Windy by the harbor
Boston Tea Party: 2010
By the convention center
Heeey!
At least I'll have my degree...
Friday, March 26, 2010
Boston!
Windy by the harborBoston Tea Party: 2010By the convention centerHeeey!At least I'll have my degree...
Vancouver!
Just noticed that Brittany's camera totally has the wrong date... This was definitely in the middle of March!
Me and the ladies!
To the airport!
The Titanic room of Simon Fraser U
In Seattle
See it? It says SAHE! And then someone in a green coat...
At the park
Granville Island
The Cat's
Roomies!
Me and the ladies!
To the airport!
The Titanic room of Simon Fraser U
In Seattle
See it? It says SAHE! And then someone in a green coat...
At the park
Granville Island
The Cat's
Roomies!
Monday, October 12, 2009
Delightfully Overwhelmed
I have a lot on my plate with school, work, and trying to have some semblance of a life.
Grad school is just as hard as everyone told me though I didn't believe it at the time. They also said that I'd love it, and I do, but no, I didn't believe that one either.
Work is great. A pain in the butt and a lot of work, but I love it as well. 25 hrs/week is a lie. A big, fat lie!
I'm happy with my program thus far. It feels like a fair bit of hazing, but I truly love the things I've been learning and the homework and papers I've done.
My APA may suck, but I'm learning and that's what matters to me. I'm really done with grades and points and GPAs (I say this now, haha...). This is for me, not you, professors. And no, I will not say sorry.
My one hold up right now is actually getting around to doing my readings and homework. I love it, but sometimes I'm just too stubborn to get down to it. I blame this on coming straight from undergrad and I take absolutely no ownership over this problem. At all. Just kidding! I know it's something I need to work on...
Grad school is just as hard as everyone told me though I didn't believe it at the time. They also said that I'd love it, and I do, but no, I didn't believe that one either.
Work is great. A pain in the butt and a lot of work, but I love it as well. 25 hrs/week is a lie. A big, fat lie!
I'm happy with my program thus far. It feels like a fair bit of hazing, but I truly love the things I've been learning and the homework and papers I've done.
My APA may suck, but I'm learning and that's what matters to me. I'm really done with grades and points and GPAs (I say this now, haha...). This is for me, not you, professors. And no, I will not say sorry.
My one hold up right now is actually getting around to doing my readings and homework. I love it, but sometimes I'm just too stubborn to get down to it. I blame this on coming straight from undergrad and I take absolutely no ownership over this problem. At all. Just kidding! I know it's something I need to work on...
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Conduct
I've been holding Conduct hearings for the past few weeks. Conduct hearings are for when students, mainly the ones who live in my hall, get themselves into not so hot situations and then make choices that get them into trouble. Then they meet with me.
I was expecting students who wouldn't talk with me or students who were just jerks, but I've been delightfully surprised thus far. They've been open to talking and they've fairly honest. Knock on wood.
I start off letting them know how the conduct process works and how I'd like to structure the conversation. I go over their file with them to make sure everything is correct (name, id number, etc...) and then for the first half hour, I chat with them about high school, CSU, the hall, their classes, and what they're involved with on campus.
After all that, we go into what happened that brought them into my office. I ask them to go back to their last meal before the event and walk me through their night. Afterward, I explain that I need to decide whether they were responsible or not responsible for the situation.
As I've only heard cases around alcohol, I usually ask if:
1. they had been drinking (usually they've already told me this earlier in the conversation) and,
2. if they hadn't, were they aware that they were in the presence of alcohol.
The university does recognize a difference in severity but not a difference in responsibility.
They usually answer the "were you responsible" question themselves. The next question I ask them is how involved were you in your responsibility? Were you pounding shots? Or were you just hanging out with friends one Thursday night but didn't drink because you have an 8am class the next day?
I have actually had people claim responsibility at the end of the conversation and say, "Yeah, I was responsible... I can see that... I wasn't, like, super responsible and drinking in the dorms, but I new it was there and I didn't leave." Then I ask them to show me on a scale what kind of consequence they think is appropriate for them.
|-----|----------|---------------|--------|-------|
A...B........C..............D......E......F
A. Warning
B. Warning and some extra sanctions
C. General Disciplinary Probation
D. Probation
E. Suspension
F. Expulsion
They let me know where they think they stand, and they're usually pretty close to what I had in mind.
After I inform them of my general intentions, I let them know that I'll be speaking with the other people from the event and once I am done, they'll get a letter with the results. Questions?
Easy-peezy-lemon-squeezey, right? We'll see how the rest of the year goes...
I was expecting students who wouldn't talk with me or students who were just jerks, but I've been delightfully surprised thus far. They've been open to talking and they've fairly honest. Knock on wood.
I start off letting them know how the conduct process works and how I'd like to structure the conversation. I go over their file with them to make sure everything is correct (name, id number, etc...) and then for the first half hour, I chat with them about high school, CSU, the hall, their classes, and what they're involved with on campus.
After all that, we go into what happened that brought them into my office. I ask them to go back to their last meal before the event and walk me through their night. Afterward, I explain that I need to decide whether they were responsible or not responsible for the situation.
As I've only heard cases around alcohol, I usually ask if:
1. they had been drinking (usually they've already told me this earlier in the conversation) and,
2. if they hadn't, were they aware that they were in the presence of alcohol.
The university does recognize a difference in severity but not a difference in responsibility.
They usually answer the "were you responsible" question themselves. The next question I ask them is how involved were you in your responsibility? Were you pounding shots? Or were you just hanging out with friends one Thursday night but didn't drink because you have an 8am class the next day?
I have actually had people claim responsibility at the end of the conversation and say, "Yeah, I was responsible... I can see that... I wasn't, like, super responsible and drinking in the dorms, but I new it was there and I didn't leave." Then I ask them to show me on a scale what kind of consequence they think is appropriate for them.
|-----|----------|---------------|--------|-------|
A...B........C..............D......E......F
A. Warning
B. Warning and some extra sanctions
C. General Disciplinary Probation
D. Probation
E. Suspension
F. Expulsion
They let me know where they think they stand, and they're usually pretty close to what I had in mind.
After I inform them of my general intentions, I let them know that I'll be speaking with the other people from the event and once I am done, they'll get a letter with the results. Questions?
Easy-peezy-lemon-squeezey, right? We'll see how the rest of the year goes...
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Student Development Theory
ARG! I love theory and I hate it at the same time.
I see where the authors (Chickering, Erikson, Marcia, Josselson...) of the theories we've been studying are coming from (the 1950s) but at the same time it is so intensely annoying reading a book that claims these theories were drawn from "students" or "people" as a whole when they really mean "white, upper-middle class, heterosexual, able-bodied males."
Yes, the theories can help those outside of that "norm," it's just difficult to hear it as if it were all encompassing, thorough reseach when only a select group was studied.
Or when the book I'm reading (which, albeit is very old and out of touch) says something along the lines of "some women have glorified childhood aspirations such as finding the cure to cancer or becoming an ambassador to Russia, but these women soon resign themselves to more realistic goals." Excuse me but... WTF?! Nay, to that I say excuse you.
It really gets to me that I've been spoonfed these paradigms that consistantly leave out the under-privileged. Look at our school textbooks from childhood. World history is called just that yet it only includes the Western world. And what happens if a student actually has a question about the non-Western world? Sure, go read the little section about Asia at the end of the book that no classroom ever gets to. Sorry.
Whoa, don't be so sensitive! It's totally not racist in at all. Take a course focused on non-Western history, this is "regular" world history. Really, you should be greatful we even have a course on Asians, it's not like we have a course on white people. Wait...
Can you tell I'm fired up?
But then I take a step back and I start thinking, will the work I do today be seen as out of touch, sexist, racist, heterosexist, etc. by the following generations? Can I really label others as discriminatory and discount them if I want those who come after me to show me patience and guidence when I lag behind the times? It's already starting.
I see where the authors (Chickering, Erikson, Marcia, Josselson...) of the theories we've been studying are coming from (the 1950s) but at the same time it is so intensely annoying reading a book that claims these theories were drawn from "students" or "people" as a whole when they really mean "white, upper-middle class, heterosexual, able-bodied males."
Yes, the theories can help those outside of that "norm," it's just difficult to hear it as if it were all encompassing, thorough reseach when only a select group was studied.
Or when the book I'm reading (which, albeit is very old and out of touch) says something along the lines of "some women have glorified childhood aspirations such as finding the cure to cancer or becoming an ambassador to Russia, but these women soon resign themselves to more realistic goals." Excuse me but... WTF?! Nay, to that I say excuse you.
It really gets to me that I've been spoonfed these paradigms that consistantly leave out the under-privileged. Look at our school textbooks from childhood. World history is called just that yet it only includes the Western world. And what happens if a student actually has a question about the non-Western world? Sure, go read the little section about Asia at the end of the book that no classroom ever gets to. Sorry.
Whoa, don't be so sensitive! It's totally not racist in at all. Take a course focused on non-Western history, this is "regular" world history. Really, you should be greatful we even have a course on Asians, it's not like we have a course on white people. Wait...
Can you tell I'm fired up?
But then I take a step back and I start thinking, will the work I do today be seen as out of touch, sexist, racist, heterosexist, etc. by the following generations? Can I really label others as discriminatory and discount them if I want those who come after me to show me patience and guidence when I lag behind the times? It's already starting.
From Summer to Fall
Jared, a fellow 1st year SAHE student and ARD, and I:
Maribeth, Tryg, Paul, myself, Jimmy, Miriam, Khouri, and Chris:
By the Poudre River:
At the local county fair with Tryg:
Maribeth, Tryg, Paul, myself, Jimmy, Miriam, Khouri, and Chris:
By the Poudre River:
At the local county fair with Tryg:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)