What I've Learned So Far

As most of my friends know, I have taken this semester of school off for a variety of reasons. Although I expected it largely to be unproductive, I hoped that it would re energize me and prepare me for next semester. Interestingly enough, I feel that I've gained more this semester off than I have from any one semester on campus so far - and I have learned so much over the past few months, not only about myself but also about life in general.

Allow me to elaborate. As a junior, I feel that I've experienced much of what college life has to offer: I've made many meaningful connections with amazing people, whether they are students, professors, or mentors; I've enjoyed parties with friends after long weeks of studying; I've experienced the difficulties of "hell weeks" and consecutive all nighters; I've come to appreciate the charm of the beautiful campus; I've dabbled in a variety of extra curricular activities like club tennis, young democrats, and anime club; I've spent the summer on campus, and I've spent the summer as an intern in DC; Well, you get the picture - I've tried to make the most of my time on campus.

However, there were a variety of difficulties that I simply wasn't prepared for once school began. Academically, my expectations changed - I went from being sure of what I wanted to do after school to being completely confused. I went from being focused purely on grades to putting forth more of a consistent effort to learn comprehensively and for my own interest. My apathy about so many issues turned into engagement and immersion.

Socially, my expectations largely changed as well. I grew up in a small town in southwestern Virginia - where there was not much diversity, not much ambition, and where my values differed greatly from those around me. My experiences there were challenging, and ultimately they allowed me to become a lot more comfortable with my own values and myself as a person. One of the negative effects of those experiences, however, was that I was not used to interacting with people who had similar interests and values as I did. Once I got to William and Mary, I was surrounded by those people. When you're used to being the odd one out, you sometimes don't know how to act around people who think like you.

Overall, I changed as a person dramatically and matured in a lot of ways. However, I didn't feel that I was able to see the progress or how far I had come until recently. Much of it probably has to do with the fact that I've had more time to reflect and more free time in general. Some of it also has to do with my interactions being largely with people who I haven't talked to for a while and who have helped me to identify the ways that I've changed positively.

One of the most important accomplishments of this semester off has been developing my relationships with a variety of people. Surprisingly, rather than losing touch with my friends on campus, I improved most of those relationships. Since I've had to put an effort into thinking about and maintaining these relationships regularly, I've noticed that I appreciate them much more and actively express that appreciation as well as what I feel is unique about each one. The fact that many of my closest friends are graduating at the end of the semester also made me think regularly about how I will keep in touch with all of them after school. Balancing each of these relationships has proven difficult and exhausting at times, but also incredibly rewarding. I've learned the true impact that real, thought provoking conversations can have on people - and how important it is to continue to keep relationships dynamic and always look to improve them. Throughout the process of managing these relationships, I also really learned the importance of consistency and routine in my life. Although I have a long way to go in terms of managing time and creating a regular routine, I have made much progress.

Despite my own expectations, I also managed to be somewhat productive in terms of real world experience. I was able to work on my writing skills and develop areas in which I was weak. Academically my previous writing experience had been research papers and essay. My other writing experiences were on my own time, very opinionated, and usually I didn't push myself to finish within any sort of deadline. Not only did I learn new formats of writing recently (Game reviews, previews, newspaper articles, etc.), but I also learned much more about journalism which is particularly interesting to me. I learned to accept that when there are consistent, weekly deadlines, along with random assignments throughout the month, that I won't be able to turn in my best work every time. However, I also balanced that without compromising the overall quality of my writing - I never settled for mediocrity and always tried to use what I learned in each article I wrote. These have been valuable experiences that have helped me appreciate writing so much more.

Perhaps most importantly, I have learned much about myself over the past few months. I have become a much more positive person in general. I've seen a significant change in my overall thought process as a result of many deliberate techniques. I start the day thinking about three things I am grateful for - which only takes a few minutes but has made a huge impact on my mood on a daily basis. I also try to start the day with one of my favorite songs and a cup of coffee which goes along with the appreciation of a routine. Often I exchange messages with some friends or have thought provoking conversations to start my day by actively thinking. Recently, I have been trying to find a role and a purpose for each of my actions throughout the day as well. Although this is tedious, it has allowed me to plan more efficiently and live with a better sense of purpose overall.

I have been able to work on dealing with high levels of stress and anxiety, as well as pinpointing the causes. Oftentimes with anxiety, there are days when you just don't feel like you have the energy to deal with all the craziness of life. Particularly last semester, these days were all too common. It felt like stressful situations were popping up one right after the other and overlapping way too much - and I just had no idea how to deal with them all at once. While life has been just as unpredictable recently, I have dealt with it so much better - and I am satisfied to say that I've learned from my mistakes in the past. When I pinpoint and recognize a problem, I address it much more directly, and I am able to move on more quickly. Admittedly, it is still a struggle at times. On top of dealing with stress and anxiety, I have learned how to deal with my anger in a much less intrusive manner. I have gotten better at preventing anger at one particular thing from translating to anger in general. Still, I recognize that there are times when I just have no energy or am physically and psychologically exhausted. During these times I need to be alone, chill out, and give myself time to re energize - and this realization more than any other has helped me to deal with stress, anxiety, and anger.

Even as I am writing, it's becoming easier for me to see just how much progress I have made in terms of improving every aspect of my life. When I see the progress I have made, it is extremely gratifying. Still, it only makes me want to continue this pattern. As long as I continue to improve as a person, this semester off will be a success.

The Confounding Effect of Fear

When I think of my fears, all sorts of things come to mind. There are common ones like bears, heights, and the big one - Death. But there is another dimension of fear that I feel isn't explored as much as it should be. For example, the fear of an unfortunate realization - whether it is about you, someone you hold in high regard, or anything you value. This internal fear is sometimes even more paralyzing and obtrusive than physical fear, yet it is often ignored.

The reason I find this so important is because fear and the process of accepting / confronting it have gotten me out of numerous tough situations in my life. It was incredibly difficult for me to understand at first, but only recently have I begun to realize the impact that fear has had in my life. I had many emotional fears, such as not fitting in, not being trusted, or not being liked - but the biggest one was being vulnerable. I did not recognize these fears at the time, and it took me years to accept them. My fear of not fitting in prevented me from being individualistic and developing creativity in a positive way. My fear of not being trusted, and inevitably my fear of trusting people prevented me from learning so much more from friends and family. My fear of not being liked allowed me to justify compromising my most important values, which I would consider unacceptable by my own standards today. My fear of vulnerability prevented me from forming many potentially significant and meaningful relationships with a variety of people. When I look back at the huge impact of fear in the past, I wonder how it will affect my future.

I have confronted and continue to work on accepting some of these fears without abandoning my own values. Now, more than ever, I have begin to explore what makes me unique as a human being while accepting that we can all find common ground. I no longer worry about whether people trust me, and I trust those who are willing to be a consistent part of my life. I value and respect myself enough not to always cater to others - and rather, value my own character and principles.

On one hand, there are risks of accepting vulnerability. After there is a mutual level of trust and vulnerability, if that trust is betrayed, the consequences can be severe. It can change both people in a lot of ways, and it can have negative effects on both people's relationships with others. So why trust anyone enough to be completely vulnerable?

The most significant thing I have learned by facing these fears is that vulnerability is a privilege, and it is not something to be afraid of. Let me explain : I believe the foundation of mutual trust is vulnerability. If someone is willing to open up to you and trust you enough to show vulnerability, it shows that your relationship with that person is unique. It also allows you to be more open, and when both people in any kind of relationship are comfortable around each other enough to be vulnerable, it is a truly unique and more meaningful. These kind of relationships cannot be formed without that level of trust and vulnerability, especially if it is not mutual.

These are all lessons I have learned from fear. None of them were easy to learn, and I made many mistakes along the way. I also accept that I will make more mistakes in the future. I know that I still have many emotional fears - but the most important struggle is for balance - specifically that I balance confrontation and acceptance of fear. It can be difficult to find that balance for each fear, but if we strive for it the quality of our relationships and our lives will show it.

Top 5: Movies

I've been having a lot of interesting conversations with a variety of people about movies and cinematography. The films a person enjoys can say a lot about that person. I believe the medium to be very personal. Yet I never really considered what my favorite movie was. I can name a few that I believe are unmatched, but I decided to make a list of my top five movies of all time. It was extremely difficult to say the least, but here it is:

5. Flipped - This is not an amazing movie in terms of direction, but the plot was so engaging and the characters were multidimensional and likable. This movie will make you laugh, cry, and everything in between. There is just a great variety of emotional engagement, and it makes the movie a unique experience. Throughout the whole movie, the talented actors made the characters easy to relate to and made you want to root for the protagonists wholeheartedly without being disingenuous. Very few movies have that kind of affect on the viewer, and for that reason, Flipped is in the top five.

4. State of Play - This movie represents the return of the original political thriller. At the time, political thrillers were just glorified action movies which focused less on characterization and acting, and more on special effects and pure action. While I enjoy action movies as much as the next guy, I particularly appreciate interesting, suspenseful plots and intelligent acting. The movie itself is incredibly entertaining, with Ben Affleck and Russell Crowe delivering fantastic performances - but the true significance of this movie is bringing back the political thriller genre. This led the way for other brilliant movies in the genre such as The Constant Gardener and Frost/Nixon.

3. Oldboy - This is the second entry in the Vengeance trilogy by the masterful director, Park Chan-Wook. All three movies could easily be in this list, but this is definitely my favorite entry in the trilogy. I would go as far as to say this represents the pinnacle of Korean direction and cinematography. Each frame is so precise and measured. The actors are phenomenal, with moving, emotionally engaging performances throughout. The plot is genius, and the twist is genuinely tough to predict. Until about halfway through the movie, everything is confusing but still interesting and engaging enough to keep the viewer interested. This is intentional, as is the case in all three of Park Chan-Wook's movies in the series. When it all comes together, there is no experience like Oldboy out there, and it is one of the best psychological thrillers ever made. However, I highly recommend watching this movie with English subtitles rather than the voice-overs which are hilariously bad.

2. Michael Clayton - This movie has a fairly predictable plot, but it is all about the acting. Two of my favorites, George Clooney and Tilda Swinton, have two of the best performances I have ever seen. Each scene is spot on in terms of emotional and facial cues. The actors portray the proper mood and atmosphere sometimes without even saying a word. This is a perfect example of when the dialogue (while excellent, as is always the case for Clooney movies), is transcended by the acting skill. It is extremely rare for a movie to be so focused on the tiny details, and with Clooney and Swinton, it works brilliantly. Some think it is slow paced, but for someone who appreciates brilliant acting, it will not fail to impress.

1. Good Night, and Good luck - This political drama was a huge breakthrough for Clooney as a writer. The cast was made up of many up and coming stars at the time (Downey Jr., Langella, Clooney), yet it had a chemistry that was unparalleled. The dialogue was witty, interesting, and engaging. The plot was not only suspenseful and entertaining, but it made the viewer question moral standards in journalism. The subject matter was something that resonated with me, as I was always interested in the role of media in social issues. This movie not only represents my love for journalism, but also for writing in general. If you are interested in journalism, you will absolutely love this movie. If you just want to watch a great movie, I also highly recommend it. It doesn't get much better than this.

Mr. Tait - You Should Set a Better Example for Your Future Daughter

This is a response to an article on Starcitygames.com by Geordie Tait. To fully understand my post, check out his article.

Recently, Geordie Tait wrote an article about the negative stereotypes of women and how they are perpetuated in gaming/nerd culture. It was framed as a letter to his future daughter and published on Starcitygames.com. I was told to reserve my judgment until the end of the article, which was difficult for a variety of reasons. Before I talk about what I feel the intended message of the article was, I want to share some of the problems I had with it.

I found that despite the fact that he was referring to geeks, nerds, and gaming culture in general (Things I can identify with) - it was alienating. Throughout the article he made backhanded comments and generalizations about people like me and my other "nerd" buddies. All the while he was condemning us for perpetuating a culture of misogynistic generalizations and backhanded comments. He then proceeded to call us hypocrites (You seeing what I'm seeing?). I couldn't keep count of the times I rolled my eyes at the condescending statements in the article.

These problems were present throughout, and they made it difficult to take the message seriously. The delivery is important, and he missed a valuable opportunity.

By far, the biggest issue I had with the article, however, was that I did not feel appropriately represented at all despite the fact that I consider myself and most of my friends nerds and geeks. In fact, most of my friends and I don't resemble the "socially ostracized," "depressed," "bitter," "hairy," (What was even the point of that one?) characterization of a nerd mentioned in the article at all.

I was happy growing up and continue to be. I talked to people, had a solid group of friends that I counted on, I never hated women, and I really wasn't that hairy (-_-). I never thought that I deserved a medal just because I never physically abused a woman. I fell in and out of love, I was hurt by rejection (like most people are at some point in their lives), and I experienced both high and low points in my romantic relationships. You see, Mr. Tait -I was just a regular guy who enjoyed playing video games. I'm not an anomaly either - most of my friends resembled this description. We were just guys who liked video games - both competitively and for fun. Although we all loved video games, we were all unique.

I never thought of video games as an obsession - I was passionate about them because they were meaningful to me, but obsessed is a stretch - like many of the statements in Geordie's article. I loved video games more than any of my other hobbies which included tennis, soccer, rapping, basketball, among others (all of which I was proud of). I loved gaming the most because of the variety of games and the depth of knowledge required to compete at most games. The detailed characterization of himself as a nerd who hated women as an awkward adolescent doesn't fit with my definition of it, and before you start, Geordie - I'm not a twisted misogynist despite the fact that I disagree with you. The reason our definitions differ is because nerd culture is just different now. When I think of nerds, I think of the passionate, talented, intelligent, diverse people in the gaming communities I have been lucky enough to be a part of. Despite the fact that we all love video games, we are all unique and multidimensional. This concept of a nerd is from my personal experiences, and I understand that not everyone perceives nerds in this way.

What you fail to acknowledge, Geordie, is that not everyone sees nerds as you do either. The culture has changed, the perception of nerds has changed, and the people have diversified dramatically over the past

decade. Instead of acknowledging that not all nerds fit into his characterization (I would even argue that most don't), he hand picks quotes from the comments section of forums and blogs - and then generalizes the attitudes within the quotes to the gaming community as a whole. The worst thing about it is that after he makes false assum

ptions about the community, he implies that those who disagree are somehow disturbed sexists. This hardly opens the topic up to intelligent discussion, which defeats the point. Why is it so hard for some writers to understand that insulting a group of

people or making backhanded, sarcastic insults will not lead to honest, intelligent, CRUCIAL discussions about feminism or false stereotypes?

When he's not quoting comments on online blogs / foru

ms to support his argument, he even quotes popular St

arcraft commentator, Sean "Day[9]" Plott - claiming that "like most male gamers, he (Day9) doesn't understan

d that gendered insults are wrong and off-putting to women." I have watched many of the

day[9] dailies, which is a show where Sean Plott analyzes Starcraft replays and interacts with the community. First of all, Geordie does

not even know which daily this quote came from, and he

provides no context. That aside, the story he was referring to was one in which Mr. Plott shares a Starcraft tidbit with his girlfriend: that gg stands for good game and people say it at the end of games to show sportsmanship. She would always type it out as G.G. instead of gg to poke fun at him. Here's the quote:

"It's not 'gee-dot gee-dot' it's 'GG' you young bitch!"

Without proper context, the article misleads people to believe that Day9 is disrespectful to women.

In reality, even if you heard the actual story without any knowledge of S

ean Plott instead of one isolated quote with no context, you should be able to see

how the story certainly is not a concrete example of misogyny. 

What's wor

se is t

hat Geordie further insults Day[9] by suggesting that the message he cares for dearly, that of "nerd pride," was harmful and misogynistic. After dissecting and mo

cking each part of day[9]'s E-sports manifesto, Mr. Tait goes on to claim that it contributes to the "high perch of cultura

l satisfaction" and that it gives gamers a sense of entitlement to "Nerd-rage" at anyone who doesn't und

erstand their passion. Ho

w

he can twist day[9]'s message -which is to wear your

passion of gaming with pride and share it with other people while transcending mainstream stereotypes - is beyond my understanding and that manipulation is extremely dangerous.

Before I address the Destructoid article, I want to talk about the Todd Anderson article titled: "Constructed Criticism - Living the Dream of Pro Magic." The reason I want to address this article specifically is because it exemplifies Geordie's pattern of misleading people by not giving proper context. Although he did link the article, I highly doubt that he actually expected readers to click the link and read through it because there was a huge disconnect. I read Anderson's article, and I was shocked at the difference between it and what was written in Tait's. According to Geordie's "Cliffnotes" version of the story there were 4 bulletpoints :

1. Author paints self as irresponsible drunk

2. Wife breaks down in tears, thinks everything is her fault

3. ...

4. Profit

Let me give you an honest "Cliffnotes" version of the story:

1. Author moves out of town to support his wife's career aspirations

2. Author's wife does not support his passion because it does not provide stable income

3. Author drinks frequently - he is miserable and hates his job

4. Author quits his regular job to play Magic professionally

5. Him and his wife fight frequently because of a failure of communication on BOTH ends

6. Wife finally realizes that he isn't happy and that he just wants her to be proud of him - She breaks down

7. They make up and live happily ever after

Maybe I just saw more in the article than Geordie did. Maybe he just left out important aspects of the article to support his argument. It didn't seem to be important to Geordie that the author sacrificed a lot to move away and support his wife's career (So she would be happy). Then, when he quit his job that made him miserable - she was not able to make a big sacrifice and support him while he gave it a shot? Are we reading the same article here? Maybe Geordie linked the wrong article - or maybe I'm a misogynist. Who knows? Please do take a look at the article yourselves - if nothing else, it is certainly interesting and thought-provoking. Despite what Mr. Tait thinks, it was clear to me from the beginning of the article that the author did not blame his wife for him being miserable - he also clearly wanted to make her happy. I think getting over relationship problems and communication barriers while pursuing your dream and supporting your partner is pretty damn inspirational.

Now, for the infamous Destructoid Article by Alyssa Bareznak. Well, it doesn't start out on a positive note. In the revised version, she starts off by saying that the article sounds mean - then she says that "One person's Magic is another person's finger nail biting and no online profile is deep enough to account for that." I can understand what she is trying to say - online profiles don't account for every aspect of a human being and that can cause problems. The article could have been humorous - the article could have made a good point. However, her negative preconceptions about nerds or people who play Magic: The Gathering are clear when she opens up by comparing it to a bad habit like nail-biting. As a writer, whether you just blog, or are featured on a prominent website - you should always keep in mind that word choice can affect how people view the article, regardless of your intentions. As I said before, delivery is extremely important. The error of choosing the wrong words or tone of voice seems to be a theme in gaming "journalism" and coverage- One blogger makes a post about a completely relevant topic (In this case online dating - in the case of Mr. Tait's article, negative stereotypes of women in gaming culture) but throws in condescending remarks and low blows towards the gaming community. I don't know why- maybe for more views, maybe to be controversial, or maybe because of their own preconceptions about gaming culture. The community responds angrily (many comments irrational tirades against the author - but many also constructively criticizing the author). Then the author either writes a follow-up post (often highlighting ONLY the negative, immature comments posted, which is both misleading and manipulative) criticizing the community for their overreaction or declares nerds as whiny babies, sexists, racists, etc., who failed to understand the writer's intentions. (Or according to good ole Geordie, to punish girls for making fun of them...?)

After the condescending opening of the article, Alyssa goes on to tell an interesting story that shows that online dating websites don't always match you with people you are going to be compatible with. Throughout, Alyssa uses this condescending language and a dismissive tone towards geeks in general - it can be frustrating to try to see through it all and find the take-home message, but it is there. Again, maybe it's just the psychotic sexist in me, but it seems that she characterizes Mr. Finkel, a Magic champion, as a creepy individual who couldn't be romantic if his life depended on it.

Maybe it's wrong to call her shallow based on this one article - but how would you feel if someone implied that people who played a game you loved were creepy and unromantic? This guy certainly went beyond playing Magic for fun in his free time, but it was also his profession that supported him financially. He was serious about it. Would the response be any different if his profession was different? I don't think so. In fact, I think the response would be much worse if she criticized a profession that society held in higher regard. I think that's part of the problem -maybe she thought it was okay to insult all the nerds out there because everyone insults nerds... right? Then again maybe I shouldn't make assumptions about what she was thinking when she alienated the very demographic that destructoid attracts - however tempting it may be (especially as a psychology major). Then I would be heading down a dangerous road - one that Mr. Tait seems willing to travel quite often. I have to say, Geordie, you're not setting a great example for your "kiddo" in the article.

Obviously one isolated incident isn't enough to convince me that Alyssa is a shallow person, and it doesn't tell me much about her personality - I agree that the response to the article was heated and many of the comments were uncalled for. However, it is not rational to say that everyone who responded with criticism is on a "high perch of cultural self-satisfaction" and are just bitter nerds who rage because they can't take rejection as well as others. It's these assumptions about the motives behind the negative feedback that make me cringe as I read Mr. Tait's article. Every negative comment came with a sarcastic remark about how this nerd must have been rejected by girls his whole life and how that nerd must have been bitter and depressed.

When I read the comments, I saw some overreactions - but I didn't see the herd of angry nerds filled with rage and bitterness over their pathetic love lives. I didn't see the irrational, socially ostracized psycopaths you characterize in your article. I saw a group of people who love a variety of video games and are offended by the tone and word choice that several journalists have recently used to describe all of us. I see a group of people who are tired of being generalized - a group of people who are tired of journalists and writers like you who think you have us all figured out - when in reality, you are frankly wrong and unqualified to make those kinds of assumptions.

You see, Geordie, I don't want to be with a partner who thinks that gaming is a bad habit of mine. I don't want to date someone who thinks that gaming is silly or that it is a turn-off. Surely you can understand that I don't want to be involved with someone who I can't share my interests and passions with. Can't someone just criticize a writer for generalizing and alienating a group of people instead of promoting a healthy discussion about negative stereotypes? That is a valid criticism and it is applicable to her article, as well as yours.

Is Geordie not perpetuating false, negative stereotypes of male gamers while pretending to be some sort of civil rights pioneer for women? To me, it would not have mattered if Alyssa and Jon switched places. I would have a similar, negative response - as would most of the people I know in the gaming community. To be clear, I don't think I have any right to tell Alyssa what she can and can't do - especially when it comes to personal topics. Surely I can empathize with that situation - I have (and we all have) been in situations in which we are interacting with people who do not have the slightest interest in our hobbies, profession, or passion. I just think she could have gone about it in a less condescending way.

Finally, I want to address Geordie Tait's article and the message I got out of it. I will start by sharing a story about my girlfriend and I in high school. We had just gotten together, and I was sharing some of the things that were important to me with her. She decided to try out Halo 3, and I even gave her the microphone in case she wanted to talk some trash and really get into it (Terrible idea in retrospect). Because she had never really played many shooters, the controls were foreign to her. While she was learning she was asking me how to jump, reload, etc. After hearing her voice and realizing that she was a girl, her teammates started to make inappropriate, offensive comments. She was clearly upset, but I was desensitized. This moment gave her a negative first impression of gaming - and it took a long time for that to change.

You see, although I had not been guilty of making inappropriate comments about females while playing Halo - I was used to them - and that was not okay. Often, people get frustrated playing video games and they target your race, sex, or age even though they are unrelated to your gaming skill. Whatever someone can say to offend you, you will probably hear it. Hell, it was only a year ago that I used my first name as a username in World of Warcraft (Ahmed) - and I got many offensive comments about my ethnicity. I can totally understand the frustration that comes with losing - when you spend time trying to improve at anything competitive and you lose it can be tough to deal with. However, many people cross the line.

Part of the problem is the anonymity, and part of it is that Mr. Tait attempts to address - the perpetuation of negative stereotypes of women (as well as any minorities) in gaming culture. The issue I have with the take-home message, however, is that it implies that these negative stereotypes originate with or are exclusive to video gaming culture. Contrary to what some may believe, negative stereotypes of women in media have been prevalent in photography and cinematography since their invention. These unrealistic portrayals continue to be problems in today's entertainment culture - whether it is magazines, movies, books, etc. In every form of entertainment, both women and men are held to unrealistic standards. Singling out the video gaming culture is - again - misleading.

I completely agree that women are unrealistically and condescendingly portrayed in most video games - this is a huge problem that I am happy to discuss - but the conversation should not be prefaced with sarcastic jokes and assumptions about my past interaction with women. I did not become involved in gaming culture because of sexism - Hell, I just thought it was really cool to control a base and make an army. Although the tech industry is clearly male dominated - I believe a huge reason for that is the social stigmas associated with women in the tech industry. I don't think that video game culture is the culprit here. Technology related jobs do not align with the historically traditional roles of women - we have a much bigger problem than the unrealistically portrayed women in video games. This issue is pervasive in our culture. However, I believe that we can transcend these unrealistic, social guidelines and schemas - whether you are a man or a woman by valuing your individuality and realizing the importance of your words. But what do I know? I'm just a raging misogynist.

Various reflections and thoughts

Over the past few days, the students in our Education 400 class went on a trip to Washington D.C. with our professor, Drew Stelljes, to see public education in practice. We got the opportunity to meet with administrators, teachers, students, policy makers, and William and Mary alumni involved with public education.

Going into the trip, I didn't really know what to expect. I tried to come in with an open mind and just observe and learn as much as possible. I also kept in mind that what I was seeing was just a snap shot of the very dynamic public education system.

As I observed effective teachers in the classroom and talked to so many students who really had the desire to learn, a lightbulb lit up in my brain and I knew that teaching was the profession for me. Still, I saw teachers who were in my shoes not too long ago, and many seemed to be exhausted and unsure of their futures in education after only a couple of years. To say that this was discouraging and disheartening would be an understatement. How did this happen to some of the bright and motivated teachers in the profession? The only clear answer I got was that it was anything BUT the children. This was enough to reassure me that I will have a hopeful, bright future as a teacher, regardless of the obstacles along the way.

Aside from seeing effective teachers in action, the part of the trip that impacted me most was the visit to Curiosity Zone, which was a place where children could go as early as age 2 for hands on science learning. The purpose of the program was to encourage children to explore their love for science through hands-on learning. Although I did not have the opportunity to observe a class, the idea of the program seemed well thought out and promising. We had a question and answer session with the education director as well as the founder of Curiosity Zone. The education director seemed to really understand some of the limits of curriculum development in public schools, and she implemented innovative ideas for science curriculum without the restrictions that public school teachers face.

During the trip, I had some interesting conversations with all of the extremely bright, engaged, and determined students in our class. Specifically, the conversations about Curiosity Zone really made think about the issues that are being ignored in public education. The question was posed: Do programs like Curiosity Zone perpetuate the widening of the achievement gap? It seemed like a very simple answer to me. How could a program that instills an interest in science into children of all ages contribute to the achievement gap? Some suggested that since the program was only available to students in a very wealthy county (Loudoun) and because it cost money, it would only help those who are already destined to be high achievers.

This really made me wonder: Are we approaching the problem of the achievement gap in the wrong way? I believe the achievement gap is not only between high achievers and low achievers in the United States, but also between the students in the United States and those in other countries. The best of the best in the United States are still not competing with those in other developed countries. Even if programs like Curiosity Zone only serve high achieving students, which isn't necessarily the case, it would still have an impact on the achievement gap between the US and other countries. It would help high achieving students reach their full potential. I strongly believe that the effort to close the achievement gap will affect high achievers, low achievers, and those in the middle. I believe that the goal of a public education system should be to allow ALL students to reach their highest potential, which will inevitably vary depending on numerous factors. Programs like Curiosity Zone are not contributing to the root causes of the achievement gap. A public education system based on standardized testing does have a huge impact on all students, not just those on the lower end of the achievement spectrum, and this is largely being ignored. Our conversation about Curiosity Zone was one of many intellectually stimulating discussions we had during the trip.

By the end of the trip, I was filled with more mixed emotions than ever before. I was hopeful about the future of public education but humbled by the daunting task that lay ahead. I was angry about the issues that were being ignored in public education, yet inspired and impressed by what is already being done. For the first time, I was certain about what I wanted to do with my life but still so uncertain about the support system or lack thereof for teachers in many schools. I told myself that I could make a significant difference as a teacher in the future, but as I observed teachers at Anacostia high school and Maury Elementary school, I also asked myself, "If these amazing people were part of a failing public education system, what could I possibly do?" After having dinner with some outstanding W&M alumni, many of which had been in our shoes only a few years go, I realized that this balance between certainty and uncertainty was not only okay, but it was crucial to maintain throughout my life. To make a difference, we have to challenge our own views as well as those of others and stay open minded. The achievement gap will only close if we attack it from every angle. Teachers, administrators, policy makers, parents, and students must all work towards the goal. Everyone has a stake in public education and the future of this country.