Sunday, March 22, 2015

Is It OK?

Last week in class, we examined an article from the New York Times about the only thing on upperclassman's minds: college. The day after we discussed the article, both of my parents sent me the article. After reading the article a second time, I decided I had some of my own thoughts, because who doesn't like talking about college?

In the article, Bruni examines the application process of two students, one being a past NT graduate. Both students were very successful in high school, in terms of grades, and were rejected from their top choice of colleges. They ended up going to their "safety" schools, and thrived at college. The article states that Peter Hart, NT graduate, felt that he was a "very competent person" once he arrived at Indiana, one of his safety schools. To me, this is very interesting. I think our school is so competitive and I don't think it's common to feel competent in all of your classes. We strive for perfection at our school, and are easily disappointed. All teachers and parents tell students that our school is unlike any other, and I think that most students have a hard time believing them, or at least I know I do. How is a student supposed to step back and look at the big picture, realizing that levels don't mean anything or making varsity isn't the end of the world, if it's all they've ever known?


I also think it's a little unfair of Bruni to use Hart as an example for his article. After college, he quickly found a job, and is now "in graduate school — at Harvard". My biggest problem with this statement is the fact that Harvard is emphasized by being separated from the sentence.  It seems that Bruni is trying to show that although he didn't go to an Ivy League for undergrad, as long as he ended up at one at some point he is "successful". But how do we define success...by having lots of money? Does going to an Ivy League school automatically mean a student will be rich when they're older? I don't think so, in fact, I believe that what you do at college is more important than what school you actually attend. But I think that's hard for us high school students to realize, especially at a place as competitive as New Trier. Don't get me wrong, I love most aspects of my school, but I think there is an added pressure to the students who attend, whether its from teachers or parents, or sometimes the worst ones, themselves. 
A photo from Bruni's article
It's hard to believe that "It's Ok" if you don't get into any of the schools you want to go to. I haven't gone through the process yet, but I find it unlikely that I will feel completely okay if I don't get in to a school I really want. Bruni states that 70-95% of applicants are declined from elite colleges every year. So how do we change our philosophy, or our parents philosophy, into believing that going to an elite school isn't crucial to our future?

Sunday, March 15, 2015

Stop the Yakking

I remember the first time I heard the words "Yik Yak". I was in Chemistry class, and someone in my class asked me if I had posted anything on the app yet. At that point in the morning I didn't know what it was, but by the time I saw my friends at lunch it was all anyone could talk about. It was all the rage until teachers found out and quickly shut it down, blocking it from the schools wifi. We had discussions in advisory, and a week or so after that first day, no one really talked about it anymore. It was old news.

While at our school Yik Yak seems to be a thing of the past, different college campuses have been experiencing what we did a year later. At Eastern Michigan University, for example, students in a lecture hall were "yakking" during a lesson and the teaching assistant showed the professor the posts about her after class, many of them rude and inappropriate. The professor went to the university officials, showing them the posts, but the officials couldn't really do anything about it in the end, since Yik Yak is anonymous. While at our school, it was easy to track down students who posted it through the schools wifi information, it's not as easy for college campuses to do the same (many use their phones wireless data instead of the school).

Yik Yak was created in 2013 with the intention of creating a different kind of social media network that wasn't based on friends or followers, and you could see others posts within a 1.5 mile radius. However, in my opinion, more bad than good has come out of the app. At our school, the biggest issue from the app was that it created anonymous cyberbullying, even more hurtful than other social media sites. Our school wasn't the only school to ban the app; many other schools and students have petitioned against the app. 78,287 people support the petition to stop Yik Yak on change.org (a petition started by a victim of the app). While the app may not be deleted, I think it should be banned in college campuses as well.

I know someone who was written about on the site, and I saw the damage it caused. I don't think it was ever used for good at our school, and although I don't have experience anywhere else, I can't imagine a school where no bullying occurred. No one should have to suffer anonymous cyberbullying; regular cyberbullying is bad enough.

Monday, March 9, 2015

Secret Email Gone Viral

Recently, newspapers have exposed that secretary of state Hillary Clinton has a private email which she has been using for her work--government work. Federal officials are supposed to use emails that are given to them, ending in ".gov", so that the government can see their activity. This information has led to questions about whether or not it is okay for government officials to have their own email, and if they should be allowed to use it for their work.

According to the NY Times, Clinton released over 55,000 pages worth of information obtained from her email. The problem, however, is that she could have deleted important information or anything she wanted to hide. Since she was the one to release certain emails, she obviously chose what to expose to the media and what to keep for herself. A personal email lets her delete certain emails as well, without the government having access to all of her emails. It's also a little dangerous to her because hackers and spies could have easily gotten into her private email, while government's emails are heavily guarded and very secure. This raises the question, should she have been able to have her own private email?

I see both sides of the argument. I realize that it was against government policy, and that it makes her seem a little more shady, but I also think she should be able to have her own email for personal information. In my opinion, even government officials should be able to have a private life separate from their work and what the media sees. I can see why she would want her own email, but I think I don't think she should have used it for her work. If she had just used her personal email for family and friends, I don't think that would have been a problem. Since she was using it for government work, however, I can see why this raises concerns about her privacy. Also, the number of pages of emails she submitted is a little surprising to me; it seems like a lot of information, which means she used that email for a lot of her work. I think this may hinder her campaign at running for president in the next presidental election, because enemies will use it to their advantage and some may not trust her. Overall, I think it was a mistake to have one and use it for her job, when it's clear that most government officals did not.