My biggest frustration in job hunting right now is that companies are down-sizing and/or laying off employees with years of experience and then those people are getting entry level and junior positions at other companies. Obviously those people have to work and it's a shame they have to take pay-cuts. Obviously, hiring managers are making safe decisions by hiring people with five, ten, fifteen years of experience. I'm not frustrated with the people, but this situation stinks for me, the recent college grad.
I applied for a junior writing position at a small local organization. I submitted strong writing samples. I outlined my relevant experience in a cover letter.
Today I received an email from the hiring manager that I'm not moving forward as a candidate because she needs someone with years of full-time writing experience. I don't have that and other applicants do. Fair enough.
Or is it? True, I don't have years of paid writing experience on my resume. How can I? I graduated from college in May 2011. I wasn't on a time clock, but I did write every day, research, and put together presentations in English and in Spanish for four years of college. I learned to be flexible, work in groups, and adapt to whatever guidelines I had to meet.
I know that my B.A. program was heavy on writing and that may not be the case at other colleges and universities, but why is my college experience overlooked when I'm applying for full-time work?
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label education. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Hearing what I can't see
I'm taking an intro to music class this semester that's basically a historical survey. We started in the Middle Ages and by the end of the semester we'll be talking about modern music. I haven't had a formal music class since 8th grade and since this is my last semester of college, I thought I should fit in one.
I'm a visual learner, so what's difficult for me about studying music is that all the things you learn about are things you hear. In a literature course, I can find passages and make connections between them. I can analyze film scenes. I can write out Spanish compositions.
I can't see music. The professor can explain where a chord change is but I still have to listen for it. We can talk about separate voices in imitative polyphony, but it's nothing I can point out.
These aren't difficult concepts, but they don't come naturally to me. I have to pay extra attention and take careful notes. It's funny how this 101 class takes more effort than my 400-level Spanish lit. But that's how it goes for me.
I'm a visual learner, so what's difficult for me about studying music is that all the things you learn about are things you hear. In a literature course, I can find passages and make connections between them. I can analyze film scenes. I can write out Spanish compositions.
I can't see music. The professor can explain where a chord change is but I still have to listen for it. We can talk about separate voices in imitative polyphony, but it's nothing I can point out.
These aren't difficult concepts, but they don't come naturally to me. I have to pay extra attention and take careful notes. It's funny how this 101 class takes more effort than my 400-level Spanish lit. But that's how it goes for me.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Apologetic Professors
I have a professor this semester who is really nice and a great teacher, but he constantly apologizes for the work we have to do for his class. What is that about? The whole point of college is reading, writing, and going to class. That's what full-time students do.
That soft attitude that apologizes for giving work is exactly why students get away with not doing any work. You don't have to do the reading if you know the professor won't call on you unless you raise your hand. You don't have to worry about answering questions incorrectly if you know the professor will sugar-coat his correction and move on. ("Well, that's one way of thinking about it but does anyone have a different idea?") You can BS and the professor won't call you on it.
I've had moments when I considered a teaching career. Students would hate me for calling on them randomly and making sure they do their work, but I think I'd be a good teacher. My Spanish teachers in high school were like that: they expected us to do a lot of work, they called on us on the spot, and they weren't always nice about correcting us. I hated it sometimes but I also learned a lot.
I know in college your work is your own responsibility, but I would be delighted if professors called out students for not doing their work.
"What do you mean you don't know the answer? Did you do the reading?"
"No..."
"Then see to it that you do for the next class." Then the professor randomly calls on someone else. Repeat until he finds someone who knows the correct answer.
Keep doing that to students and they'll learn to do their work so they're not embarrassed in front of the whole class. I know I'm a little old-fashioned in the way I think students and teachers should be, but this easy-going attitude drives me crazy. People wonder why the U.S. is falling behind other countries in education. The reason is we have this education system that doesn't hold students accountable. We're more concerned with pleasing people than making sure students learn.
That soft attitude that apologizes for giving work is exactly why students get away with not doing any work. You don't have to do the reading if you know the professor won't call on you unless you raise your hand. You don't have to worry about answering questions incorrectly if you know the professor will sugar-coat his correction and move on. ("Well, that's one way of thinking about it but does anyone have a different idea?") You can BS and the professor won't call you on it.
I've had moments when I considered a teaching career. Students would hate me for calling on them randomly and making sure they do their work, but I think I'd be a good teacher. My Spanish teachers in high school were like that: they expected us to do a lot of work, they called on us on the spot, and they weren't always nice about correcting us. I hated it sometimes but I also learned a lot.
I know in college your work is your own responsibility, but I would be delighted if professors called out students for not doing their work.
"What do you mean you don't know the answer? Did you do the reading?"
"No..."
"Then see to it that you do for the next class." Then the professor randomly calls on someone else. Repeat until he finds someone who knows the correct answer.
Keep doing that to students and they'll learn to do their work so they're not embarrassed in front of the whole class. I know I'm a little old-fashioned in the way I think students and teachers should be, but this easy-going attitude drives me crazy. People wonder why the U.S. is falling behind other countries in education. The reason is we have this education system that doesn't hold students accountable. We're more concerned with pleasing people than making sure students learn.
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Content Analysis Analysis
I'm taking my senior seminar for Communication and Media studies this semester and as part of the course, each student has to do her own research paper/project. Four of the seminar students (including me) are doing a content analysis where we code some type of media content. Three of us are looking at TV shows and one is looking at video game game play. We have to code our own projects and at least one other student's project. I'm looking at the portrayals of characters according to their age in Nickelodeon programs and I coded the video game project and two episodes of Top Chef for one of the other content analyses in the class.
The funny thing is, comm students get a lot of flak for being comm students. We have it "easy" because "all we do" is watch videos and talk about them in class. Most people don't take communication and media studies seriously, so likewise our work is not considered serious or important.
With content analyses, though, you have to pay so much attention to what you're coding. You have to watch for details and you have to take careful notes about what the analysis is looking for. Then after you spend hours coding episodes and collect notes from students who coded the same content, you have to somehow make sense of what you have. You have to find a pattern, make an argument, or organize support for your idea. All of this on top of regular course readings, essays, and exams.
Maybe it's because I'm at a small liberal arts college, but there's definitely a hierarchy of majors that I see. The natural sciences get the most respect and prestige because they have three-hour labs and independent research projects. The theater students spend hours and hours rehearsing so of course they're working hard. The communication students read a lot and spend some time watching movies and TV.
See how it sounds bad when I say it that way? But that's the way most people think of those majors. Everyone watches TV and browses the internet, so it can't be important that we study them, but the fact that everyone is exposed to and uses media is the exact reason we should pay attention to and understand all aspects of the media.
The funny thing is, comm students get a lot of flak for being comm students. We have it "easy" because "all we do" is watch videos and talk about them in class. Most people don't take communication and media studies seriously, so likewise our work is not considered serious or important.
With content analyses, though, you have to pay so much attention to what you're coding. You have to watch for details and you have to take careful notes about what the analysis is looking for. Then after you spend hours coding episodes and collect notes from students who coded the same content, you have to somehow make sense of what you have. You have to find a pattern, make an argument, or organize support for your idea. All of this on top of regular course readings, essays, and exams.
Maybe it's because I'm at a small liberal arts college, but there's definitely a hierarchy of majors that I see. The natural sciences get the most respect and prestige because they have three-hour labs and independent research projects. The theater students spend hours and hours rehearsing so of course they're working hard. The communication students read a lot and spend some time watching movies and TV.
See how it sounds bad when I say it that way? But that's the way most people think of those majors. Everyone watches TV and browses the internet, so it can't be important that we study them, but the fact that everyone is exposed to and uses media is the exact reason we should pay attention to and understand all aspects of the media.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
In response to Dan Brown's Open Letter to Educators
Dan Brown (pogobat on YouTube) posted a video where he discusses the problems he sees with institutionalized education, especially at the university level. I disagree with some of what he said, and that's good. Few YouTube videos make me think about their content enough to write a full-out blog post. Here's Dan's video and my response below it.
As a second-semester college junior, I understand some of Dan's frustrations. I've sat in classes where professors lecture endless facts that we're expected to regurgitate on the exam. I hate lesson plans that rely on PowerPoint slides. Most of those classes, though, are introductory courses. They lay the groundwork for more in-depth studying. You have to get through the boring, mindless notetaking before you can get to the more interesting parts of your discipline. I've had many more classes that are discussion-based, where the 15 to 25 students in the class are expected to contribute as much as the professor.
A big difference with the classes I've taken is that I attend a small liberal arts college. By small, I mean 2,500 undergraduate students--not anywhere near the 18,500 undergrads at the University of Nebraska (Lincoln, where I assume Dan went). Smaller size means smaller classes. More interaction with professors and other students. Your major matters too. I imagine I would have much thicker, fuller notebooks thanks to hours of lecture if I were a biology or chemistry major. I study media and communication, however, so we read and watch a lot and then talk about it. My class materials are stacks of scholarly articles with my scribbled notes and comments in the margins.
I agree that colleges and universities do need to change in some respects. Dan talks about the availability of so much information via the internet. He says it's no longer necessary to test students on memorized information because all of it is readily available online. In some ways, he's right. There's really no reason for me to know every nation's capital city when I can Google them if need be. It's one thing, however, to look up specific information and another to look up everything. Looking up some information all the time instead of memorizing it isn't practical. I can look up the first 20 digits of pi if necessary, but there's no reason for me not to know pi equals 3.14 for everyday mathematics. Many people in Dan's video comments have said that there's no way doctors can operate without memorizing facts and procedures, and they're absolutely correct. YouTube tutorials are good for learning how to play a song on the guitar but not for performing surgery.
I don't see memorization vs. the availability of information as the most important issue when compared to other aspects of the university system. Publishing companies continue to raise the prices of textbooks without making significant changes to new editions. Grade inflation in the U.S. encourages mediocre qualities of work. Engaged, interested students can get as much out of their college education as they put in, but many students drift through, doing the minimum amount of work required to receive a degree. There are problems on both sides: how universities are structured as well as students' attitudes toward their education. I agree that changes need to be made, but what, specifically, needs to happen?
Dan says educational institutions today need to reinvent themselves or the world will move on without them. Education needs to fundamentally change and go beyond simply using e-mail, online databases, and Blackboard. But he doesn't say what should be done. Online courses? Already in session. Using YouTube for class demonstrations and examples? Happening. I'm all for new teaching strategies, but what other way is there to learn information than to study it? There are different learning styles, yes, like visual, auditory, tactile...but how do you reinvent those? Or where do you go instead? Scenes from The Matrix come to mind, directly uploading knowledge into human brains...
I agree that change is necessary, but I don't envision an overhaul of the system. Change will be gradual because despite its problems, a college education is still worth the time and effort.
Assuming you live on campus, college offers you a unique time to learn. You don't have the distractions of home and family. You've moved past high school drama (hopefully). You have new sources of intellectual stimulation all over campus, both in and out of the classroom. You dedicate as much time as you want to your studies and choose how much you get involved with other aspects of campus life such as sports, clubs, and organizations.
College is a time to grow as a person, not only as a student. Nothing on the internet can simulate four years of living with thousands of your peers. Besides classes, you're in charge of your entire schedule: when you do your work, sleep, eat, do laundry, and hang out with friends. You learn to interact with people from all kinds of backgrounds. You use your time as you see fit and with any luck, still love learning after graduation.
There's room for improvement, obviously, but we don't need to (and shouldn't) scrap the university system.
As a second-semester college junior, I understand some of Dan's frustrations. I've sat in classes where professors lecture endless facts that we're expected to regurgitate on the exam. I hate lesson plans that rely on PowerPoint slides. Most of those classes, though, are introductory courses. They lay the groundwork for more in-depth studying. You have to get through the boring, mindless notetaking before you can get to the more interesting parts of your discipline. I've had many more classes that are discussion-based, where the 15 to 25 students in the class are expected to contribute as much as the professor.
A big difference with the classes I've taken is that I attend a small liberal arts college. By small, I mean 2,500 undergraduate students--not anywhere near the 18,500 undergrads at the University of Nebraska (Lincoln, where I assume Dan went). Smaller size means smaller classes. More interaction with professors and other students. Your major matters too. I imagine I would have much thicker, fuller notebooks thanks to hours of lecture if I were a biology or chemistry major. I study media and communication, however, so we read and watch a lot and then talk about it. My class materials are stacks of scholarly articles with my scribbled notes and comments in the margins.
I agree that colleges and universities do need to change in some respects. Dan talks about the availability of so much information via the internet. He says it's no longer necessary to test students on memorized information because all of it is readily available online. In some ways, he's right. There's really no reason for me to know every nation's capital city when I can Google them if need be. It's one thing, however, to look up specific information and another to look up everything. Looking up some information all the time instead of memorizing it isn't practical. I can look up the first 20 digits of pi if necessary, but there's no reason for me not to know pi equals 3.14 for everyday mathematics. Many people in Dan's video comments have said that there's no way doctors can operate without memorizing facts and procedures, and they're absolutely correct. YouTube tutorials are good for learning how to play a song on the guitar but not for performing surgery.
I don't see memorization vs. the availability of information as the most important issue when compared to other aspects of the university system. Publishing companies continue to raise the prices of textbooks without making significant changes to new editions. Grade inflation in the U.S. encourages mediocre qualities of work. Engaged, interested students can get as much out of their college education as they put in, but many students drift through, doing the minimum amount of work required to receive a degree. There are problems on both sides: how universities are structured as well as students' attitudes toward their education. I agree that changes need to be made, but what, specifically, needs to happen?
Dan says educational institutions today need to reinvent themselves or the world will move on without them. Education needs to fundamentally change and go beyond simply using e-mail, online databases, and Blackboard. But he doesn't say what should be done. Online courses? Already in session. Using YouTube for class demonstrations and examples? Happening. I'm all for new teaching strategies, but what other way is there to learn information than to study it? There are different learning styles, yes, like visual, auditory, tactile...but how do you reinvent those? Or where do you go instead? Scenes from The Matrix come to mind, directly uploading knowledge into human brains...
I agree that change is necessary, but I don't envision an overhaul of the system. Change will be gradual because despite its problems, a college education is still worth the time and effort.
Assuming you live on campus, college offers you a unique time to learn. You don't have the distractions of home and family. You've moved past high school drama (hopefully). You have new sources of intellectual stimulation all over campus, both in and out of the classroom. You dedicate as much time as you want to your studies and choose how much you get involved with other aspects of campus life such as sports, clubs, and organizations.
College is a time to grow as a person, not only as a student. Nothing on the internet can simulate four years of living with thousands of your peers. Besides classes, you're in charge of your entire schedule: when you do your work, sleep, eat, do laundry, and hang out with friends. You learn to interact with people from all kinds of backgrounds. You use your time as you see fit and with any luck, still love learning after graduation.
There's room for improvement, obviously, but we don't need to (and shouldn't) scrap the university system.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)