The Case Against College

                                                The Case Against college

Many scholars debate on whether or not education is important to a person’s success. In an article titled, “The Case Against College,” Dale Stephens argues that people don’t need college to be successful in life. He believes that college kills creativity, puts people in debt, and one does not need a college degree to find a job in today’s age. He states that he believes colleges today are built upon a system that kills the creative thinking in people’s minds. He also explains the problem of student debt and how it forces students to simply find jobs after they get out of college just to pay off their debt rather than looking for ways to create or develop their dreams for their future. Stephens does explain in his manifesto, however, that he isn’t totally against college but simply believes a college degree is not worth the large amounts of money students have to pay to get them. Above all, he emphasizes his theory that people can use self-improvement tactics and today’s technology, like the Internet, to put their creative talents on display, making a formal degree unnecessary when obtaining a job. In conclusion, Stephen’s belief is that college is not necessary and it can hurt people’s future rather than help it.

In my view, Stephens is right about the large percent of students that go into debt after college. However, he is wrong because in society today, many employers look for people with at least a 4-year degree from a college. Otherwise, it would be very hard to find any sort of well-paying job. Also, if Stephens’s claim about the restrictive structure of the college schooling system were true, than the public schooling system before college would also have to apply. This being the case, those who have already been through the normal schooling would have had their creativity “killed” before they get into college, which would mean college would not be to blame in his theory. More specifically, I believe that dropping out of or not going to college is not the answer. Instead, reinventing the system would be more beneficial rather than not being a part of it entirely. Although Stephens might object that college is, in fact, important to someone’s future, I maintain that college is necessary for a large percent of the population to succeed in life. Therefore, I conclude, that college is not the source of the problem that kills creativity and students need to stand up to work through the financial problems that are present in today’s system to make college accessible because college is very important to people’s futures.

            Despite Stephens’s claims that the structure in which college is based upon is the same system that was used to train factory workers back in the 18^th and 19^th century in America, he fails to realize that college is not the source of that problem and people who have already been part of the school system would have, according to Stephens, had their creativity killed before college. The school system does, in some way, command a certain type of learning on kids; however, the experiment Stephens refers to in his article was done to kids who did not go to college. This means the effects of the school system start to occur well before any form of higher education. If any change were to be brought in attempts to fix the problem of schools killing creativity, it would have to involve changing the school systems that comes before college rather than completely rejecting the idea all together. Implementing more art and other programs outside the STEM subjects could be an example that would help fix the problem of the creatively challenged school system. If more opportunities for inventive thinking were offered to students at a younger age, creativity can be preserved and college would be an extension to someone’s goals rather than just another step in someone’s life that is forced upon them based on society’s norms. Stephens may not agree that college is not the problem, but he would agree with me that schools need more outlets for students of all ages to satisfy their creative needs. By changing the school system, prior to college, people’s creativity can be secured and it would allow college to fulfill its purpose: to give people the tools to succeed in life.

            In his article, Stephens urges people that college puts so much financial pressure on students after college, but instead of simply skipping out on college all together, why not look for ways to decrease the cost of college to begin with? It is a fact that a large number of students in the United States suffer from being in debt after college. Debt can cause financial problems for people in the future if not taken care of. Stephens does not shy away when talking about the financial problems that college can cause for a person who needs student loans to pay for their education; however, not going to college is just running away from the issue and does not create a solution for that issue. In 2009, the US government spent around 7 times the amount spent on education on the military. Much of that tax money can be put into education to help students manage their expenses better. In today’s age, there are so many outlets that allow people to voice their opinions. With modern media availability, students should look to tell their government that their education is more important than bombs and missiles. The role of America’s government is to serve its people and nothing would serve people better than aiding the next generation who will one day run the country in their own respects. With the government’s help, college could be something people look forward to rather than just another obstacle they have to overcome.

Although Stephens claims that a college degree is not worth the time and money people invest into it, over 700,000 international students in 2010 and growing disagreed with him in thinking that a college education is not worth such a dedication. He illustrates steps in his manifesto that people can take to become successful without going to college. He thinks college is unnecessary and firmly believes a degree is not worth $40,000, but thousands of people all over the world travel to America to take part in this “unnecessary” education. The financial help students can get from the government can give them a chance to be part of what people travel half way around the world to be part of. Higher education in American is seen as one of the world’s best and the large number of international enrollments demonstrates it. If students from all around the world attend one of America’s colleges, why shouldn’t American students? Stephens may believe college is useless, but over 700,000 people in 2010 did not.

            In Stephens’s manifesto, he suggests that self-directed learning and the use of the Internet is enough to become successful, but there is a big imbalance in the ratio of the relatively small number of people who have been successful and those who are still struggling. The Internet gives people the ability to connect with virtually anyone and anything in the world and Stephens even gives examples of different sites that allow people to show off their talents online and to put their work on display. He suggests that the Internet paired with his twelve steps in self-directed learning is sufficient enough for someone to find a job or career. There is no doubt that the Internet can be the beginning of people’s careers and people like Justin Beiber and Colbie Callet are fine examples of this. However, out of the number of those who have succeeded through similar tactics as Stephens suggests, what is the number of people who have tried and failed to start their careers up? Of those people who do inspire to be artists, the likely hood of becoming successful are very slim. A survey that was taken about artists in Australia are stuck and having difficulty supporting themselves financially just by survival means, let alone find time to dedicate to their creative work. Money is required to sponsor their creative dreams and people who abandon the idea of college are forced to work low paying jobs to keep their artistic dreams alive. Stephens may not think college is needed to get a job, but in today’s conditions, it is extremely difficult to get jobs, regardless in what field, without some sort of formal schooling or training in the particular field.

Stephens is right that the informational stream of the Internet gives artists and innovative creators a way to show off their work, but what about the people who inspire to become something that cannot be put on a computer screen? What is the situation was reverse someone wanted to leave the more creative life-style they have now and get proper? The young performers in Alegria stated in the documentary called “A Journey to Alegria: A Special,” that they would like to finish school and one day, become a doctor or lawyer. This is an example of how someone who lives in a world of creativity and innovation want to be part of the system that Stephens claims to be so wrong. Would college still be so wrong if someone knowingly wants to revert their lifestyle from a creative one to a more “boring” one? In all fairness to Stephens, he does state that he doesn’t believe everyone should not go to college but simply that college is not the only way to be successful. If he were to be asked this question, he would probably explain all the downsides of college before simply saying go to college, but I am confident that Stephens is not totally against college. In his manifesto, however, he states that a “piece of paper”, referring to a degree, is worth $40,000 dollars. Kids, like the young performers, inspire to become doctors or lawyers and if there was no college, how would they be able to achieve their dreams? Without the right schooling or degree, it would be impossible in today’s age to get a job as prestigious as a doctor or lawyer. If he believes that people achieving their innermost desired goals is the most important thing in the world, how can there be a price put on someone’s happiness and fulfillment in life when what separates them from their dreams is that very same “piece of paper”?

            College is an institution that gives people the tools to succeed in life. Dale Stephens says that college hurts the chances of people having a fulfilling life because it kills a person’s creativity, puts a person in debt, and there are other ways of succeeding that are better than college. Although many of the general statements are true, Stephens fails to mention alternatives or other problems. First, if his claims that the school system kills creativity were true, college would not be the problem but rather the overall public school system. Changes should be made to overall school structure instead of neglecting college completely. Second, although college does put people in debt, the solution should not be to avoid college. The solution would be having students appeal to the government to give more help to students financially, which would benefit both parties in the future. Lastly, although people have found success through the Internet and other means other than college, the practicality of it is in put into serious question. Looking for a job, in today’s economy, without a college degree is very difficult. Skipping out on what people from countries all over the world highly value is not the best life move someone can make. College can be a very useful asset to a person and missing the opportunity to gain what millions of people before have used to become successful can be the most damaging decision to someone’s future.

http://www.mpcfaculty.net/penny_partch/1Aweek/1A_the_case_against_college.htm

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1258

http://chronicle.com/article/International-Enrollments-at/129747/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colbie_Caillat#2009.E2.80.932010:_Breakthrough

http://www.cirquedusoleil.com/en/shows/alegria/show/about.aspx

http://www.roysac.com/blog/2009/04/cirque-du-soleil-documentaries-complete-list/

http://uncollege.org/academicdeviance.pdf

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/may2004/art-m07.shtml

#11 Assignment 4 Draft

                                                The Case Against college

Many scholars debate on whether or not education is important to a person’s success. In an article titled, “The Case Against College,” Dale Stevens argues that people don’t need college to be successful in life. He believes that college kills creativity, puts people in debt, and one does not need a college degree to find a job with today’s technology. He states that he believes colleges today are build upon a system that kills the creative thinking in people’s minds. He also explains the problem with student debt after they come out of college and how the debt force students to simply find jobs just to pay off their debt rather than looking for ways to create or develop their dreams for their future. Above all, he emphasizes the fact that with today’s technology, people can find ways to show off their creative talents through outlets, like the Internet, and a formal degree is not needed to find a job. In conclusion, Steven’s belief is that college is not necessary and it can hurt people’s future rather than help it. In my view, Stevens is right about the large percent of students that go into debt after college. However, he is wrong because in society today, many employers look for people with at least a 4-year degree from a college or otherwise, it would be very hard to find a job. Also, if Stevens’ claim about the restrictive structure of the college schooling system were true, than the public schooling system before college would also have to apply. This being the case, those who have already been through the normal schooling would have had their creativity “killed” before they get into college. More specifically, I believe that dropping out of or not going to college is not the answer. Instead, reinventing the system would be more beneficial rather than not being a part of it entirely. Although Stevens might object that college is, in fact, important to someone’s future, I maintain that college is necessary for a large percent of the population to succeed in life. Therefore, I conclude, that college is a vital part in someone’s plan to fulfill their goals in life.

            Stevens claims that the structure in which college is based upon is the same structure used during Industrial Revolution. He claims that schools today operate in the same system that was used to train factory workers back in the 18^th and 19^th century in America. Stevens’ reference to the experiment done by George Land and Beth Jarman explains his idea that schools kill creativity. The school system does, in some way, command a certain type of learning on kids, but Stevens fails to realize that college is not the source of that problem. The experiment was done to kids not in college, which means the effects of the school system start to occur well before any form of higher education. If any change were to be brought, it would involve changing the school system, not rejecting college. Implementing more art and other programs outside the STEM subjects could be an example that would help fix the problem of the creatively challenged school system. If more opportunities for inventive thinking were offered to students at a younger age, creativity can be preserved and college would be an extension to someone’s goals rather than just another step in someone’s life that is forced upon them based on society’s norms. Stevens may not agree that college is not the problem, but he would agree with me that schools need more outlets for students of all ages to satisfy their creative needs. College is meant to give people the tools to succeed in life. Ideas of changing the school system to secure people’s creativity should be applied to schools between kindergarten and high school.

            It is a fact that a large number of students in the United States suffer from being in debt after college. Debt can cause financial problems for people in the future if not taken care of. Stevens does not shy away when talking about the financial pressures that college puts on a person who needs student loans to pay for their education. If it is such a big problem paying for college, why not decrease the cost of college? Not going to college is just running away from the problem and doesn’t solve the issue at hand. In 2009, the US government spent around 7 times the amount spent on education on the military. Much of that tax money can be put into education to help students manage their expenses better. With the government’s help, college could be someone people look forward to rather than just another obstacle they have to overcome. The help given by the government can also give native students from American a fighting chance against the increasing number of international students. Higher education in American is seen as one of the world’s best and the large number of international enrollments demonstrates it. If students from all around the world attend one of America’s colleges, why shouldn’t American students? Stevens may believe college is useless, but over 700,000 people in 2010 did not. With the government’s help, students in America can be part of what people across the globe come to America for.

            The Internet gives people the ability to connect with virtually anyone and anything in the world. Stevens gives examples of different sites that allow people to show off their talents online and to put their work on display. He suggests that the Internet is sufficient enough for someone to find a job or career. There is no doubt that the Internet can be the beginning of people’s careers and people like Justin Beiber and Colbie Callet are fine examples of this. However, out of the number of those who have succeed by the means of the Internet, what is the number of people who have tried and failed to start their careers up. It is true that the information stream of the Internet gives artists and innovative creators a way to show off their work, but what about those people who inspire to become something that cannot be put on a computer screen? Kids inspire to become doctors or lawyers one day and if there was no college, how would they be able to achieve their dreams? Without the right schooling or degree, it would be impossible in today’s age to get a job as prestigious as a doctor or lawyer. Stevens may not think college is needed to get a job, but in today’s conditions, it is extremely difficult to get jobs, regardless in what field, without some sort of formal schooling or training in the particular field.

What if the situation was the reverse? What if someone wanted proper schooling and wanted to get away from a more creative life-style they are in now? The younger performers in Alegria stated in the documentary called “A Journey to Alegria: A Special,” that they would like to finish school and one day, become a doctor or lawyer. This is an example of how someone who lives in a world of creativity and innovation want to be part of the system that Stevens claims to be so wrong. They desire to go to school to get a degree in a certain profession and are willing to face the financial troubles. It is clear that Stevens believes that school kills creativity and hurts their inventive instincts. What can he say to someone who has lived a life of visionary experiences and wants to live of life with books and teacher authorities within a college institution? Would college still be so wrong if someone knowingly wants to revert their lifestyle from a creative one to a more “boring” one?

            College is an institution that gives people the tools to succeed in life. Dale Stevens says that college hurts the chances of people having a fulfilling life because it kills a person’s creativity, puts a person in debt, and there are other ways of succeeding that are better than college. Although many of the general statements are true, Stevens fails to mention alternatives or other problems. First, college itself does not kill creativity, rather that the overall public school system and changes should be made to that rather than neglecting college completely. Second, college does put people in debt but to fix this problem should not be to avoid college. The solution would be having the government give more effort to help students manage college financially, which would benefit both parties in the future. Lastly, although people have found success through the Internet, the practicality of it is in put into serious question. Looking for a job, in today’s economy, without a college degree is very difficult. Trying to become successful without going to college is not impossible, but very unlikely. Skipping out on people from countries all over the world highly value is not the best life move someone can make. College is be a very useful asset to a person and missing the opportunity to gain what millions of people before have used to become successful can be the most damaging to someone’s future.

http://www.mpcfaculty.net/penny_partch/1Aweek/1A_the_case_against_college.htm

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1258

http://chronicle.com/article/International-Enrollments-at/129747/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Revolution

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colbie_Caillat#2009.E2.80.932010:_Breakthrough

http://www.cirquedusoleil.com/en/shows/alegria/show/about.aspx

http://www.roysac.com/blog/2009/04/cirque-du-soleil-documentaries-complete-list/

#10

"Title: The case against college

The general argument made by author Dale Stevens in her/his work, people don’t need college to be successful in life.

More specifically, Stevens argues that, college kills creativity, makes people in debt, and people can learn better if they go out and experience the world for themselves.

He writes, “the problem is hat schools kill creativity.”

In this passage, Stevens is suggesting that there is an alternative to schooling and if one would “escape” the school system, they can maintain their creativity which would help them in their lives.

In conclusion, Stevens’s belief is that college is not necessary for everyone and it can be hurt people’s future rather than help it.

In my view, Stevens is right because it is true that a large percent of students go into debt after college. However, he is wrong because in society today, many employers look for people with at least a 4-year degree from college and it is very hard to get a job without at least that. Also, before people go into college, those who have already been in normal school has had their creativity killed before they get into college so college would not be the problem.

More specifically, I believe that maybe there could be an alternative to schooling before college so creativity could be salvaged."

Topics for assignment #4:

How so much of school now a days are based purely on tests and students dont really seek out to learn rather than just do well on tests.

if college did not cost so much, would it still be so bad?

does college still hurt creativity if people are majoring in an art subject but still required to take STEM subject classes

#9

After handing in our first draft of assignment #3, and discussing how to argue a certain point within a paper, I am not as confident about my paper as I was. When I wrote my rough draft, I have to admit, I was completely lost. I really didn't have any good ideas and I just wrote what I thought about Ken Robinson's idea that school kills creativity with the use of so many standardized tests. I was even embarrassed to give my paper away for other people to read because I just really didn't like. However, reading other people's paper helped me a lot. It gave me a real guide as to what I can put into my paper. The group discussion of the two papers also helped me a lot in coming up with an idea. When I was writing the paper, I had a feeling of a little constraint because I always felt as though I should explain a lot more but it wouldn't fit within the 1250 word limit. It is partially my fault but I felt as though I left a lot out of the paper that would be important for the reader to witness. When we were discussing, in class, what would be an effective way to argue the point I was trying to make, I thought my paper did not fulfill those requirements. This assignment was definitely one of the harder essays we had to do and I will have to wait until the first drafts come in before I make any more decisions about changing my papper.

#8

I use to really enjoy things of mystery. I remember growing up, I use to really like the Cam Jansen series by David A. Adler and "The Hardy Boys" Franklin Dixon. I liked trying to figure out who was the culprit of the crime being solved, which is why I also loved the show Scooby Doo. 

I also really liked fantasy. I remember the first book that turned me onto fantasy was "The Lion, The Witch, and The Wardrobe" by C.S. Lewis. Reading and watching things of a fantasy genre was very engaging for me because I love allowed my mind to get lost in the story and put myself in the middle of the tale.

After reading the article "The Case Against College," im can understand where Dale Stephens is coming from. I do agree that people go to college to get a degree just to find a job where they may not necessarily enjoy. Some people look for jobs just for the sake of jobs and making money. I am all for making money and becoming successful but, I much rather get there by doing something I enjoy rather than coasting through life bored with my profession. Growing up, I never really saw not going to college as an option because it just was a norm that I was a part of. However, if I had the chance of finding what I wanted to do and I knew I could really enjoy it and make something out of it, actually going to college would be be put into consideration. College is suppose to be more than getting a degree, it is about finding out about yourself and if that does not take all four years and someone can rationally make the decision, college may not be necessary.

My views, however, are not shared by everyone in the world, including employers. This is what makes me so torn about the subject because it seems so hard for someone to get a job these days even with a bachelors degree. What chance would someone without a degree at all have on the job market. Even though I believe college may not be the most necessary thing, it may not be so true in a reality. 

#7

After reading "Essentialism and Experience" by Bell Hooks, what I thinking essentialism is is certain things that separate different groups in the world. Hooks first discussed the use of essentialism in the context of the classroom. He quoted one of the critiques he was referring to and he said that "'those "in the know" commerce only with others "in the know," excluding and marginalizing those perceived to be outside the magic circle.' " He assumes that this other critique is saying that people who find similarities with themselves group together with people like them. This suggests to me that essentialism can be used as gentler term for segregation or selective recognition from individuals. Hooks continues his essay by describing the dangers of essentialism and I agree with his views on the topic because I do believe the world needs to mend together in order to have a chance in a better future. If I were to be asked what is the point of essentialism, I would say there is no point.

It is out of experience that can make essentialism dangerous or not. The critique Hooks was referring to, Fuss, describes that her views of essentialism come from her experience in the classroom. Experience come differently to everyone and Hooks clearly states that his experience in the classroom is different than that of Fuss's. This can be the reason their views on the matter of essentialism are different. To me, ideas of essentialism and generalizing people into different groups based on characteristics is the result of different experiences and environments people lived in. People who lived in different parts of the world experiencing different cultures will have different views on matters than one another and that is inevitable. The thing, in my opinion, to keep in mind is not letting these differences or experiences turn people against one another by grouping themselves together and looking down on other groups.

Genres are different types or styles of a particular art, whether it be literature, movies, etc... Genres are a good analogy of essentialism because these works of art are grouped together based on specific characteristics. People have certain preferences of genres they enjoy like comedies or tragedies. Something like genre preference in art is a suitable way of explaining why essentialism should not necessarily divide people. Although people may have different reasons to like different genres, it doesn't mean they necessary hate everyone who doesn't like their genres.

#6

We got our essays back this week, and I have to say im really disappointed with my grade. I knew after handed it in, it didn't feel quite as right as I hoped it would. I remember sitting there in front of the computer, staring at the screen, and trying to come up with a way to answer the question of the assignment, which was about literacy events. I read my paper over again today, and I realized there were things I could have definitely changed to make it fit the topic of the assignment better. This was definitely not the way I wanted to start things in the class. Hopefully I can make up for my mistake and do better on this next essay and bring my grade back up to my standards.

#5

It is one of those fables, which, out of an unknown antiquity, convey an unlooked-for wisdom, that the gods, in the beginning, divided Man into men, that he might be more helpful to himself; just as the hand was divided into fingers, the better to answer its end.

Fables

            In the paragraph before, Emerson was talking about a The American Scholar’s biography. When he uses the word fable in this paragraph, he could mean that a man is in control is his life and it is up to him to become an American Scholar. Like a fable, he could be describing the American Scholar’s life as something the man creates and writes himself and only he can turn his story into success.

The word fable could also mean the complete opposite, and mean made-up. He could mean that people claiming they are true scholars are fake and everything written up to this point does not describe what a true a true American Scholar is.

Divide Man into men

            Emerson could be trying to say that the act of the “gods” dividing man into men means that every man lacks something and is not complete. They are all divisions from a single being that makes them incomplete in terms of complete wisdom.

            Using the man with a capital “M” could be mean he was trying to convey a more religious meaning. Like using the a capital “G” in God, Emerson could be saying that men are divisions of God and it takes looking at religious teachings to achieve real wisdom.

In the beginning

            This statement could have a literal definition and Emerson could be talking in terms of time and the gods were first creating the world and the people.

            This statement could also have negative notion to it. “In the beginning” could mean at one point and not anymore. In relation to the rest of the sentence, Emerson could be saying that when the gods first divided “Man into men,” it was suggested that the men would learn from each other and help the society and themselves; however, that does not seem to be the case anymore and men are now too content with themselves and they no longer seek true wisdom because they think they have already achieve the goal of being a true scholar.

#4

Close reading to me is examining a piece of literature very closely and interpreting the meaning of sentences or words beyond the first instinctive meaning you come up with. In order to close read effectively, it requires the reader to take more than one step.

Like Dr. McClennen (http://www.personal.psu.edu/users/s/a/sam50/closeread.htm) describes, the process of close reading " moves from the smallest bits of information (words, sound, punctuation) to larger groupings (images, metaphors) to larger concepts (themes)." He explains that the reader should first looked at the smaller parts of the literature and figure out the structure of the writing is and what the words mean in context of the rest of the text. Patricia Khan (http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~wricntr/documents/CloseReading.html) advises to "Read with a pencil and annotate the text." She explains how helpful it can be if the reader takes notes in the beginning about specific words or details within the text to give the reader clues to what he/she needs to pay closer attention to. Both these scholars seem to be first emphasizing the importance of looking at the smaller details in the beginning first to try and decipher what smaller details mean before looking at the bigger picture and trying to interpret the text as a whole.

Khan then describes the next step of close reading is to look the patterns in the text such as "repetitions, contradictions, similarities"and ask yourself questions as to what these patterns mean. I find this part of close reading the most important. Although it requires looking at the smaller to things first in order to successfully do this step, this is the step where it really gives the reader the backbone of what they think the reading is about. I see this step as the bridge between reading the text for the first time and really understand or interpreting what the reader thinks the piece of literature is trying to say. From this step, the reader can make conclusions about the reading and they can formulate what they think the theme or thesis is from the passage. Dr. McClennen brings up a very good point when he tells the reader to "Ask yourself how the passage provides insight into the text (and the context of the text)." He explains how this step can give the reader a good clue as to what the rest of the text is talking about based on just the one passage that is being interpreted.

To me, I think everyone does some form of close reading in their heads, but dont really think much about it as they're reading. When using these steps set up by Khan and Dr. McClennen, it allows the reader to really focus on their thoughts and put whatever that came up with in their heads onto paper and allows a reader to further look at the reading in more detail. Close reading is very important especially when trying to read harder and more abstract text because just close reading a paragraph can help a reader understand the rest of the text easier.

#3

I thought reading the different essays this week that dealt with literacy events were very interesting.  Everyone wonders about their future and what it holds for them. It was nice to read about other people's lives an event can cause them to change the way they view and live life. I read two essays where the people interviewed changed in a positive way which was a pleasant read;however, I am interested in reading an essay about how a person maybe did not change in the most positive way. Sharing something like this would probably difficult for the person and I do not personally know anyone who has experienced this, but I wonder what a person who became very critical of life would say if they were asked the questions we asked for this essay. What I also think would be very interesting is seeing something go through a literacy event more than one time in their life. I believe life is very long and it is definitely capable for someone to go through more than one change in their lifetime. I, again, do not know anyone like this so I wondering how a person would describe multiple changes in their lives and caused them to view the world in multiple ways.

#2

This is our 2nd week of classes and I have to admit the readings that have been given to us has been really challenging me. I was never a fan of reading, a trait im not especially proud of, but every time I have a book in front of me, I instantly get sleepy. Besides a natural sleep reaction to reading, the American Scholar was written in an old english that it takes me a few reads to get through a paragraph. Hopefully, in a month or so I can pick up my own pace and be able to take on more challenging works of literature with a little more ease.

I do like the way the material is presented to us. It makes it easier and is helpful that we would have class discussions on the more important parts of the literature or split up into groups and put the readings into a simpler language. 

Emerson

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/e/emerson/4957107.0007.001/1:5?rgn=div1;view=fulltext

I was reading this poem written by Emerson, which can be found in the link above, and to me, it was pretty interesting. Emerson first talks about what I think to be a man's life and his situation. He described the man's life as hard, working for lords or richer people and not seeming to have any luck finding a woman for himself. Then Emerson transitions and changes the language in the poem for palaces and princely women, to mountains and crystals souls. Because this poem is titled "Society and Solitude," I find the description of these two extremes is very clever and interesting, even though I would have to admit I do not understand everything in the poem.

I think strategies to interpreting and reading difficult text is the same for experienced and non-experienced readers. In both cases, the reader looks at the passage and finds details within each sentence to determine what the author is trying to say or what the piece of writing may mean. Experienced writers just may be able to do this process quicker that just comes with time, which to me is may be the only difference in experienced and non-experienced readers reading difficult texts.

I am glad that my professor, Adam Katz, took the time to create this syllabus because it is very in depth and answered a lot of my questions that I had about the class.

Creating this blogger was not difficult at all, and writing in it seemed simple enough. I hope it stays this way for the rest of the semester.