skills and knowledge each of us can offer. I’m also going to be very intrigued to see how to group dynamics change as we have group members absent to study abroad programs.
I just wanted to end by thanking everyone for the contributions that they do make, because (although you probably wouldn’t guess it after observing me talk so excessively this semester – sorry about that by the way) I am infinitely more interested in hearing what you have to say than just hearing myself talk.
I hope everyone has an awesome break! Dr. G, thank you for your holiday wishes by the way, the card is lovely!
Friday, November 21, 2008
on campus event and off campus event
For my on campus event I chose to go to one of the presidential brown bag lunches. I chose this because I wanted to expose myself to some ideas that were against my political beliefs. I think that I sometimes only talk about politics with the friends that I know will agree with me and only read about the news from sources that advocate a liberal agenda. However, I really do believe that it is important to spend time listening (open-mindedly) to people who have differing opinions because it is a good way to discuss and understand why I feel the way I do. Unfortunately this event was not as much a stretch for me as I would have liked, as all of the speakers strongly supported Obama over McCain and there was little if any discussion of areas in which McCain might be more qualified or reasons why one might wish to vote for him. Because of this disappointing result I chose to watch the election results on November 4 with a group of friends that included a McCain supporter. I found that this experience produced some of the results that I had hoped for when I attended the presidential brown bag lunch discussion. For instance I was reminded about how important I think it is that people of all political orientations work together. I feel that the smugness and superiority that often comes with being a part Washington’s party in power is often very damaging and stands in the way of our government being productive. Additionally, I think that the goals of the American people are in many areas the same for most people, with the real disagreement lying in how to accomplish these goals. During this election I have been rather upset with how much we as a society have been vilifying the members of the parties who oppose our political beliefs. I am as guilty for doing this as anyone else is, however I feel that this is something we should strive to move away from in the future. The conversations that I had while watching election results with friends that have opposing beliefs gave me hope that this is possible.
I don’t really know much about the city of Georgetown, especially in the political realm, I don’t know if we have a mayor, or who that person might be and I don’t know what propositions or ballot initiatives were decided during the election, because I voted by absentee. I feel bad that I am so uninformed about the town in which I live, so I decided to attend a public meeting of some sort in Georgetown for my off campus event. I chose to attend the Georgetown Municipal Airport Advisory Committee meeting. I pick this event because I didn’t even know Georgetown had an airport (also, to be honest, it was at a more convenient time for me than some other meetings). The meeting was held at a firehouse right next to the airport at 7 on a Monday night. The main question under discussion at this meeting was about the lease for the land the airport is on. As I understood the situation the land is leased from Georgetown for the airport to be able to operate. The board members were discussing if they wished to renew the lease with the same terms that they had had before or if they wanted to renegotiate it. I thought that this was particularly interesting because it is not at all how I would have imagined such a decision being made. It was by no means an elaborate legal process including polling about how individuals felt about the decision. Instead each of the members gave their opinions and it was fairly quickly decided that the lease would be renewed as it was before. I really enjoyed seeing the legislative process on such a small scale with just a few people in a room talking about what they thought would work best. It certainly seemed more reasonable and humane than some of the debates that occur between legislators in Washington.
I don’t really know much about the city of Georgetown, especially in the political realm, I don’t know if we have a mayor, or who that person might be and I don’t know what propositions or ballot initiatives were decided during the election, because I voted by absentee. I feel bad that I am so uninformed about the town in which I live, so I decided to attend a public meeting of some sort in Georgetown for my off campus event. I chose to attend the Georgetown Municipal Airport Advisory Committee meeting. I pick this event because I didn’t even know Georgetown had an airport (also, to be honest, it was at a more convenient time for me than some other meetings). The meeting was held at a firehouse right next to the airport at 7 on a Monday night. The main question under discussion at this meeting was about the lease for the land the airport is on. As I understood the situation the land is leased from Georgetown for the airport to be able to operate. The board members were discussing if they wished to renew the lease with the same terms that they had had before or if they wanted to renegotiate it. I thought that this was particularly interesting because it is not at all how I would have imagined such a decision being made. It was by no means an elaborate legal process including polling about how individuals felt about the decision. Instead each of the members gave their opinions and it was fairly quickly decided that the lease would be renewed as it was before. I really enjoyed seeing the legislative process on such a small scale with just a few people in a room talking about what they thought would work best. It certainly seemed more reasonable and humane than some of the debates that occur between legislators in Washington.
Friday, November 7, 2008
Civic Engagement Blog (take two)
I am optimistic about our motives for civic engagement. I certainly feel like we are on the right path to avoiding the “coat-drive” self-righteousness, but I also thing it is important to keep this goal in mind through out our work. However, the fact that is a concern we are aware of will help us to avoid such a situation.
I think that it is certainly okay for us to be ambitious, and I think we might have more fun if we try something that “stretches” us. At the same time, if we do choose an ambitious project I think we also need to be willing to accept the fact that we may not get everything accomplished that we set out to do. Since our ideas from the last meeting are still sort of fluid and in the works it’s hard for me to say whether they are to big or to small. I think all the ideas we threw out are still new enough and flexible enough at this point that we can work with them to ensure that they are not to small.
I think I would prefer us all to work together as a group. While I do understand the advantages I feel that working together and having a shared experience would really help us to get to know each other better, understand how each individual works, how we can work together and what we can learn from each other.
I really feel like 3 is a magic number in terms of encounters. I feel that in order build some sort of relationship we really need to be in contact with the same population at least three times. For my schedule committing to work once every other week would probably be easiest. In terms of scheduling encounters I am really fond of the following: Perhaps we can set up a regular weekly time for some of the cohort to work at whatever site or project we choose. Then we could sing up for the various days according to our schedule. That way students could work on the project as often as they wish (although I’m sure we would set a minimum) and if you know you’ll be crazy-busy for the 2 weeks in March planning whatever for the organization you are president of you could schedule around that.
I’m not really excited about the populations we have discussed working with. This is largely because I feel especially passionate about other populations. I spent the summer working as a call councilor for a crisis hotline that picks up for two major national suicide hotlines. As a result of this work I am really passionate about helping people going through mental health crises, or those struggling with disabilities. I’m not suggesting that we all go be call councilors for a suicide hotline, but I would be interested to see how we could maybe meet the needs of persons with physical, mental, and/or psychological disabilities. I also feel that veterans are a population that is in great need, especially those just returning from Iraq. There really are not a lot of services for these men and women, especially for those who are dealing with issues like PTSD. This is an issue that we might be able to do a lot for by raising awareness and seeing how we can work inside the system (i.e. the government) to demand a change in this. Since this project is about civic engagement and not just volunteerism it might be interesting to explore some ideas that tap into the civic side. Maybe we could facilitate a letter writing campaign or start a petition to demand better mental healthcare for veterans. As a non-mental health alternative I’m also a big fan of amnesty international and I think it might really interesting and eye-opening.
If we do decide to pursue working with children or the elderly I really think that the project would be nice if it was one-on-one and fairly unstructured. I think this is important because it would facilitate making connections and building relationships. Also I think this is an important way we can avoid the “coat-drive” problem because this way we can listen to what the people we are working with want and need instead of assuming that we know what is best for them. If the unstructured idea is too fluid for some people we could come up with a basic outline of what we want to do and then maybe talk to the groups we would be working with to see how they feel about it and if they have any additional suggestions or ideas. I like the idea of incorporating art, literature, sports/team building, etc, but I think we should talk to the people we would be working with before we make any unchangeable choices and also see if they have additional ideas.
If we do decide to work with children I would prefer to work with economically disadvantaged children, but I do not have a particular age preference for the group we would be working with.
I mentioned above (fourth paragraph) some of the ideas I have for organizing the project in terms of scheduling and contact. I think that there are ways the program work well whether we decide to structure it in a centralized or decentralized way. The suggestions in my fourth paragraph are simply ideas I had that I think could work well, but I’m interested to see what others have to say about this part of the project in particularly and I am certainly open to suggestions. In terms of the project having leaders or no leaders I think it might be hard to say definitively what would be best in this area without first knowing what sort of project we want to do. For instance if we decide to do art with kids than maybe a couple of people would want to form a sort of lesson plan or activity and others could help do the activity with the kids. On the other hand we certainly do not have to have leaders and another sort of project (doing something with amnesty international or the caring place for instance) might be just a easily and successfully completed without leader. I am open to all of the potential options involving leaders (or lack there of), however if we do decide to use leaders of some sort I think it might be best to use a system of volunteering/nominating and voting on leaders.
I think it would be really neat if everyone could come up with one or two ideas of a project that we could do (complete with preliminary research of the organization involved – maybe Suzy could help us individually with this if we want) and then present that idea to the group. I think this would be a really interesting way to do things because it would make each of us more invested in the projects we are discussing and it might let the group hear about some ideas that haven’t really been discussed yet. For me I sometimes end up liking ideas that are completely different from my own, just because they are ones I never would have come up with on myself. If others aren’t so interested in having to filter through so many different suggestions then I think it would be really good to either have Suzy take the lead on this or at least guide us through the process. I think having Suzy help us would be really great because she has a good deal of experience working with different organizations and so she can help us understand how they work and if they might be a good fit for us.
I certainly don’t want to prevent anyone from doing something they have their heart set on, however I do think it is important for us to explore a few different ideas, so the following suggestions are some projects others might not have thought of but still might be really interested in:
Amnesty International: this is an organization that works to correct civil rights injustices throughout the world. You might have heard about them in history class from their attempts to raise awareness about Nelson Mandela and other “forgotten prisoners” of South African Apartheid in the 1960s. The USA branch of the organization has a bunch of interesting suggestions and ideas of how to get involved on their website, including those especially for college students. Of particular interest to us might be lobbing congress, educating the public, and starting a letter writing campaign. For more info check out http://www.amnestyusa.org/get-activist-toolkit/page.do?id=1031046.
Lone Star Circle of Care: this is an organization here in Williamson County that provides healthcare for people who are uninsured or underinsured. They have clinics in Georgetown (literally walking distance down 29), Round Rock, and Granger. I’ve work with them through APO and done things like filing, making folders, and reading to kids in their pediatric waiting room. They have a website too, it’s http://www.lscctx.org/index.html.
R.O.C.K. (Ride on Center for Kids): This organization is here in Georgetown and they do hippotherapy (therapeutic horseback riding). This would be really neat if we wanted to work with kids and animals. R.O.C.K. works with kids that have cognitive and mental disabilities. Also, the staff always has organizational stuff they can use help with if you don’t feel comfortable working with kids. Website: http://rockride-org.doodlekit.com/home.
That’s pretty much all I have to say for now, but I can’t wait to read everyone else’s ideas!
--Margaret
I think that it is certainly okay for us to be ambitious, and I think we might have more fun if we try something that “stretches” us. At the same time, if we do choose an ambitious project I think we also need to be willing to accept the fact that we may not get everything accomplished that we set out to do. Since our ideas from the last meeting are still sort of fluid and in the works it’s hard for me to say whether they are to big or to small. I think all the ideas we threw out are still new enough and flexible enough at this point that we can work with them to ensure that they are not to small.
I think I would prefer us all to work together as a group. While I do understand the advantages I feel that working together and having a shared experience would really help us to get to know each other better, understand how each individual works, how we can work together and what we can learn from each other.
I really feel like 3 is a magic number in terms of encounters. I feel that in order build some sort of relationship we really need to be in contact with the same population at least three times. For my schedule committing to work once every other week would probably be easiest. In terms of scheduling encounters I am really fond of the following: Perhaps we can set up a regular weekly time for some of the cohort to work at whatever site or project we choose. Then we could sing up for the various days according to our schedule. That way students could work on the project as often as they wish (although I’m sure we would set a minimum) and if you know you’ll be crazy-busy for the 2 weeks in March planning whatever for the organization you are president of you could schedule around that.
I’m not really excited about the populations we have discussed working with. This is largely because I feel especially passionate about other populations. I spent the summer working as a call councilor for a crisis hotline that picks up for two major national suicide hotlines. As a result of this work I am really passionate about helping people going through mental health crises, or those struggling with disabilities. I’m not suggesting that we all go be call councilors for a suicide hotline, but I would be interested to see how we could maybe meet the needs of persons with physical, mental, and/or psychological disabilities. I also feel that veterans are a population that is in great need, especially those just returning from Iraq. There really are not a lot of services for these men and women, especially for those who are dealing with issues like PTSD. This is an issue that we might be able to do a lot for by raising awareness and seeing how we can work inside the system (i.e. the government) to demand a change in this. Since this project is about civic engagement and not just volunteerism it might be interesting to explore some ideas that tap into the civic side. Maybe we could facilitate a letter writing campaign or start a petition to demand better mental healthcare for veterans. As a non-mental health alternative I’m also a big fan of amnesty international and I think it might really interesting and eye-opening.
If we do decide to pursue working with children or the elderly I really think that the project would be nice if it was one-on-one and fairly unstructured. I think this is important because it would facilitate making connections and building relationships. Also I think this is an important way we can avoid the “coat-drive” problem because this way we can listen to what the people we are working with want and need instead of assuming that we know what is best for them. If the unstructured idea is too fluid for some people we could come up with a basic outline of what we want to do and then maybe talk to the groups we would be working with to see how they feel about it and if they have any additional suggestions or ideas. I like the idea of incorporating art, literature, sports/team building, etc, but I think we should talk to the people we would be working with before we make any unchangeable choices and also see if they have additional ideas.
If we do decide to work with children I would prefer to work with economically disadvantaged children, but I do not have a particular age preference for the group we would be working with.
I mentioned above (fourth paragraph) some of the ideas I have for organizing the project in terms of scheduling and contact. I think that there are ways the program work well whether we decide to structure it in a centralized or decentralized way. The suggestions in my fourth paragraph are simply ideas I had that I think could work well, but I’m interested to see what others have to say about this part of the project in particularly and I am certainly open to suggestions. In terms of the project having leaders or no leaders I think it might be hard to say definitively what would be best in this area without first knowing what sort of project we want to do. For instance if we decide to do art with kids than maybe a couple of people would want to form a sort of lesson plan or activity and others could help do the activity with the kids. On the other hand we certainly do not have to have leaders and another sort of project (doing something with amnesty international or the caring place for instance) might be just a easily and successfully completed without leader. I am open to all of the potential options involving leaders (or lack there of), however if we do decide to use leaders of some sort I think it might be best to use a system of volunteering/nominating and voting on leaders.
I think it would be really neat if everyone could come up with one or two ideas of a project that we could do (complete with preliminary research of the organization involved – maybe Suzy could help us individually with this if we want) and then present that idea to the group. I think this would be a really interesting way to do things because it would make each of us more invested in the projects we are discussing and it might let the group hear about some ideas that haven’t really been discussed yet. For me I sometimes end up liking ideas that are completely different from my own, just because they are ones I never would have come up with on myself. If others aren’t so interested in having to filter through so many different suggestions then I think it would be really good to either have Suzy take the lead on this or at least guide us through the process. I think having Suzy help us would be really great because she has a good deal of experience working with different organizations and so she can help us understand how they work and if they might be a good fit for us.
I certainly don’t want to prevent anyone from doing something they have their heart set on, however I do think it is important for us to explore a few different ideas, so the following suggestions are some projects others might not have thought of but still might be really interested in:
Amnesty International: this is an organization that works to correct civil rights injustices throughout the world. You might have heard about them in history class from their attempts to raise awareness about Nelson Mandela and other “forgotten prisoners” of South African Apartheid in the 1960s. The USA branch of the organization has a bunch of interesting suggestions and ideas of how to get involved on their website, including those especially for college students. Of particular interest to us might be lobbing congress, educating the public, and starting a letter writing campaign. For more info check out http://www.amnestyusa.org/get-activist-toolkit/page.do?id=1031046.
Lone Star Circle of Care: this is an organization here in Williamson County that provides healthcare for people who are uninsured or underinsured. They have clinics in Georgetown (literally walking distance down 29), Round Rock, and Granger. I’ve work with them through APO and done things like filing, making folders, and reading to kids in their pediatric waiting room. They have a website too, it’s http://www.lscctx.org/index.html.
R.O.C.K. (Ride on Center for Kids): This organization is here in Georgetown and they do hippotherapy (therapeutic horseback riding). This would be really neat if we wanted to work with kids and animals. R.O.C.K. works with kids that have cognitive and mental disabilities. Also, the staff always has organizational stuff they can use help with if you don’t feel comfortable working with kids. Website: http://rockride-org.doodlekit.com/home.
That’s pretty much all I have to say for now, but I can’t wait to read everyone else’s ideas!
--Margaret
Monday, November 3, 2008
Civic Engagement Blog
I'm not exactly sure what civic engagement means to me. I know that I have always viewed volunteerism as an important part of my life and that seems to be a key element of civic engagement as well. I also feel like civic engagement has a more purposeful drive and more stable foundation than simple volunteerism. I hope to make an impact on SU with CE work in paideia. I am trying to remain open and fluid about what that is exactly at this point, but it is important to me that the CE work I do have a positive impact on at least one life. In approaching the topic of CE I am a bit concerned about finding a topic or issue that all of us in the cohort feel passionate about. I think that will be a key factor in making our CE work great, but because we are such a diverse group I am a bit concerned about us being able to choose something everyone cares about.
The areas I am interested in (today at least): are healthcare for the un/underinsured, mental health issues, domestic hunger (especially in children), and homelessness.
The areas I am interested in (today at least): are healthcare for the un/underinsured, mental health issues, domestic hunger (especially in children), and homelessness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)