The other day I was talking to a friend, and he was telling me that once of his friends got into an awesome college. He also told me that he was black, but he was really talented and worked hard and deserved the spot as much as anyone else. Now, when I first asked him about his friend, I had only asked whether the friend was a girl or a guy, because most of my friends accepted in that tech school were girls so far, and I wanted to see if more guys had gotten in that I had initially thought, you know, to dispell that idea that only girls could get into that school.
But then I realized, as my friend was describing this 'awesome' student, I realize that he was also trying to explain that although he was black, he was still just as qualified as anyone else. I'm sure if that kid was not African American, he would not have rationalized his statements as much. I mean, personally, affirmative action was not the first thing that came to mind. When I hear that someone has been accepted into an amazing college, the first assumption that i make is that he or she is smart. I've personally known so many minorities that got into colleges, and so many minorities that have been rejected from most IVY leagues that I know that affirmative action is definitely not the only determining factor for college admissions.
However, I think that the problem lies in the fact that there is a greater emphasis on Affirmative Action than there should be. Affirmative Action comes into play when two students basically have identical transcripts, identical activities, and are both qualified equally, yet one is 'majority' and one is 'minority.' I mean, its just a statement that tells the generally caucasian admissions officers that they should accept the 'minority' person because of a) diversity and b) Affirmative Action. So, although being an minority generally means that you have a greater chance, its not the definitive chance that you will get into college. Basically, it's like having a smaller pool to compete against, you know? People aren't accepted solely on their race or gender. If you dont have the qualifications to be accepted into that college, you will not get in, whether you're white, black, yellow, red, green ,or purple.
I feel that so many people put such an emphasis on minority 'advantages' that people tend to forget that college admissions people are not stupid. They recognize those who suffer from a poor socioeconomic background, and realize that that individual may not have had as many Princeton Review courses as the rich white kid in some snotty rich town. They might recognize that fewer qualifiied women apply to tech schools than qualified men. Honestly, from my experience, the people that get into the top-notch colleges must have some merit to back up their numerous accomplishments and expendable efforts into their passions and whatnot. I feel that people tend to forget that there's something more to the skin color or gender of a person... and forget to look inside at one's soul. We forget the aspiring physicist or civil engineer, we forget the insane writer who is determined that comptemporary literature is the way to be. We forget the abstract artist, the perfectionist musician, the diligent athlete or the freak who knows everything to know about history. College admissions is a brutal process because not only we become dehumanized, we also become a mere statistic. That is why that we should not forget that in the long run, we are not numbers and that we are people. We are individuals with a passion, with a desire to change the world or affect someone's life. To become role models or to learn from role models. In the long run, admissions or rejections don't change who we are.
You want to know whos the biggest influence in your life? It's simple. Look into a mirror. Look inside yourself. And what you see, no statistic or college letter will be able to see. And that, my friends, is fact.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Monday, February 26, 2007
A (Rare) Kudos to Harvard!
So I was looking for some information on Drew Gilpin Faust, Harvard's 28th president, and first woman president, and i stumbled across their webpage. I see that Harvard is becoming less narrow minded, since they have recently proposed to expand their "Division of Engineering and Applied Sciences" to "School of Engineering and Applied Sciences." [click for link here] It seems as if they are placing a stronger emphasis on the engineering program (big plus), as well as raising concern about women in the engineering fews.. or lack thereof.
Sunday, February 4, 2007
Passion v. Practicality: Intended Dilemma or Partners in Disguise?
There comes a point in everyone's life where he or she must make a decision: to follow through with what he believes is better for him (the choice that society looks upon generally as good), or to follow through with an unfullfilled passion with the intent of maintaining it for the sake of doing it. And then, he becomes stuck between two choices.
There is common misconception that these two choices must always oppose each other. Society tells us that it is better to strive for an academic goal and a economically better goal because it raises our position in life. But think about it. If everyone were to strive to become doctors, lawyers, bankers, politicians, or even the president of the united states because of the money and power involved, our society would be pretty messed up. We wouldn't have those eccentric painters or writers that provide with the guilty pleasure of originality, creativity and change. We wouldn't have efficient garbagemen or waitresses or store managers who really enjoy what they do. Some people simply lack the motivation or the 'talent' involved with manipulating and cheating people in politics. But that's okay. Because contrary to what standards society imposes on us, not all of us are going to meet the bar.
The problem lies in that parents push their children too much. Sure, it' s okay to teach a child that he or she should be diligent and cunning. But if that child isn't too bright, or if he simply lacks the motivation to move ahead in life, there will definitely be an occupation that fits him well. Sure, he may not own Microsoft, but he may as well use his talents to be an amazing airport manager, because thats what we need right now more than any corporation owner or whatnot. Our society seems to simply discourage or look down up such occupations, and I don't know whether it is because we live with capitalist principles or that's just the way evolution works, but I know, deep inside, that it is wrong. We should not shun the common person for living a decent life and really enjoying what they do. The problem is tha when we think of survival of the fittest, we tend to believe that it is always the person with the most money who is successful. I beg to differ.
There's something special about genuinely enjoying your own occupation. Or whatever it is that you choose to do. I mean, loving what you do is the key to happiness; if you are simply doing something because you think it'll make it you happier in the future - you are completely wrong. If you believe you sacrafice your time, your efforts, and all that jazz... for 'happiness,' then you're a complete joke. Ever hear of the phrase, "the ends justify the means?" Yea, there's actually a meaning behind it. The phrase wisely tells us that what we achieve is only as big as how much effort we put into achieving the goal. But frankly, if we don't enjoy the experience of getting there... then it wouldn't be worthwhile goal. But then again, not all people value the idea of working hard and suffering a little bit when considering an 'enjoyable experience.' I don't know. maybe i'm a little bit more masochistic than everyone else.
The point of the matter is, we shouldn't base our decisions on what we plan to do based upon what we think will make us richer, or better off on life. There's a lot of power in being great, even awesome, at what you do best. It may not necessarily be Secretary of State (though we honestly need a better one of those) or President (yup, we need another one of those too), but it may be the common man that has the most power. After all, our country is based upon the decisions of common man, to an extent, because our happiness is important to those close to us. Unless you enjoy being masochistic, you shouldn't try to sacrafice most of your life to get maybe a position or millions of dollars. As long as you're living, why don't you enjoy life as it passes by? Stop and smell the flowers every once in a while. Because maybe 10 years from that moment you stopped and realized that happiness and satisfaction with self was more important thatn withering away with numbers, you might have made the best decision of yourself. I'm not saying that you should change your expectations or anything. Sure, strive only for the best! But perhaps, you should look and them and change them so they are more realistic. Because its when we make unrealistic expectations that we fall the greatest.
There is common misconception that these two choices must always oppose each other. Society tells us that it is better to strive for an academic goal and a economically better goal because it raises our position in life. But think about it. If everyone were to strive to become doctors, lawyers, bankers, politicians, or even the president of the united states because of the money and power involved, our society would be pretty messed up. We wouldn't have those eccentric painters or writers that provide with the guilty pleasure of originality, creativity and change. We wouldn't have efficient garbagemen or waitresses or store managers who really enjoy what they do. Some people simply lack the motivation or the 'talent' involved with manipulating and cheating people in politics. But that's okay. Because contrary to what standards society imposes on us, not all of us are going to meet the bar.
The problem lies in that parents push their children too much. Sure, it' s okay to teach a child that he or she should be diligent and cunning. But if that child isn't too bright, or if he simply lacks the motivation to move ahead in life, there will definitely be an occupation that fits him well. Sure, he may not own Microsoft, but he may as well use his talents to be an amazing airport manager, because thats what we need right now more than any corporation owner or whatnot. Our society seems to simply discourage or look down up such occupations, and I don't know whether it is because we live with capitalist principles or that's just the way evolution works, but I know, deep inside, that it is wrong. We should not shun the common person for living a decent life and really enjoying what they do. The problem is tha when we think of survival of the fittest, we tend to believe that it is always the person with the most money who is successful. I beg to differ.
There's something special about genuinely enjoying your own occupation. Or whatever it is that you choose to do. I mean, loving what you do is the key to happiness; if you are simply doing something because you think it'll make it you happier in the future - you are completely wrong. If you believe you sacrafice your time, your efforts, and all that jazz... for 'happiness,' then you're a complete joke. Ever hear of the phrase, "the ends justify the means?" Yea, there's actually a meaning behind it. The phrase wisely tells us that what we achieve is only as big as how much effort we put into achieving the goal. But frankly, if we don't enjoy the experience of getting there... then it wouldn't be worthwhile goal. But then again, not all people value the idea of working hard and suffering a little bit when considering an 'enjoyable experience.' I don't know. maybe i'm a little bit more masochistic than everyone else.
The point of the matter is, we shouldn't base our decisions on what we plan to do based upon what we think will make us richer, or better off on life. There's a lot of power in being great, even awesome, at what you do best. It may not necessarily be Secretary of State (though we honestly need a better one of those) or President (yup, we need another one of those too), but it may be the common man that has the most power. After all, our country is based upon the decisions of common man, to an extent, because our happiness is important to those close to us. Unless you enjoy being masochistic, you shouldn't try to sacrafice most of your life to get maybe a position or millions of dollars. As long as you're living, why don't you enjoy life as it passes by? Stop and smell the flowers every once in a while. Because maybe 10 years from that moment you stopped and realized that happiness and satisfaction with self was more important thatn withering away with numbers, you might have made the best decision of yourself. I'm not saying that you should change your expectations or anything. Sure, strive only for the best! But perhaps, you should look and them and change them so they are more realistic. Because its when we make unrealistic expectations that we fall the greatest.
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Because Grammar Isn't the Deciding Factor, Facebook Is!
So they're these flyers for a meeting thing about facebook... there is apparently an increasing concern that facebook may influence college admissions decisions? You know, like with myspace, and xanga, and other forms of stalker-friendly websites. Anyways, the main issue is whether these sites affect college admissions.
So I'm walking around school and these flyers are like "Can Facebook Effect College Admissions?" I first looked at it, and then instantaneously took a double-take. And then I started laughing. And somehow I think to myself "I don't think facebook is the main issue here, I believe its the degradation of student's grammatical abilities." Seriously, if one can't differentiate between effect and affect.... colleges will probably not like that, facebook or not.
It's like, so many kids are worried about how facebook will affect this or myspace will affect that. You have to remember, though, that there probably is some relationship to kids that spend their entire lives on facebook and lack of studying. I mean, if you lack the motivation to study and want to be on facebook, be my guest. But its the fact that you post revealing pictures of yourself on your site with you either doing illegal stuff or disgusting stuff that may hurt you. To some, facebook would never hurt them. Because those kids don't get into situations that could be potentially dangerous for them. Facebook in itself is not actually a bad idea, its just that the information kids choose to reveal about themselves via facebook that actually hurts. And obviously, if you have the guts to show that world that's who you really are, then why shouldn't college admissions look into that to? Are they the select few that shouldn't see that you like to drink underage at house parties on the weekend? Why not? They are, evaluating you as a person and should be entitled the information about you, especially infomation that YOU took the libertly to post about yourself! If you have absolutely nothing to hide from colleges, then you would have nothing to be afraid of. Colleges are supposed to accept you for who you are right? So why do you care if colleges take the intiative to find a little bit more about you? It's not their fault that they want to know more about the people that they accept. What you do reflects who you are, and colleges or not, I don't think you would change who you are because of it.
To a certain point, however, I'm sure that are other extraneous factors in addtion to these websites. I mean, the expectations of Great Neck North parents are that "my kid is going to Harvard/Princeton/Yale and no one is going to tell me otherwise." Seriously, some parents just need to understand- a kid witha 1800 SAT score and a 85 gpa is probably not going to get into IVY league schools. I don't know. Just a hunch.... I mean my point is that parents have unrealistic expectations for their kids. Don't they want their kids to simply be happy a college where they'd be able to academically challenge themselves and enjoy the next four years of life? The reason the top schools ARE, in fact, the top schools, is because the kids that go there are simply brilliant. It happens that the college admissions recognizes talent and intelligence when they see it - so sue them. Getting into Harvard doesn't guarantee you a $70,000 job offer after college. If you kid is a lazy bum, he will always be a lazy bum. It doens't matter what college that person goes to - they might as well go to a more reasonable college that fits them, rather than go to an unreasonably difficult college that they cannot handle. I mean, people really have to recognize their limitations. I'm sure that going to a good college and being successful is somewhat related, but honestly, when it comes down to it, its the individual's work ethic and attitude that ultimately determines his or her success.
So, in order to sum this up without an excessively redundant PTSA meeting, I'm here to affirm that there are some more vital factors that are considered that are (*gasp*) more important than facebook.
So I'm walking around school and these flyers are like "Can Facebook Effect College Admissions?" I first looked at it, and then instantaneously took a double-take. And then I started laughing. And somehow I think to myself "I don't think facebook is the main issue here, I believe its the degradation of student's grammatical abilities." Seriously, if one can't differentiate between effect and affect.... colleges will probably not like that, facebook or not.
It's like, so many kids are worried about how facebook will affect this or myspace will affect that. You have to remember, though, that there probably is some relationship to kids that spend their entire lives on facebook and lack of studying. I mean, if you lack the motivation to study and want to be on facebook, be my guest. But its the fact that you post revealing pictures of yourself on your site with you either doing illegal stuff or disgusting stuff that may hurt you. To some, facebook would never hurt them. Because those kids don't get into situations that could be potentially dangerous for them. Facebook in itself is not actually a bad idea, its just that the information kids choose to reveal about themselves via facebook that actually hurts. And obviously, if you have the guts to show that world that's who you really are, then why shouldn't college admissions look into that to? Are they the select few that shouldn't see that you like to drink underage at house parties on the weekend? Why not? They are, evaluating you as a person and should be entitled the information about you, especially infomation that YOU took the libertly to post about yourself! If you have absolutely nothing to hide from colleges, then you would have nothing to be afraid of. Colleges are supposed to accept you for who you are right? So why do you care if colleges take the intiative to find a little bit more about you? It's not their fault that they want to know more about the people that they accept. What you do reflects who you are, and colleges or not, I don't think you would change who you are because of it.
To a certain point, however, I'm sure that are other extraneous factors in addtion to these websites. I mean, the expectations of Great Neck North parents are that "my kid is going to Harvard/Princeton/Yale and no one is going to tell me otherwise." Seriously, some parents just need to understand- a kid witha 1800 SAT score and a 85 gpa is probably not going to get into IVY league schools. I don't know. Just a hunch.... I mean my point is that parents have unrealistic expectations for their kids. Don't they want their kids to simply be happy a college where they'd be able to academically challenge themselves and enjoy the next four years of life? The reason the top schools ARE, in fact, the top schools, is because the kids that go there are simply brilliant. It happens that the college admissions recognizes talent and intelligence when they see it - so sue them. Getting into Harvard doesn't guarantee you a $70,000 job offer after college. If you kid is a lazy bum, he will always be a lazy bum. It doens't matter what college that person goes to - they might as well go to a more reasonable college that fits them, rather than go to an unreasonably difficult college that they cannot handle. I mean, people really have to recognize their limitations. I'm sure that going to a good college and being successful is somewhat related, but honestly, when it comes down to it, its the individual's work ethic and attitude that ultimately determines his or her success.
So, in order to sum this up without an excessively redundant PTSA meeting, I'm here to affirm that there are some more vital factors that are considered that are (*gasp*) more important than facebook.
Sunday, January 21, 2007
Beauty and the Geek: Sexist, much?
So there's this show on MTV (I think it was actually moved recently to CW) called "Beauty and the Geek," which is a tv show that tries to performed the "ultimate social experiment." Now, normally I don't pay attention to menial shows that do ridiculous things so that people can win money and curse at each other on tv. But something told me that there was something different about this show, something very unique that I could not put my tongue on.
After pondering a few days, I realized that the reason this show was different was because it was one of the few shows that actually incorporated the idea of 'intelligence' as a market product. Pairing up 10 nerdy intelligent but marginally-sociopathic geeks with 10 'so-called beautiful' idiotic beauties is possibly one of the most brilliant things MTV has every done. I mean not only do you get the same audience that watches OC, Laguna Beach, Real World, and etc, but you ALSO get something different from those 'hot guy hot girl' shows. Here, in Beauty and the Geek, beauties are forced to deal with insecure social wrecks, while geeks are forced to shave their unibrows.
I mean, it's not a bad thing to help a guy who researches monkeys with red lasers or to help a girl who doesn't know who the president of the united states is. But sometimes I feel that the characters in their personal interviews seem superficial- they talk about how great and valuable of an experience they had, but how is that possible within only like one week? And besides, I've also noticed that its something that the guys only said - it was probably only 'amazing' because they spent time with a beautiful woman, someone that they would never really be able to achieve on their owns.
but on another note, Beauty and the Geek doesn't really 'teach' anything, it actually only reinforces that stereotypes that we have against women and men. Women are dumb and beautiful, while men are smart but shy. But it's okay for a guy to be ugly while an ugly women is shunned not only from the female society, but also everyone else as well. Is it necessarily fair that beauty and the geek actually encourages these stereotypes? They specifically chose ignorant women and strange eccentric men to fulfill this job, and for whose sake? Ours! for money! for entertainment! because we, as human beings, love to see people suffer. whether it be dumb blondes or hairy nerds or anything or anyone out of the norm. and I personally think that this aspect of beauty and the geek is truly abhorring.
However, it is not a lost cause. To remedy this, I propose the the next season of beauty and the geek reverses roles: we find the female geeks out there and the male beauties. I mean that we find those female lab nerds who have low self-esteem, and the hot abercrombie male models who couldn't spell connecticut to save their lives. It would be nice if television supported a message that both males and females can be beauties, that both males and females can be geeks. I mean, why do geeks always have to be males? In fact, I believe that I am a female geek. I am a female geek obsessed with science, who has only kissed one boy, and who loves to spend her summers working at a lab running fuel cells. I am the geek who wants to graduate from a tech school, who is afraid of admitting her feelings, and etc etc. What makes me different from any geek on that show? Because I am a woman, and therefore I cannot be stereotyped as a geek. What bogus is that? I'm sure there are guys equally out there who think that they're beautful and think they have an IQ of 1,000,000. Why dont you try that, MTV? Why don't you ever try anything different? And if this doesn't convince you, I'm sure that the diversity in the program would at least make money on this endeavor.
After pondering a few days, I realized that the reason this show was different was because it was one of the few shows that actually incorporated the idea of 'intelligence' as a market product. Pairing up 10 nerdy intelligent but marginally-sociopathic geeks with 10 'so-called beautiful' idiotic beauties is possibly one of the most brilliant things MTV has every done. I mean not only do you get the same audience that watches OC, Laguna Beach, Real World, and etc, but you ALSO get something different from those 'hot guy hot girl' shows. Here, in Beauty and the Geek, beauties are forced to deal with insecure social wrecks, while geeks are forced to shave their unibrows.
I mean, it's not a bad thing to help a guy who researches monkeys with red lasers or to help a girl who doesn't know who the president of the united states is. But sometimes I feel that the characters in their personal interviews seem superficial- they talk about how great and valuable of an experience they had, but how is that possible within only like one week? And besides, I've also noticed that its something that the guys only said - it was probably only 'amazing' because they spent time with a beautiful woman, someone that they would never really be able to achieve on their owns.
but on another note, Beauty and the Geek doesn't really 'teach' anything, it actually only reinforces that stereotypes that we have against women and men. Women are dumb and beautiful, while men are smart but shy. But it's okay for a guy to be ugly while an ugly women is shunned not only from the female society, but also everyone else as well. Is it necessarily fair that beauty and the geek actually encourages these stereotypes? They specifically chose ignorant women and strange eccentric men to fulfill this job, and for whose sake? Ours! for money! for entertainment! because we, as human beings, love to see people suffer. whether it be dumb blondes or hairy nerds or anything or anyone out of the norm. and I personally think that this aspect of beauty and the geek is truly abhorring.
However, it is not a lost cause. To remedy this, I propose the the next season of beauty and the geek reverses roles: we find the female geeks out there and the male beauties. I mean that we find those female lab nerds who have low self-esteem, and the hot abercrombie male models who couldn't spell connecticut to save their lives. It would be nice if television supported a message that both males and females can be beauties, that both males and females can be geeks. I mean, why do geeks always have to be males? In fact, I believe that I am a female geek. I am a female geek obsessed with science, who has only kissed one boy, and who loves to spend her summers working at a lab running fuel cells. I am the geek who wants to graduate from a tech school, who is afraid of admitting her feelings, and etc etc. What makes me different from any geek on that show? Because I am a woman, and therefore I cannot be stereotyped as a geek. What bogus is that? I'm sure there are guys equally out there who think that they're beautful and think they have an IQ of 1,000,000. Why dont you try that, MTV? Why don't you ever try anything different? And if this doesn't convince you, I'm sure that the diversity in the program would at least make money on this endeavor.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
A Double Fudge Chocolate Chip Sundae with a Huge Cherry on Top
Today is just an amazingly good today. Like, today I just feel good about myself. First, we had our last advisory session, and we did a really awesome activity that consisted of writing nice things about each other. To be more specific, I typed out the names of everyone in the group, and got everyone else to write nice things about the person named on top of the paper, and you're not allowed to look at it until everyone is done signing. Granted, it's not the most exciting thing to do, but I know that deep inside some people are really touched by the insightful comments that others make. I know for a fact that it boosted my confidence to see that my peerlings thought highly of me. that they thought I was intelligent, organized, and very outgoing. I mean, telling yourselves these things may sometimes help, but all it really does is boost your ego and it might do so in a false manner. I like this activity because you are somehow appreciated for the small things that you do, no matter how insignificant they may seem. The best part is that other people recognize what you recognize as well, and it just feels good that they can think of it without you having to brag about it. I guess it's really mostly for the modest people. I was actually thinking of writing a little rant called "ode to the modestly," and complain about how the modest people always get looked over by the idiots because they don't brag about their grades or they don't inflate their egos. I mean, if you're going to act 'above' someone, you don't say to them 'I'm going to act above you and ignore that comment.' That defeats the whole purpose of acting above someone - if you were seriously more mature, you would have simply just ignored the person's comment without a word. Honestly, there are so few kids who actually are mature, and there are so many spoiled kids who believe that they deserve honors and respect... Pfft. If people cant learn to respect those that are mature and act above people... then they are conniving maniupulative spoiled brats.
Anyways, on a brighter note, I recieved news that I was awarded Intel Semi-Finalist today! It was a great feeling. In fact, when I found out, I had left my flute and piccolo out on the stand and I was just in a state of awe for the entire day. Well, I took a psych test after I found out - but then I was in awe. It was a great feeling, and I felt totally accomplished. And well, some more egotistical people... Let's put it this way. I'm just glad that I got what I got. Before i say anything too bashingly negative. You know, just because I feel proud of my accomplishments.
Anyways, going to play around with this blog layout a little more. yay for blogs.
Anyways, on a brighter note, I recieved news that I was awarded Intel Semi-Finalist today! It was a great feeling. In fact, when I found out, I had left my flute and piccolo out on the stand and I was just in a state of awe for the entire day. Well, I took a psych test after I found out - but then I was in awe. It was a great feeling, and I felt totally accomplished. And well, some more egotistical people... Let's put it this way. I'm just glad that I got what I got. Before i say anything too bashingly negative. You know, just because I feel proud of my accomplishments.
Anyways, going to play around with this blog layout a little more. yay for blogs.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
First Trial
Okay so maybe perhaps this is my...3rd or so attempt at using ebloggy, since ebloggy literally changes its format periodically. I kind of wish I had my last one though - it had a cool bamboo template. Oh well, I realy can't complain. Worse comes to worse I'll actually play around with the html and do something about it. until then, I'm going to try to get some sleep and have some fun with this blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
