Is homework a good thing or a bad thing? Most teachers would argue that homework is beneficial, as it allows students to review what they have learned in class and apply the material. But what if a student receives too much homework? Is too much homework beneficial, or can it actually hinder a student’s ability to learn?

            Teachers often say that they don’t give too much homework and that the homework they assigned can be completed in one hour. However, many students have five other teachers repeating the same phrase. That’s six hours of homework in one night. There have been days where I attended school for nearly seven hours, came home straight away, and did homework for eight more hours (only stopping for bathroom breaks and dinner). On those days I spent roughly fifteen hours doing schoolwork. This much work on top of sports, clubs, jobs, and other activities can lead to sleepless nights and stress. Surely, too much homework does more harm than good. 

            According to an Australian study, too much homework can, in fact, be detrimental to one’s ability to learn. Australian researchers found that a student’s amount of homework has a strong, negative relationship with the student’s academic performance. In other words, the more homework the student had, the lower scores the student received. Another study conducted by Harris Cooper, a professor of psychology and director of the program in Education at Duke University, revealed that more than two hours of homework a night could prove counter-productive to academic success.

            Excessive amounts of homework can also affect a student’s sleep schedule. Students who have several hours of homework often sacrifice sleep in order to complete their homework. This is especially true when students have other afterschool activities and aren’t able to get home until later on in the evening. Harvard Medical School’s Division of Sleep Medicine found that sleep-deprived students couldn’t focus attention optimally, which prevented them from learning efficiently. Sleep-deprivation can negatively impact mood, which affects one’s ability to learn new information and remember that information.

            Now, I’m not saying that homework should be banned, but rather limited. Since excessive homework has been proven to hinder one’s ability to learn, perhaps students should be limited to two hours of homework per day. This can be achieved if teachers only assign homework when they feel it is necessary to help the progression of learning, not just for the sake of assigning homework because they feel like they are required to. With less homework, students will be more likely to get the proper amount of sleep, and they will have more success with learning. 

Works Cited

Ellenbogen, Jeffrey M., MD, Jessica D. Payne, PhD, and Robert Stickgold, PhD. "Sleep, Learning, and Memory." Healthy Sleep. WGBH Educational Foundation, 7 Nov. 2006. Web. 13 Dec. 2013.

Wolchover, Natalie. "Too Much Homework Is Bad for Kids." LiveScience.com. TechMedia Network, 30 Mar. 2012. Web. 15 Dec. 2013.

Gilmer, Kelly. "Duke Today." Duke Today. Office of News & Communications, 7 Mar. 2006. Web. 13 Dec. 2013.

Should college athletes be paid? This is a commonly asked and highly debated question. In 2008 the total revenue raised by the top ten college football programs like Ohio State, Oklahoma State, and Texas A&M ranged between 91,000,000 and 123,000,000 dollars. These colleges use athletes to take in revenue. Granted, the money is used to build state-of-the-art facilities, buy equipment, and pay coaches and trainers, but at what point should a Division I college sport be considered a job?

21,000 male college athletes from all divisions participated in a USA Today survey about their comparison between their sport and their studies. Two out of every three said that they consider themselves more athletes than students. Football players in the NCAA Division I admitted that they spend an average of 44.8 hours a week on their sport (games, practices, training, and weight training) compared to less than 40 hours a week on academics.

With all of the time spent on athletics, is it possible for them to take full advantage of their college education? A typical day in the life of a college athlete entails a morning lift or workout, followed by classes, and a three hour practice in the afternoons. They also include watching film and team meals. Weekends, or sometimes even weeknights may be spent traveling to away games. This hectic schedule does not stop when the season does, it is a full year round commitment. According to the NCAA only 1.6% of football players and 1.2% of male basketball players become professional. So, for the vast majority, their college years are the last years they will play. Without a proper education, the options for the players who do not go pro after college are limited.

The odds are not in these players favor. For the time and effort they put into the college, they deserve to be paid. There is no guarantee that they will go on to the next level, and chances are that they will not. These young adults bring hundreds of millions of dollars to these universities through tickets, branding, and media rights. They deserve something concrete in return.

 For those who are unaware, Beyoncé recently dropped her latest self-titled “visual album” at midnight this past Friday, completely unannounced. Even more shocking than the 14 new songs accompanied by 17 videos, was the reaction received from it all. The majority of this gigantic reaction was from twitter. In just the 12 hours after the album was released, more 1.2 million tweets were shared on the site, topping other major twitter topics that have been tweeted about before. Tweets from other huge pop-stars including Katy Perry even showed their praise and excitement for the news. Not only did the album cause such a reaction on the twitter scene, but on iTunes as well. Because of its “iTunes-Only” availability, the album immediately shot to the top of the charts, still at #1 for new albums, where it will most likely stay for days and weeks to come.

                What may be the most shocking part of the whole situation, is the whole idea that all of this gigantic positive feedback happened, including all the additional success that is coming out of it, without any anticipation for the album. While most artists give the public (and mainly their fans) at least a month’s notice, Beyonce’s decision was completely unexpected. However even with no notice, she does not fail to dominate the charts of iTunes. This is practically any artist’s dream. That says a lot about Beyoncé’s reputation in the world. She is often referred to by many as “Queen B” and used as a comparison, her being the superior in any situation. Receiving a lot of praise and attention can be called a “Beyoncé Moment” or sometimes her name may be used as an adjective; something being “Beyoncé” would usually be associated with being “flawless” (which happens to be the name of one of her new songs on the album). She is clearly a major icon of this generation, and that is a huge advantage for her.  Many of her songs include themes like female empowerment and individuality, while her performances are high-energy, flashy and entertaining. Many can argue that she may be one of the best entertainers of this generation.  

The most widely recognized phrase in the United States right now isn't the Nike slogan, Just Do It, like many people believe; it's "Made in China". This has become a phrase that's common in every household across the U.S. Everything from phones to jeans are now imported from China. This transition to a country that imports more than 20% of its $2.3 trillion worth of imports from China, has happened because many Chinese goods are being sold for the same price or even less than it costs to produce it. This low cost has caused an enormous shift to companies buying Chinese made products. However this low cost is deceiving. The post production costs of these goods are almost never factored in.

Consider safety for example, as recently as 2007 China was importing toys and other products with lead paint. While lead paint has been banned from household paints since 1978 because even a small amount of lead can kill a person, the U.S. was still allowing deadly lead paint into households across the nation. In 2007 however this issue of lead paint made front page news and a recall of over 19 million toys was made.

Another example of safety is with Chinese food. Ontaskva.com gives an example of a popular noodle house in Shanghai. A man saw men coming in with bags one day and when he asked what they were, they replied that they were bags of salt used to make the noodles. The man saw chemical names listed as ingredients and so he wrote them down and went home to investigate what they were. This Chinese noodle house was using road salt used to de-ice roads during snow storms in U.S. cities, not suitable for consumption.

            The post production costs became painfully evident for California when it decided to renovate the San-Francisco Bay Bridge. The state opted for saving money by buying from Chinese steel fabricators. These savings quickly eroded when problems with the steel such as faulty welds by a Chinese steel fabricator caused extremely costly delays. Costly over-runs aren’t the only worry about buying from Chinese steel producers however. In 2011, inferior materials have caused six bridges to collapse in China. This is worrying as the Verazano-Narrows Bridge in New York is going to be renovated using $34 worth of Chinese steel and steel work.

                Can we really "save money and live better" by shopping at Walmart? Walmart provides a wide range of goods,  ranging from groceries, to clothing and electronics, all at affordable prices. However, these low prices come at a cost. While consumers reap the benefits of these lower prices, suppliers and other businesses are pressured to produce products for less, which many local manufacturers cannot supply. In response,  suppliers are forced to send their jobs overseas to produce the product for less. So which is more important? The consumer or the suppliers?

                On one hand, Walmart can be praised for producing a variety of affordable products  that are available to consumers. It allows an exchange of goods at a low price that benefits everyone. Adam Smith, the "father of modern economics,"  argues that free trade makes both sides better off. After all,  who would trade if they were going to lose from it? The average family of four spends over $4,000 a year at Walmart. Walmart especially benefits those with the lowest incomes by offering cheaper prices for similar goods and give them leeway in their budget that they can direct towards other things. Critics often protest that Walmart is offering prices that are too low to match, but ultimately it is up to the consumer to decide where to shop, and the government has no right to restrict trade on a business for merely doing well.

                However, Walmart has been under recent scrutiny for neglecting its employees. Walmart, the biggest private employer in the world, hands out pitifully low wages to its employees.  H. Lee Scott Jr., the chief executive officer of Wal-Mart, released that the average employee wage is around $10 an hour. The worst part; Walmart can easily afford to raise pay for its low-wage workers by $5.83 an hour, to an average wage of $14.89 and still keep its prices the same. Walmart has also been known for its notoriously poor health benefits. Walmart spends about 27 percent less on health benefits than do large retailers as a whole. This combination of poor wages and benefits recently led employees of a Walmart in Ohio to set out storage bins in an employee-only area, inviting employees to donate food to each other, "so associates in need [could] enjoy Thanksgiving dinner.”

                Walmart has been a revolutionary in the retailing field. They provide inexpensive products to thrifty consumers that benefit by spending less. Walmart has basically everything, and is basically a one stop shop for all of you necessities. But at what cost? To get its low prices, Walmart forces suppliers to relinquish some of their potential income or turn to outsourcing.  Its employees are paid an unlivable wage, and its health benefits are nearly non-existent. No wonder 45% of its workers quit every year.

Works Cited

"Daily Kos." : Walmart Could Pay Workers $14.89 an Hour without Raising Prices. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Dec. 2013.

"The Ludwig Von Mises Institute." The Ultimate Pro-WalMart Article. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Dec. 2013.

Seggerman, Suzanne. "Does Obama Play Video Games?" The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 24 Nov. 2008. Web. 15 Dec. 2013.

"Video Games ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2013.

"Walmart." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 12 Nov. 2013. Web. 15 Dec. 2013.

"The Wal-Mart You Don't Know | Fast Company | Business Innovation." Fast Company. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Dec. 2013.

As of right now, hundreds of thousands of high school students are frantically preparing for the SATs. The SAT, according to the College Board website, is a “fair and valid predictor of college success for students of all backgrounds.” But is this really true? Is the SAT really fair? Before answering this question, one must understand the basic concept of the SATs. The three-hour long test is designed to quiz students on their basic reading, mathematics, and writing skills. The test does not measure what one might learn in school, but rather the ability of a student to take the SAT—“a skill that, depending on your ability to pay, you could pick up in a coaching class” (time.com). This is where the fairness of the test comes into question. 

An SAT prep course, such as Princeton Review, costs from eight to nine hundred dollars for six weeks of test-prepping. Taking a course raises a student’s SAT score by an average of 150 points. Based on a student’s family income, he or she may not be able to pay such a large sum of money to prepare for the test. According to npr.com, “the strongest correlation between SAT scores and virtually anything is family income: The higher your family income, the higher your scores.” The same can be said for the SAT IIs, which are even more expensive to prepare for than the regular SATs. 

Another inequality that can be found in the SATs is the prominent racial gap in the test scores. African American and Latino students tend to do worse than white students on the test. According to time.com, “even blacks whose parents have the same level of education and income as a comparable sample of whites score about 120 points lower on average.” The gap can be explained by the fact that most test writers are white and import cultural biases into the SATs. 

More and more colleges, also questioning the fairness of the SATs, are beginning to make the test scores optional. Countless others are de-emphasizing the importance of the SATs in their admissions processes by weighing other factors more heavily. The president of the University of California proposed to “scrap the thing” claiming that the SATs “hurls kids into months of practicing word games and math riddles at the expense of studying chemistry or poetry.” 

Cloud, John. "Should SATs Matter?" Time.com. N.p., n.d. Web.
Sanchez, Claudio. "College Board 'Concerned' About Low SAT Scores." Npr.com. N.p., n.d. Web.

Every Sunday guarantees one thing, Fantasy Football. For people who are not familiar with Fantasy Football, this online activity uses real NFL players in created leagues in which people compete in. Fantasy Football is to be played with multiple people that can be friends in a private league or with other football enthusiast across the county in a public league. Leagues consist usually of 8-16 teams with only one champion at the end of the season. According to the Fantasy Sports Trade Association, or FSTA, there are 33,559,990 fantasy sports users in the USA alone which is larger than the entire population of the 39^th most populous country in the world, Morocco (32,649,130). There are certain “haters”, the majority of who are angry wives and girlfriends, which claim Fantasy Football is just a bunch of guesses and random numbers. This claim is actually the exact opposite reason that Fantasy Football is not illegal and not classified as online gambling. FSTA states that opposed to gambling “Fantasy sports leagues are games of skill. Managers must take into account a myriad of statistics, facts and game theory in order to be competitive.” As for those wives and girlfriends out there, I am sorry but Fantasy Football is not just a bunch of random numbers.

The most important, and riveting, part of the Fantasy Football season is the pre-season draft. Each participant in every league is awarded one draft pick at random. The draft format is serpentine which means the person with first pick of the first round has the last pick of the second round and this repeats until each team’s roster is full. The draft is where everything begins. Some players make out like bandits, (for example my sister who picked Peyton Manning in the THIRD ROUND) and some go home losers (like myself who picked Trent Richardson in the second round and he has been the season’s biggest bust). This event is where dreams are either made or crushed.

One of, if not the, most difficult decisions of the weekend is deciding which players I should include in my starting lineup for Fantasy Football. Each roster has 16 spots but only nine of the players count. Many users, including myself, research players, statistics, opposing teams, and weather conditions to maximize scoring totals. FSTA concludes that 30% of participants use more than 6 websites to help them make weekly decisions.  Fantasy Football includes many challenging decisions that have to be made in order to be successful. Being the champion at the end of the season is worth much more than the prize money. The pride and bragging rights that accompany a championship are admirable as well.

Works Cited

"Central Intelligence Agency." The World Factbook. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Dec. 2013.

"Fantasy Sports Trade Association." Fantasy Sports Trade Association. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Dec. 2013. <http://fsta.org/>.

For the past few decades, everyone has heard the talk of global warming. Studies have shown melting of glaciers in the north and south poles. Some scientists have made predictions about the extinction of polar bears and penguins. But the cries of global warming are dying out. Now, theories of the opposite problem, global cooling, are popping up.

In the 1960s and 70s global cooling was a hot issue, but it has since been masked by global warming. However, in the past few years, more and more studies have shown traces of global cooling. Studies of global cooling have been proven by decreasing sun spots. Sun spots are defined as regions on the solar surface that appear dark because they are cooler than the surrounding photosphere. Low sunspot activity is associated with periods such as the 1600s which is known as the “Little Ice Age”. High sun spot activity is associated with warm periods like the 1970s-90s. Recently, scientists have noticed decreasing sun spot activity which leads them to believe that the planet will experience substantial cooling in the next decades. Scientists have noticed these signs of cooling for the past couple years. A Russian science team concluded last year that the planet is heading towards another “Little Ice Age” which could be in full swing by 2055.

From the summer of 2012 to the summer of 2013, the ice sheet on the north pole grew 533,000 square miles, making BBC’s 2006 prediction that the Arctic ice sheet will disappear by 2013, completely irrelevant. 

Just in these past few months, there have been unusual levels of snowfall that point towards theories of global cooling. A week ago, the Middle East experienced an unprecedented snowstorm causing Jerusalem to shut down. Cairo, Egypt received snow for the first time in 112 years. Also in the past few weeks, meteorologists have noticed snow covering reaching unusually far south in the United States. Around the time of December 12, the nation is usually only about 30% covered with snow. This year, it is more than double the average. Parts of Texas, Oklahoma, and Arkansas that hardly ever see snow have already been impacted by storms. 

Scientists expect that talk of global warming will soon start to die out and be replaced by talk of global cooling which is believed to be an imminent danger for the planet.

     Today I watched a video on You Tube entitled "Why I Hate School But Love Education". Right away the title caught my eye and I had to watched it.(Link here) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_ZmM7zPLyI In the video a young man speaks for 6 minutes about education and all that is wrong with schools. The video basically sums up everything that I have been feeling about school, and puts into words what I have been thinking in my head for so many years. In the United States today schooling is a part of mostly every kids life. Teachers, counselors, and parents tell you every day that in order to get a good job and to have a good life you need to go to school and do well in school. The stress that is put on students to do well in school these days is immense. Going to school is never really something that is questioned and when I asked my parents why I have to go to school they usually reply, "Well, because you just do. Everyone has to."
     I often wonder if going to school is really the only way to get educated. What about Jesus, Socrates, Malcolm X, Mother Theresa, Shakespeare, Beethoven, Jesse Owens, Michael Jordan, Michael Jackson, Abe Lincoln, and Walt Disney? These were all people who did not go to high school or college but changed the world anyway. Shakespeare changed the world with his writing, Beethoven with his music, Mother Theresa with her charity work, and Malcolm X with his work for human rights. All of these people were educated in their own ways and didn't need to go to school for 16 years to do it, so why do we? As the guy in the You Tube video says in the end of the video, "There is more than one way in this world to be an educated man." Education is very important but school is not the only way to get it. Unfortunately, school is the only option given to many students around the world.
     After watching the You Tube video, I decided to go on Google and do some research on if schooling is the only way to be educated. I came across an article entitled, "School Not the Only Way to Learn" by Meredith Small for LiveScience.com. In the article Small talks about how she visited a group of Maya kids in Mexico and talks about how they did not have the opportunity to go to school but they were very good at other tasks. The Maya children cultivated fields, prepared food, cared for other children, chopped wood and pick up goods from town. At the end of the article Small observes that because of their knowledge of growing food and survival skills,"Unlike Western kids, they would still survive, even without understanding Shakespeare or knowing how to do algebra, or having the experience of riding the yellow bus." Smalls work with the Maya children shows that there is more than one way to be educated, and it doesn't always have to involve going to school for 30 hours a week for 12 years.
      Every day, students spend countless nights writing papers on books they could care less about and doing never ending math problems they will never use in real life at 2 AM as they struggle to keep their eyes open, just to be woken up at 6AM to go to school and repeat the whole process again. Why should we spend so many hours memorizing useless things we will never remember or use in the future. Why should we sacrifice our sanity, our happiness and our life for school, when going to school is not the only way to get educated.
   
Citations:
Small, Meredith F. "School: Not the Only Way to Learn." LiveScience.com. N.p., 7 Sept. 2007. Web. 15 Dec. 2013.

            Imagine this. You’re hanging out with your friends, having a good time. Someone suggests a movie that you all really want to see. Why not go now? You arrive at the ticket window and what do you find? “Sorry it’s sold out.” Why is it sold out if the movie has been out for nearly two weeks?

As I’m sure anyone who has gone to the movies lately has realized, there have been some drastic changes. Of course, the new comfy seats and machines that serve you whatever kind of drink you want are great, but I’m referring the change in how to buy tickets. In order to reassure you can actually buy the tickets, they must be bought online, which has actually been an option for the last few years. Now, however, it’s practically mandatory to buy them online at least a day prior, and there’s even a chart of the theater for you to pick seats.  Okay, great. Now, not only do you have to make a plan between you and the group to see this movie together on a scheduled day, but also, you get to plan it all out down to the exact seats you’ll be sitting in. Aren’t you thrilled with all the changes the movies have made for your “convenience”?

            Okay, now imagine this scenario. You and your friends are talking and someone brings up the fact that a favorite musician you all share, will be performing near you in three months. Excited, you all go online to find out more information and see that you can buy tickets there. Then you come across what? Another complicated seating chart! The excitement becomes replaced with frustration as most of the good seats have been already picked.  Eventually, you manage to find some. They even come with directions that include the exact door you should enter through. You hear your mother mumble something about how that was never the case in her day. “If you wanted to go to a concert, you’d show up at a booth, buy a ticket, and walk right into the concert, using whatever door you wanted. Nothing complicated like this,” she says.

            You then come to realize that she's right. The world didn’t used to be like this. Now, everything is scheduled. Everything is planned. Even trivial matters, such as where to sit at the movies, are carefully outlined. Somehow the world has managed to suck all the fun out of activities that are meant to be enjoyable. It becomes clear to you that the days of spontaneity are over. 

This morning, I woke up and turned on my T.V. and saw that Jameis Winston had won the Heisman Trophy.  During Winston’s freshman season he had done it all.  He put up great statistics, led his team to the national championship, and did it with a style and smile that excited college football fans.  However, during the season Winston was accused by a Florida woman of sexually assaulting her.  Winston will not be charged because the accuser’s attorney thinks there is not enough evidence to convict him.  This got me to thinking, was there really not enough evidence or does Winston’s status help him get away with this crime? Now, I’m not saying Winston is guilty because everyone in this country is innocent until proven guilty, but the fact is that professional athletes and athletes with Winston’s status tend to get away with such crimes or in many cases, get a lighter penalty.

In 2009, Donte Stallworth of the Cleveland Browns hit and killed a 59-year old man while driving under the influence.  This crime occurred in Florida, where the average penalty for a crime of this magnitude is 10 years of imprisonment. However, Stallworth received a 30-day sentence, $10,000 fine, and was ordered to do 1,000 hours of community service. This penalty is outrageous. In 2007, when Stallworth played with the Patriots, he was one player I really admired.  What kind of message does this send to kids that DUI manslaughter will only get you this kind of penalty?

In 2001, Ruben Patterson of the Seattle SuperSonics pleaded guilty to attempted rape of his child’s nanny.  Patterson’s sentence was 1-year of imprisonment, where the average sentence is 10 years. Patterson was released after just 15 days in prison.  Even though Patterson was not a face of the league or his team, his status of being a professional basketball player had something to do with his light punishment.

While Allen Iverson played and starred at Bethal High School in Virginia, he was involved in a brawl that sentenced him to 5 years in prison.  In the documentary about the trial, one person describes Iverson as, “the gold boy”.  Iverson, because of his status as a high school superstar, was released after only 4 months served in prison.

These players such as Donte Stallworth, Ruben Patterson, and Allen Iverson all deserved harsh sentences.  Instead, because of their status, were given light penalties and let off early. This trend needs to be changed because these people are role models to many children around the world and we are letting them think that these actions are perfectly normal.  Professional athletes need to be treated in court just as a regular citizen would be.    

According to fairtraderesource.org, more than 11,000 Fair Trade Certified (FTC) products were available in 60,000 retail locations last year––yet many Americans are still unaware of what exactly “Fair Trade” means. Well, Fair Trade is exactly what it sounds like: an exchange between producer and consumer that benefits both parties. By purchasing Fair Trade Certified items like coffee, chocolate, or fruit, the buyer is not only receiving a superior product (with minimal pesticides and free from GMOs), but she is also making a difference in communities all around the world.

Farmers benefit immensely from the purchase of Fair Trade goods. They receive just wages and work under safe conditions. On coffee plantations that are not approved by the Fair Trade Labeling Organization, most growers have no choice but to work for “sweatshop wages and toil under abysmal working conditions” (www.organicconsumers.org). In Guatemala, more than half of all coffee pickers don’t receive minimum wage; some earn less than $3.00 a day. And it’s common for the laborers to sleep in shacks on plantation property and use the same water to cook with and bathe in.  However, farmers working on FTC farms are guaranteed wages that they can live off of. For example, Ethiopian Fair Trade farmers receive $1.26 per pound of coffee and in Peru, new Fair Trade coffee farmers earned nearly 40% more than they had previously.

The environment reaps the benefits of Fair Trade, as well. FTC farms utilize the method of crop rotation to avoid depleting the soil of nutrients. These farms also limit the use of fertilizers and pesticides, and source water sustainably. Farmers are required to provide evidence of reduced carbon emissions and are taught how to properly dispose of waste.

Coffee isn’t the only Fair Trade product out there­­. Let us not forget about chocolate (brands like Equal Exchange, Green & Black’s, and Theo), tea (Honest, Numi, and Traditional Medicinals), or rice (Eighth Wonder). There are also Fair Trade Certified fruits. And vegetables. And soaps and oils and honey. And yes, these products do tend to be more expensive than the ones made or grown by poverty-stricken near-slaves. But the extra dollar or two paid by the well-off American makes all the difference to the small-scale farmer.

Works Cited

"History of the Global Exchange Coffee Campaign." www.organicconsumers.org. n.p., n.d. Web. 14 Dec. 2013.

"Fair Trade U.S. Market Shows Some Changes in 2011." www.fairtraderesource.org. n.p., 19 Apr. 2012. Web. 14 Dec. 2013.

Spector, Kaye. "5 Reasons You Should Buy Fair Trade." ecowatch.com. n.p., 25 Oct. 2013. Web. 14 Dec. 2013.

"Why Fair Trade Means Protecting the Environment, Too." www.triplepundit.com. n.p. 30 Apr. 2012. Web. 14 Dec. 2013.

Are violent video games causing teens to be more violent?  Critics argue that violent video games “desensitize” teens to violence and are the sole reason for the increasing rate of bullying in schools.  These same critics believe that video games teach teens that violence is an acceptable way to solving problems and achieving goals.  Yet many supporters of violent video games believe that the research has failed to show a correlation between violent video games and real world violence.  Statistics show that video games are not the cause of real world violence.  The arrest rate for juvenile violent crimes from 1995 to 2008 has declined by 49.3 percent, while video games sales have almost quadrupled over these years. 

            Critics continue to argue that the violent video games caused the Columbine shootings.  Apparently the two teenage shooters were avid players of violent video games such as “Wolfenstein 3D” and “Doom."   “Wolfenstein 3D” is a first person shooter, where the main character is an Allied spy trying to escape a Nazi prison.  “Wolfenstein 3D” is still a popular game on the PC today.  According to this logic, “Wolfenstein 3D” will cause many more shootings and violent teen crimes.  The first violent video game that started the debate on whether video games caused teen violence was created in 1976.  “Death Race” was an arcade game where the objective of the game is to run over gremlins with a car.  Critics believe that running over black and white stick figures will directly cause teens to use cars to murder other people.  A recent Pew report showed that 97 percent of teenagers are playing video games.  If violent video games caused teens to become more violent then, the world should be in complete chaos right now with young teens running around the city robbing stores, vandalizing buildings and assaulting people.  Also the video games now are more violent than in the 1970s.  Instead of black and white images of stick figures being murdered, today we have high definition images of normal everyday people being murdered.  One of the top rated games today is “Grand Theft Auto V.”  In “Grand Theft Auto V”, the main character basically runs around killing, stealing, and assaulting normal citizens around the city.  Yet the most of teens stay home and do their homework.  Almost all teens play video games yet only a small handful are violent.  Maybe there is a lurking variable that causes teen violence?

"Video Games ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2013.
Seggerman, Suzanne. "Does Obama Play Video Games?" The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 24 Nov. 2008. Web. 15 Dec. 2013.

With loud colors, dazzling rhinestones, and an abounding number of feathers, the Victoria's Secret models are ready to hit the runway. The audience sees one perfect model after another. With flawless hair, and ideally toned bodies, one might struggle to find flaws within each of the dazzling Victoria's Secret Angels. The bewitching annual fashion show brings about the question of whether this company paints an image of beauty that is at all realistic to their viewers.

The models have chosen a career primarily based on strutting around in flashy lingerie. Constantly completely exposed, working on their bodies is a full time job for these women. Healthyceleb.com describes the rigorous diet plans and workout routines of the devoted models. The Victoria's Secret Angels work out up to seven days a week. Several of those workout days are organized by a paid personal trainer.  Some Angels, like Miranda Kerr, practice strict diets based on blood type. Adriana Lima admits that before a show, she does not eat any solid foods and just drinks water. Twelve hours prior to the show, she doesn't consume anything, including water.

Many would argue that this demanding lifestyle is simply unattainable for the average woman. If women are setting goals for themselves based on Victoria's Secret's idea of beauty, many would say that they are setting themselves up for failure. In turn, causing personal body image issues, and a lack of self confidence.

Victoria's Secret has also recently been accused of discrimination against different varieties of women. Carmen Carrera, a transgender model was left disappointed in her attempts to be the first transgender Victoria's Secret Angel in the 2013 fashion show. The company failed to acknowledge a Change.org petition to embrace the transgender community by including Carrera in their show. The petition has acquired 45,000 signatures since it was first posted in November. Victoria's Secret has yet to respond to Carrera's story at all. Despite her struggles, Carrera is optimistic and sets her sights on the 2014 Victoria's Secret fashion show. She assures her supporters that she will train harder for her audition next year.

The Victoria's Secret fashion show ultimately only represents a specific kind of woman. Their models all share the same body type. They also fail to give representation to the different variations of woman that live among their viewers. However, millions continue to tune in to watch the show every year to be enchanted by this idealistic view of beauty.

            Procrastination is puzzling. Why, after 6 million years of evolution, do modern day humans have the tendency to put off work and watch just one more episode of How I Met Your Mother?

            It turns out that humans procrastinate because we evolved from a much less developed species of ape. Throughout our evolution, our brains have gotten more and more complex, as regions responsible for the most complicated thinking have developed. However, the core of our brain, the part responsible for the most basic needs and feelings, has barely changed at all. It is this primitive part of our heads that results in our amazing ability to put off any assignment for weeks on end.

            In his TEDx Talk, Vik Nithy explains the conflict between the more developed part of our brain, the prefrontal cortex, and the more primitive limbic system. The prefrontal cortex tells us that we need to work  to be successful. The limbic system however, is home to the amygdala. The amygdala is responsible for all of our fear and anxiety. While it may have originally been intended to protect our ancestors from danger in the wild, the amygdala now tells our brain to freak out whenever we get assigned an important essay. In the wild, the amygdala had to shut down all other parts of our brain so our body could concentrate on the danger at hand. Today, the amygdala has the unhelpful tendency to shut down our critical thinking whenever we are tasked with studying for midterms.

            Psychologists also credit procrastination to an annoying little thing called temporal discounting. The farther away the reward, the less importance it has in our brain. Watching one more YouTube video now is more rewarding to our primitive brains than doing well on a test two weeks in the future. Of course, this all changes the night before the test.

            Our brain’s system of reward doesn’t help either. Dopamine is released in our brain whenever we do something enjoyable. This could be getting a good term grade, but more often than not it is playing video games or hanging out with friends. Our ape brains give more priority to the constant dopamine received from relaxing on our phones than the one time dopamine high gained from getting things done for a change.

            In conclusion, if you ever feel bad at yourself for failing to get something done on time, turn on a video game and blame evolution.

Moffit, Mitchell, and Gregory Brown. "The Science of Procrastination - And How To Manage It." YouTube. YouTube, 19 Sept. 2012. Web. 12 Dec. 2013.

Nithy, Vik. "Why We Procrastinate by Vik Nithy @ TEDxYouth@TheScotsCollege."YouTube. YouTube, 13 Mar. 2012. Web. 12 Dec. 2013.

Schachner, Emma. "How Has the Human Brain Evolved?: Scientific American." How Has the Human Brain Evolved?: Scientific American. Scientific American, 13 July 2013. Web. 14 Dec. 2013.

Term 2 Free Write

Using between 350-450 words, please use this online journal assignment to explore an issue that interests you. The same recommendations apply to this "free write" assignment that applied to the earlier assignment from September.  You may address any issue that interests you, but please do so in an objective manner.  The only additional requirement that I have is that you try to write from a different perspective than you did in September.  If you typically write in the first person, please write from a different perspective.  You might try incorporating statistics, writing a humorous piece, or experimenting with satire.  You might also use this post to start exploring ideas for your junior research paper.  Feel free to take a risk.  Just please remember, technical precision, or perfection, is the standard.

                Lionel Richie’s “All Night Long” (All Night) is a feel good song. In the music video for this song, Richie incorporates a variety of people who appear to be enjoying themselves to demonstrate that this song is meant to get everyone on their feet and dancing in the streets. He presents a multitude of different races, age groups and professions all being brought together by the music. The wide selection of crowd demonstrates that the song is also meant to entertain and amuse because everyone is getting along and dancing together though they come from different backgrounds.

                At the beginning of the music video the instruments are playing pianissimo and the tempo is quite slow. As a result, the people in the music video are walking slowly in the streets. As the first verse begins, the beat picks up and the sound crescendos, the music brings the dancers to life. This strategy communicates that the song generates amusement and fun by showing the contrast from pianissimo and dead to fortissimo and living.

                The crowd of people dancing in the street is additionally very diverse. There are numerous children, countless integrated couples and many people with different professions all joined together by the music. There are doctors, students, policemen etc. dancing in the streets to the rhythm of the music.  This is another strategy that develops Richie’s intent. The diversity of the crowd shows the songs power to bring not just one age, ethnicity or occupation together but rather creates an assortment of them all. There are ballerinas, break dancers, tribal dancers and interpretive dancers all dancing in unison until the sun comes out. The video highlights the diversity using brief clips showing an array of contrasting people distinguished by age and race but also by the clothes they are wearing.

                In addition to the diversity, Richie adds specific instances in which people are added into the fun. First, the camera focuses on a little girl who is sitting alone in a car. Richie goes to pick her up and begins dancing with her. They both smile and laugh as they dance. In another instance, a police officer comes to break up the street dancing but he too gets caught up in the rhythm. He then begins to dance to the music as well. This strategy correlates with the idea that Richie’s intent is to entertain a variety of people using his music. This video exhibits that once one hears the rhythm of this catchy tune it is almost impossible to stay away.

                This video is so cute and fun. Lionel Richie himself even joins in the party. The video illustrates that as long as the music is playing anyone and everyone can and should join in to have a good time.

    Will Smith, or the Fresh Prince as he was known in the 80's and 90's, is known for his ridiculous music videos, such as "Parents Just Don't Understand" and "Girls Ain't Nothin' But Trouble". The music video for Fresh Prince's "I Think I Can Beat Mike Tyson" lives up to this reputation. It is a song about Will Smith trying to fight Mike Tyson. The whole song is fiction, but its a story about the events leading up to the fight and then the fight itself. The video isn't meant to be deep, philosophical or anything remotely similar to those ideas. This music video was made to entertain, promote Mike Tyson, and, in a small way, teach a lesson about ego.

            This video isn’t made specifically to promote Mike Tyson however it obviously does promote this famous boxer from the time. Quotes such as “Jeff, nobody can beat Mike Tyson” make this quite clear. One of the intents of this music video is to teach a lesson about ego. This lesson is easily found, so easy in fact, that this ease adds to the childishness of the lesson. Will Smith tries to tell his listeners that ego can get a person into serious trouble. In the song, his ego makes him fight the best boxer in the world at that time, nicknamed Iron Mike Tyson. The result of this stupid decision is shown at the end of the video when a very beat up Will Smith is talking about how stupid he was.

                The lesson that ego can cause trouble is very definitely a part of this music video however it isn’t at all the main reason behind the video. The main reason behind this music video is simply to entertain. Will Smith or “Fresh Prince” does this in a few ways. The first is by making fun of himself left and right. The very opening scene does this very well, it shows Smith making a fool of himself, stumbling around looking up at the sky, then falling down and lying on the ground. Another time he is at a press conference and Smith exaggerates about all the training he’s been doing in preparation for the fight. The things he says are so outlandishly crazy, they are meant only to make Smith appear silly or buffoonish. He says such things as “I run 10,000 miles every morning” and “I can throw a volkswagon a whole half block…and 4 million sit ups...in a minute”. These are impossible and serve only to make this video enjoyable for the viewer.