Weekly Outline
Week 1, 1/14 -- Introductions
Week 2, 1/21 -- What is literature? What is identity?
Week 3, 1/28 -- Narration, paper #1 due
Week 4, 2/4 -- Character, Setting, Symbol, Theme
Week 5, 2/11 -- Quiz #1, film
Week 6, 2/18 -- Poetry
Week 7, 2/25 - - Poetry, paper #2 due
Week 8, 3/4 -- Poetry
Week 9, 3/11 -- Poetry, paper #3 due
Week 10, 3/18 -- (out of class work on blog)
Week 11, 3/25 -- SPRING BREAK
Week 12, 4/1 -- Quiz #2 on poetry, Theory
Week 13, 4/8 -- Poetry paper #4 due, Theory, film
Week 14, 4/15 -- Theory
Week 15, 4/22 -- Theory, quiz #3
Week 16, 4/29 -- Paper #5 due
Week 17, 5/6 - Final Exam PARTY
I chose to read "Hitting Kids: American Parenting and Physical Punishment," written by Richard Reeves and Emily Cuddy. Throughout this article, it was explained how corporal punishment has negative effects that come along with the action, and how the US has a very laid-back a few on the whole ordeal. Studies were presented in which the number showed that mothers who spank their children were not particularly bad parents, and it makes sense along with the statistic that 70% of Americans believe in some sort of corporal punishment. I personally believe that the article presented quite a large amount of useful facts and statistics, but the studies accompanying the article were not very helpful to deterring spanking. Judging a "good" or "bad" parent is immeasurable. I agree with the facts stated in the article, and it was definitely interesting to learn about the long-term effects of spanking onto children. This gave me new thoughts and facts that I had not considered previously and I am definitely glad that I decided to read this article.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2014/11/06-parenting-hitting-mobility-reeves
- Brittany Clemmons
I chose the article Weight and Social Mobility: Taking the Long View on Childhood Obesity by Joanna Venator and Richard V. Reeves. In this column, the authors were explaining the relationship between obesity and wages; how lower income families are more likely to be overweight and obese than wealthier families. The article explains how job discrimination is a factor in employees who are overweight. The trickle down effect directly relates to lower income employment and how health problems associated with being overweight can affect job productivity. Studies were conducted to determine the percentage of adolescents and adults whose weight affected their income. The results were that families with lower incomes are generally more overweight and obese; affecting adults more than teens and children. The article also explains that families with lower incomes tend to eat less healthy foods because they cannot afford the more expensive, generally healthier food. It also details that gym memberships are costly and not in the average lower income family's budget, eliminating this outlet for exercise. I understand how it must be hard being discriminated against for being overweight, but I also see many other options and ways to become more fit and healthy without breaking the bank. One would be to eat natural whole foods, nothing processed. Most foods that are "grown" tend be more cost effective and healthier than a company who "makes" their food in a factory. Another solution would be to exercise using your own body weight to burn calories; such as jogging or running, push ups, sit ups, body weight squats, lunges, etc. I disagree with the author and how he seems to be giving more excuses to people who are overweight then offering solutions to the problem. I think lower income families have lower income not because they are overweight or obese, but because they do not have the determination or drive to become successful financially and becoming physically fit.
ReplyDeleteBrett Gelineau
Hitting Kids: American Parenting and Physical Punishment
ReplyDeleteThe article uses statistical surveys and other forms of data to illustrate how spanking, hitting, slapping, or any punishment in which you are using pain as a corrective measure, has negative effects on adolescent behavior.
The methods in which the surveys were conducted doesn't assure accurate statistics. Such as how various parents were asked if they used any form of corporal punishment. Some parents confirmed that they did indeed spank their children while others denied any use of pain inflicting punishment but, in the end, how do we know who's lying and who's not? In my opinion, the effects of corporal punishment vary depending on genetics, environment and even relationship. Some children are naturally more aggressive than others and require a different level of punishment but in all situations there is a time and a place for it and that is the most important aspect corporal punishment.
Daniel Dearing
DeleteI chose the article Weight and Social Mobility: Taking the Long View on Childhood Obesity by Joanna Venator and Richard V. Reeves because it was a subject that I am very familiar with. This long memo addresses the gaps between the rich and the poor in terms of nutrition and resources and expands on the idea that income and obesity coincide. This memo is packed with riveting studies that show how obese people earn 0.7-6.3% less than their non obese counter parts. That's an astounding number when you factor in that their losing pay just based on how they look but when you factor in that they may not be performing as well because of weight constraints then it seems suiting. I agree that the gap is obvious and it seems that more lower income families are obese than those of middle class or higher incomes and I also agree that childhood income has no bearing on adult obesity.
ReplyDelete-Justin Brown-
I chose to read “Should We Worry about Low Fertility?” by Isabel Sawhill. In this article, Sawhill suggests that the recent low fertility rates in the U.S. may actually be a good thing. If families are having less children then more time could be spent with each child and more funds could be invested in education. I agree with these ideas because families with more than a couple children could be unable to spend less time with each child individually and this could cause emotional tension between the members. Parents with high amounts of children are also less likely to care for the youngest kids themselves and leave the caretaking to older siblings. Parents are more likely to do a better job of raising their children when they delay childbearing and wait until they are ready. This increases the child’s chances of living a successful life and being a productive member of society.
ReplyDelete*Megan McNeely*
***could be unable to spend more time with each child individually*** not "unable to spend less time"
Deleteperfect example why proofreading is a must. Shame on me.
I chose to read the article “Happiness Requires Opportunity, Not Just Contentment”, written by Carol Graham. This article looks at how social and economic mobility can relate to someone’s ability to lead a happy, content life. The point is made that people that are not as well-off face daily stresses that can prevent them from being happy with their life overall, and that people in wealthier societies are generally happier. I agree with this, as it seems obvious that having to worry about every part of life would negatively affect the ability to be content with life. The article also brings up how character and personality can factor into this, which makes sense. If someone generally has a positive, optimistic outlook on life, they will be able to find happiness in situations others may not be able to. It makes sense that being wealthier can give someone the opportunity to be happier than someone that is poor, because of lack of stress.
ReplyDeleteAllison McDowell
I read "Happiness Requires Opportunity, Not Just Contentment," by Carol Graham. This article reflects the common question of money buying happiness or not and how the stress levels of different classes contribute to overall quality of life. Americans tend to enjoy finding an easy way out and generally do not have strong morals for hard work. An easier way out leads to less stress, right? Most people agree that being well-off rather than struggling to pay rent is ideal. In summary, I agree with the article because those with a positive outlook on the future will probably be happier in general. However, people having more money does contribute to those optimistic feelings.
ReplyDeleteAngela Beabout
I read "Families: It's Complicated," writhed by Joanna Venator and Richard V. Reeves. In this article, three characteristics are noted as being the most prominent in a family and without these characteristics, children’s economic opportunities may be limited. The three S’s are family strength, family structure, and family stability. It is no secret that children need a stable home so they can thrive and reach new benchmarks as they grow. There is now growing evidence that instability in a family can cause cognitive, developmental, and health problems in children. Strength and structure focus on the quality of relationships in the family. I believe that these three S’s are the most vital family characteristics because they all rely on one another. Wanting to raise a child by this framework and wanting to raise a child in a positive home environment go hand in hand. The “American” family is no longer just thought of as a married man and woman with children. People are now realizing that a family cannot be based on by the members in it, but through the actions of the members over time. –Karis Ederer
ReplyDeleteI chose to read the article, “Hitting Kids: American parenting and physical punishment,” written by Richard V Reeves and Emily Cuddy. This article is woven with statistical surveys and other forms of data to support its conclusion. The questions it sets out to answer include; what are the longer-term consequences of physical punishment in terms of behavior and skill development of the child. Does physical punishment make you a stronger or weaker parent, and how do the United States compare with the rest of the world.
ReplyDeleteComing from a childhood of spanking I was shocked to learn the study showed when children were spanked their was a direct correlation to higher risk for mental health problems, anxiety, depression even to alcohol and drug abuse. In short the article reads of a playbook on what not to do with your children and how the United States is an anomaly in the world of corporal punishment as a tool. What the article doesn't include in its data is the effect the variables of how often, with what and what intesity the child is spanked has on the childs outcome. The researchers it seems try to make physical punishment correspond to being a bad parent but the data comes up short as does the article.
Zachary Harder
I chose to read "Happiness Requires Opportunity, Not Contentment," by Carol Graham. This article explains the overall well being of the struggles between the impoverished and the wealthy. There are three kinds of well being that are being discussed: Hedonic, evaluative, and eudaemonic. The general definition of these words is the way someone chooses to live their life. An individual can have all the money in the world but still be miserable. The articles stresses the idea of 'life is what you make it.' Having a comfortable amount of money would take the load off, buts it's all about the attitude an individual portrays. Looking forward to things and having goals and aspirations will propel you to healthy living.
ReplyDelete--Natalie Diciaula
The memo that I decided to read was “Weight and Social Mobility: Taking the Long View on Childhood Obesity”. This article talks about the relationship of obesity to income throughout a persons life and concludes that childhood income relates to obesity as obesity is related to adult income. Data has revealed that families with lower incomes are at greater risk to be obese because of the lack of knowledge in health nutrition, the disadvantage of not having an accessible market to buy fresh produce from in the area, not having the money to buy organic foods as they are more expensive, and not having a safe outdoor environment to exercise. All the reasons listed above to why lower income families are more likely to become obese are characteristics of lower class inner city neighborhoods. The relationship between income and obesity is more negatively drastic for females then in males because females are more likely to be discriminated for their appearance because of the modern day way that they are viewed.
ReplyDeleteObesity is a serious problem in the United States and currently is trying to be changed with the efforts of organizations that are changing school lunch to be more nutritious. I don’t think that this pattern of low income equals a greater chance of becoming obese will ever change because of the dramatic increase in population every year. It becomes more difficult to feed everyone and this demands alternative ways of growing food that are cheaper for the majority of our population which are lower income families and it just so happens that this trade off for cheaper food is having to ingest synthetic artificial products that are not healthy.
Joseph Ledo-Massey
I chose to read the article "Families: It's Complicated" by Joanne Venator and Richard Reeves. For almost the entire portion of this article the focus is placed upon the typical family setting and the structure that it needs to take on in order to produce financialy stable children. This article presents a more realistic view on what the modern family consists of. It is no longer married couples and single parents that form a family but those few parents who decide to co-inhabit their kids lives. Structure, stability, and strength are the three main factors that the author and other researchers believe make up the modern day family. The relationships that exist within the typical home between all those who inhabit it are shown to have a great affect on the growth and development of the children being raised within. The author believes that all three factors are hard to achieve but essential in creating a well knit family unit.
ReplyDelete-Jordan Hepner
While reading "Hitting Kids: American Parenting and Physical Punishment " by Richard V. Reeves and Emily Cuddy, I noticed that the article shows a negative insight on corporal punishment. According to the article corporal punishment causes social problems with kids and causes strain between the relationships of parents with their children. I found this article to be a bunch of nonsense. Corporal punishment is the most stern way to correcting behavior. The Bible states "spare the rod, spoil the child." In today's times, the world has turned away from Christian views and ideas which has in returned caused turmoil in much of the world. Even in the U.S., this is can be observed by just looking at the negative outlook on corporal punishment. So, corporal punishment should be looked at as a way of behavior adjustment instead of being looked at as abuse.
ReplyDelete-William Canaday
While looking through all of the articles, I wasn’t able to find one that immediately grabbed my attention. However, all of the article’s titles came with a heavy negative connotation so I read some of the other students’ responses to get an idea about what each article was about. Almost all of the articles gave the impression that if you do not have the perfect life as a child, you will grow up with serious mental and health problems as an adult which will hinder your ability to succeed in life. For example, the article “Hitting Kids: American Parenting and Physical Punishment” suggests that spanking a child will cause that child to resent their parent and have difficulties interacting with society. I do think the amount and force that comes with the spanking can cause problems for the child, but I also think disciplining a child is very necessary. Not disciplining a child will only teach them that there are no consequences for their actions and most of them grow up to be carefree and completely disregard rules and laws set by their superior. The article “Families: It’s Complicated” also proposes that a child without a typical family household will have a disadvantage in life. Not every child is fortunate enough to have a two parent household and just because some do does not mean they will be better off than other children. A child can have a two parent household and have one of the parents be completely hazardous to their mental and physical health for different reasons, whether it be alcoholism or something else that is not healthy for the child to be around. There was also an article about money buying opportunity which I kind of agree with. I do think having money will make it easier for the child but hard work will also enable the child to create his or her own opportunities. I think these articles were based on false pretenses that life is going to be easy and everything will be perfect and fall in line the way you need and want it to be. The truth is that life will come with obstacles that you have to get around or it will keep you from reaching your full potential in life. The only disadvantage a child will have is letting excuses created by our society keep them achieving their goals.
ReplyDeleteChristopher Bijou
I chose to read "Happiness Requires Opportunity, Not Contentment," by Carol Graham. In this article, the author explains the struggles people face whether they are poor, or wealthy. The article discusses three types of well-being: Hedonic, Evaluative, and Eudaimonic well-being. In order to fulfil these traits, one must have the capacity to think beyond daily struggles and to invest in future opportunities. They state that this may be harder for those people who struggle financially, have poor health, or have violent conflict. The article stresses that having lots of money would make life easier, but there’s much more to it. People who have character and personality find that those at the highest levels are least concerned with income, yet value learning and creativity more than others. So the moral of this article is to live life to fullest no matter how much money you have. Always live an active, purposeful life, and good things will happen. - Stephen Stroop
ReplyDeleteI had looked through a few articles that would interest me I had stumbled upon the article titled: Families: its Complicated by Joanna Richard V. Reeves. This article had my attention right away because Family is the number one key in this life. Without family it’s hard to get through obstacles especially in this day and time without their support and care for your future. This article first touches on the basics and the three family factors, such as the family structure. This provides influential benefits for the child’s economic opportunities and strive to do better. With instability and conflict in the household this changes in the familys outcomes. Next is the Family stability, the article talks about divorces and parents splitting up and how it affects the children growing up this is due to lack of structure and stability in the family ring. Finally family strength, it’s very important but elusive according to the article. Family strength contains commitment, conflict levels emotional support and social networks. These three family factors the articles expresses are key to show how a functional family works.
ReplyDelete-Hampton Schaffer
Do unpredictable hours undermine upward mobility?
ReplyDeleteI chose this article because I think it is a very relatable subject for everyone at one point. People often find themselves caught up in short-term work due to the stress that it can bring. Reeves explains how the majority of American workers are paid by the hour, and that many of them learn their schedules less than a week in advance. Reeves also expresses that half of the workers in the NLSY survey have no control over their schedules, and many of them are inconsistent with the amount of hours from week to week. I think people tend to undermine paid by the hour workers and may not consider the stress and other conflicts brought on by unpredictable hours. These type of workers often include college students working part time to pay tuition and other expenses, while still making time to go to classes and do homework. Many of the workers included in the survey, however, were parents who were working in order to further their opportunities or education to eventually make more money. I think it’s important to consider people like this because it’s an issue that could easily be improved by giving workers an earlier notice of what the schedule is going to be like, and making it more consistent.
-Chloe Taylor
I read the science of power: billionaires, elites, and Social Mobility. America is born on the idea of Capitalism. In a capitalist society humans are a commodity. Each individual is responsible for his own well-being. In capitalism if a person falls behind and can’t take care of himself he dies. This is how the animal kingdom works. Fortunately, the American society isn’t as cruel as the normal world. We give people many chances and if poor will commonly bail out a person. The jury is still out on whether or not this is beneficial, however it does breed a society where the smartest and best rise to the top. The key to this is that they are rewarded for their efforts. The beauty of is that hard work is beneficial. There is a direct correlation between success and effort. And the funny thing about genes is that they tend to stay in a family.
ReplyDeleteMy article focused on Weight and Social Mobility: Taking the Long View on Childhood Obesity, this topic is definitely stressed in today’s society. Obesity can occur for many reasons, child hood obesity is popularly among those with a low income. I have a partial agreement toward this article. Yes, it is harder to supply yourself with the proper necessities to stay healthy and in shape if prices are too high for comfort. Also living arrangements may not be the safest for proper daily exercise. Although, the article does state these logical points. Staying healthy is not impossible to achieve, even under bad circumstances.
ReplyDelete- Sidney Freeman
I read "Who Is Hurt Most by Unemployment in a Recession?"; before I started reading I guessed that older, middle class people are more effected by unemployment in a recession. Think of it this way if you are young and you lose all of your money, you have time to earn it back, however if you are older, maybe close to retirement, you cannot take a hit like that, because you won't be able to earn the money back, you are out of time. I then read the article to see that it basically said it is more harmful for a poor person to lose their job in a recession, the article did not specify as much as I did, I went with age as opposed to income, the article went with income. If you combine my answer with the articles answer, you would see that older people who are close to retirement age, and are also poor/ still depending on their job, are more greatly effected by unemployment during a recession.
ReplyDeleteI forgot to put my name, Shane Parent.
Delete