Monday, March 25, 2013
GT Seminar I: Second 20% Project
My first 20% project taught me a lot. From the basics of app building, to making an ethical decision, my first 20% project truly made me a better, more well rounded person. So, for my second 20% project, my wish is to broaden my horizons even more. I want to go healthy. I already consider myself a pretty healthy person, but I want to go completely healthy, and see how I feel about it. I'm going to convince people that eating healthy doesn't have to taste bad! However, with all plans, obtacles may follow, and mine include not being able to make the perfect healthy snack. I hope to make a light snack that will be delicious and nutrituous, and it's really important that my snack goes as a success. Some people I could consult include the athletic trainer at northern, the nutrition constultant at my parent's gym, and other people in the nutrition/health fields. I believe this 20% project will help me, because when I grow up I want to do something in sports medicine. I am so excited for this 20% project!
Sunday, March 10, 2013
GT Seminar I: Terri Schiavo Case Study
Throughout this unit on bioethics, I've learned a lot. We learned a lot of different ways to look at the situation of Terri Schiavo, and have learned almost everything there is to know about this case in general. This case began in 1998 and ended after her death in 2005. After learning all about the Terri Schiavo case, I've decided that I do agree with the husband, but not the actions of the husband. He provided some very unnecessary actions, and I'm not sure his heart was in the right place, but in the end, I guess I was on his side.
So, after learning all about this case, I do believe that the decision to disconnect Terri Schiavo from life-support was justified. I think this, because while she still is a human, I don't think she should be considered a person. I define a human as somebody who is alive and has DNA, but I describe a person as somebody who communicates and has interactions with other people. To be considered a person, I think people should be able to do what they want in life and make decisions for themselves. So, Terri is a human, but not a person. However, this argument can become very controversial.
There are a few known facts that I found very interesting while researching this case. I searched if Terri was able to feel pain while she was unconscious, but I got a few different answers. Some sources said yes, some said no, and some sources even said she was able to feel some pain, but not all. Like this question, my answers were very diverse on most of the questions I asked. Though, I did find some other facts that were very odd. For one, her husband had completely moved on and created a new family, yet still wouldn't give up guardianship. Why? Was it for the money or did he still love this unconscious woman? Also, not long after her injury, he melted down her rings and made one for himself. Why would he do this? He just seems very odd and a little messed up. Though, in the end, while he believes this for reason different from mine, we both believe that taking Terri Schiavo off of life-support was justified.
When you look at this dilemma, you can view it from a few different perspectives. I first chose RIGHT TO LIFE: Does Terri Schiavo have the right to be kept alive? Does every person have a "right to life"? Obviously, Terri does have the RIGHT to be kept alive, but SHOULD she? I do believe she, like everybody, has the right to life, but in a case like hers, I don't think she should. She cannot do the things a normal person can do, she can't keep stable relationships with people, and really can't do anything. Then, you're brought into the QUALITY OF LIFE questions: Is her life still worth living? I say no, because of all the things she cannot do. I do feel bad saying this, but I just don't see the justification in keeping her alive. It's been so many years, and she obviously wasn't going to get better and just wake up one day, so shouldn't the time wasted on her be used for somebody that actually has a chance of being cured? It's sad to say, but she's a waste of time, money, and feelings. She's affecting so many people and letting people down. She obviously can't help it, but she is taking up a huge chunk of everyone's life. It's hard to say, but I don't believe Terri Schiavo's life is even worth living.
I also chose AUTONOMY: Who should decide for Terri Schiavo? When and why should other people decide for me? When I look at these questions, I immediately think the Schindlers should be the legal guardians, since they've known Terri the longest, and they are her parents! However, Micheal, her husband, is the court-appointed guardian, so he has complete control. I think people should only get to decide for me when I can no longer decide for myself, and in this case, Terri couldn't. So, while I do agree she should have somebody else making decisions for her, I disagree with who it was making the decisions.
SOURCES:
http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/schiavo-facts/
http://www.miami.edu/index.php/ethics/projects/schiavo/schiavo_timeline
http://www.blogsforterri.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_Schiavo_case
So, after learning all about this case, I do believe that the decision to disconnect Terri Schiavo from life-support was justified. I think this, because while she still is a human, I don't think she should be considered a person. I define a human as somebody who is alive and has DNA, but I describe a person as somebody who communicates and has interactions with other people. To be considered a person, I think people should be able to do what they want in life and make decisions for themselves. So, Terri is a human, but not a person. However, this argument can become very controversial.
There are a few known facts that I found very interesting while researching this case. I searched if Terri was able to feel pain while she was unconscious, but I got a few different answers. Some sources said yes, some said no, and some sources even said she was able to feel some pain, but not all. Like this question, my answers were very diverse on most of the questions I asked. Though, I did find some other facts that were very odd. For one, her husband had completely moved on and created a new family, yet still wouldn't give up guardianship. Why? Was it for the money or did he still love this unconscious woman? Also, not long after her injury, he melted down her rings and made one for himself. Why would he do this? He just seems very odd and a little messed up. Though, in the end, while he believes this for reason different from mine, we both believe that taking Terri Schiavo off of life-support was justified.
When you look at this dilemma, you can view it from a few different perspectives. I first chose RIGHT TO LIFE: Does Terri Schiavo have the right to be kept alive? Does every person have a "right to life"? Obviously, Terri does have the RIGHT to be kept alive, but SHOULD she? I do believe she, like everybody, has the right to life, but in a case like hers, I don't think she should. She cannot do the things a normal person can do, she can't keep stable relationships with people, and really can't do anything. Then, you're brought into the QUALITY OF LIFE questions: Is her life still worth living? I say no, because of all the things she cannot do. I do feel bad saying this, but I just don't see the justification in keeping her alive. It's been so many years, and she obviously wasn't going to get better and just wake up one day, so shouldn't the time wasted on her be used for somebody that actually has a chance of being cured? It's sad to say, but she's a waste of time, money, and feelings. She's affecting so many people and letting people down. She obviously can't help it, but she is taking up a huge chunk of everyone's life. It's hard to say, but I don't believe Terri Schiavo's life is even worth living.
I also chose AUTONOMY: Who should decide for Terri Schiavo? When and why should other people decide for me? When I look at these questions, I immediately think the Schindlers should be the legal guardians, since they've known Terri the longest, and they are her parents! However, Micheal, her husband, is the court-appointed guardian, so he has complete control. I think people should only get to decide for me when I can no longer decide for myself, and in this case, Terri couldn't. So, while I do agree she should have somebody else making decisions for her, I disagree with who it was making the decisions.
SOURCES:
http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/schiavo-facts/
http://www.miami.edu/index.php/ethics/projects/schiavo/schiavo_timeline
http://www.blogsforterri.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terri_Schiavo_case
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
GT Seminar I: The DNA Dilemma: A Test That Could Change Your Life
After reading the TIME article, "The DNA Dilemma: A Test That Could Change Your Life," I feel like I have a different perspective of DNA testing, and what doctors reveal to their patients. The article was all about how when some doctors are doing genetic testing for a certain disease, they sometimes find different diseases as well. Doctors follow a "do no harm" policy, and weigh the pros and cons to ensure they are making the right decision. Sometimes, the right decision can also be the wrong decision.
Some parents say they want to know everything, and some say they want to know nothing. People are very different with these choices. Most want to know everything about their children, which I understand. However, they don't inform their kids. How can you keep something so big from your children? I feel that as soon as they are old enough to comprehend the diseases that they are diagnosed with, they should be told of what's going on.
As a doctor, while I understand their perspective, I disagree. When reading this article, I read a story about a doctor who didn't tell a family of their newborn's fate of dementia at age 40. His reasoning, was that if he spoke up, they'd never be able to get health insurance for him. I do understand their reasoning, but I disagree. While it may sound like he's doing them a favor, he's really not. What about when the kid starts developing symptoms. Will the original doctor be blamed? Could it have been avoided by early detection? I think everyone has the right to know their own body.
When it comes to me, I am pretty different than most people. I'm not that scared of dying. I feel that when my time comes (hopefully a long time down the road) it should come. I want to know about any diseases or complications that I may encounter at any point in my life. It's my body, so I feel I should know. For example, if I were diagnosed with a disease that would succumb me withing the next month, I'd know what to do. I'd be vacationing, skydiving, and doing anything that I want. I want to know when I'll die and any complications, so I can live my life to its fullest potential. I may sound repetitive, but it's my body, and I feel I shouldn't be oblivious to what's going on inside my own body.
Some parents say they want to know everything, and some say they want to know nothing. People are very different with these choices. Most want to know everything about their children, which I understand. However, they don't inform their kids. How can you keep something so big from your children? I feel that as soon as they are old enough to comprehend the diseases that they are diagnosed with, they should be told of what's going on.
As a doctor, while I understand their perspective, I disagree. When reading this article, I read a story about a doctor who didn't tell a family of their newborn's fate of dementia at age 40. His reasoning, was that if he spoke up, they'd never be able to get health insurance for him. I do understand their reasoning, but I disagree. While it may sound like he's doing them a favor, he's really not. What about when the kid starts developing symptoms. Will the original doctor be blamed? Could it have been avoided by early detection? I think everyone has the right to know their own body.
When it comes to me, I am pretty different than most people. I'm not that scared of dying. I feel that when my time comes (hopefully a long time down the road) it should come. I want to know about any diseases or complications that I may encounter at any point in my life. It's my body, so I feel I should know. For example, if I were diagnosed with a disease that would succumb me withing the next month, I'd know what to do. I'd be vacationing, skydiving, and doing anything that I want. I want to know when I'll die and any complications, so I can live my life to its fullest potential. I may sound repetitive, but it's my body, and I feel I shouldn't be oblivious to what's going on inside my own body.
Wednesday, January 2, 2013
GT Seminar 1: Reflections and Resolutions
This past year of 2012 was odd. Everyone had gone on and on about how great it would be, but it turned out pretty ordinary. It was just like 2011, 2010, and all past years. I learned a lot of things. The biggest thing was that we're alive. "2012" wasn't real, and the world didn't end! But I learned some things about me. Like the fact that I am becoming more and more interested in my future everyday. Over this past year I went from not having my priorities straight, to becoming somebody who cares about everything. I've gotten better at keeping up with my schoolwork, and I've been working harder. I've also started practicing even more with softball. I've literally gone from a week of 25 hours of softball, to a week of 40 hours of softball. I've been working hard and am using my time wisely.
Throughout 2013, I would like to resolve my attitude. I want to be more positive. I feel like I tend to not give things a chance and be very closed minded. So, I'm going to think, talk, and feel positive from now on. I also resolve not to take the easy way out anymore. I want to spend more time on homework, more time on softball, and more time with family. So, I resolve to not do things quickly just to hang out with my friends or go on my laptop. I want to get smarter, healthier, and happier this year.
GT Seminar 1: The Ethics of Social Media After Death
After watching Adam Ostrow's TED talk, "After your final status update" and reading Cyberspace When You're Dead from the New York Times Magazine, I am able to form a valid opinion about our ongoing discussion of the ethics of social media after death. Adam Ostrow asks, "What happens to our online personality after we die? Could it...live on?" This seems to be the dramatic question that started it all. In the beginning, it probably seemed like a stupid question, but now that social media is becoming a huge part of our lives, the question becomes more and more realistic. In my opinion, it definetely could live on, but really, should it? I mean, just think about it for a minute. When you die, I believe that your social media should die with you. I even have a few reasons to support my belief.
For one, I think that social media is your own. So, if the social media account is yours. It should be run by you and only you. Once you're gone, you're gone, and there should be no trickery as to if you are dead or alive. I completely disagree with blogs and accounts that can have memorials or tributes. While it can be argued as a "nice" idea, it's a little creepy. It's like making them seem alive even when they're dead. That's a threat to our generations to come. Imagine a population who didn't even fear death.
Another reason, is space. Especially on counts like twitter and instagram, usernames are crucial. There are only so many possible 12 character usernames available. What happens when they are all used up? Do they just delete them all and start over? What would happen? So, once you're gone, I believe that the account should be deleted to free up space and keep these social medias going strong.
My last reason is that though I disagree with a social media life after death, I think that when a person passes away, anybody that followed or friended that person should have the ability to download their profile. Almost like a personal memory, not one that the entire world can see. I think this, because even though I don't agree with the memorial idea, I don't think it's fair to say goodbye forever.
When I die, I will want my social media accounts deleted.
For one, I think that social media is your own. So, if the social media account is yours. It should be run by you and only you. Once you're gone, you're gone, and there should be no trickery as to if you are dead or alive. I completely disagree with blogs and accounts that can have memorials or tributes. While it can be argued as a "nice" idea, it's a little creepy. It's like making them seem alive even when they're dead. That's a threat to our generations to come. Imagine a population who didn't even fear death.
Another reason, is space. Especially on counts like twitter and instagram, usernames are crucial. There are only so many possible 12 character usernames available. What happens when they are all used up? Do they just delete them all and start over? What would happen? So, once you're gone, I believe that the account should be deleted to free up space and keep these social medias going strong.
My last reason is that though I disagree with a social media life after death, I think that when a person passes away, anybody that followed or friended that person should have the ability to download their profile. Almost like a personal memory, not one that the entire world can see. I think this, because even though I don't agree with the memorial idea, I don't think it's fair to say goodbye forever.
When I die, I will want my social media accounts deleted.
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
GT Seminar 1: 20% Project
For my first 20% project of the year, my plan is to analyze the history of softball, the famous players, and the physics of the game. When analyzing the history, I want to learn about how it started, how it became popular, when it became popular, and what were the original rules like. Then, when I take a look at the famous player of the game, I want to learn their stats, their life before and after softball careers, and even how they were discovered. Finally, when I look at the pyshics, I'm going to carefully analyze the top pitcher on our team. I want to calculate the velocity and measurements of every movement, and how it impacts every pitch. Then, I will also take a look at our power hitter and analyze the angle of her bat at every movement and how that impacts her force from the bat to the ball. During this project, I will be able to consult Jennie Finch, Natasha Watley, Crystal Bustos, two different batting coaches, and a pitching coach who will help me with calculations of the movements.
I chose to do my 20% project on softball, because softball is pretty much my life. From dawn to dusk I'm on that diamond, and there is nowhere else I would rather be. Being in the dugout, it's like a home for me. So, I figured it would make the most sense or me to research and dedicate my time for a sport that is not only my passion, but my entire life. I have calculated in the past that I play softball for about 30 hours a week, and honestly, I wish I could play more. I'm very excited to learn more about this passion of mine.
Here is my 20% Project Pitch video from Animodo.
I chose to do my 20% project on softball, because softball is pretty much my life. From dawn to dusk I'm on that diamond, and there is nowhere else I would rather be. Being in the dugout, it's like a home for me. So, I figured it would make the most sense or me to research and dedicate my time for a sport that is not only my passion, but my entire life. I have calculated in the past that I play softball for about 30 hours a week, and honestly, I wish I could play more. I'm very excited to learn more about this passion of mine.
Friday, October 12, 2012
GT Seminar 1: Chris Langan: "The Smartest Man in America"
Personally, I feel Chris Langan is not successful. To me, success means to excell at something and to get the job done. Langan had so much potential. Being the "smartest man in the world," you would have expected him to be a little wiser in his choices. Langan scored a perfect score on his SAT tests. With an incredible score like that, Langan should be helping out the country. He has so much intelligence and he is basically wasting it. However, Chris Langan does not have a bad life. He has a wife and owns/lives on a horse ranch in Missouri. This doesn't sound like a terrible life! It was just not lived to its fullest potential. Chris Langan has so much more to offer, but because of his bad luck in the past, I feel the need to call him unsuccessful. According to my definition of success, Langan does not reach it. In the dictionary, however, success is defined as the accomplishment of an aim or purpose. In Langan's life, it didnt seem as though there was any real purpose. He did not apply himself as much as he could have, and did not accomplish any purposes. Therefore, I believe that though Chris Langan is "the smartest man in the world," he was not a very successful man.
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
GT Seminar I: The Kindergarten Debate
After reading this article, I can easily compare Wang and Aamodt's findings to those of Malcolm Glawell's findings in chapter one of The Outliers. I can compare both of these viewpoints, because they both believe that birthdates are a key factor towards your success. For example, in The Outliers, Gladwell goes to talk about how hockey players born right after the cutoff date have the best chances of going professional. He states that this is because the kids born in January obviously have had more time to mature than those born in December of the same year. In the article about Kindergarten, they frequently mention the term, "redshirting." Redshirting is when you delay a students participation in school to have him "a leg up" on his future classmates. Personally, I find myself agreeing mostly with Wang and Aamodt's theory that starting something late can actually be a disadvantage. Children should start all activities as soon as possible. In my case, I would rather work with kids who start off as more talented than me. When people are better than me at anything, I strive to beat them. It's just in my competitive nature. I bring this characteristic with me whether I'm in the classroom or on the softball field. Being the younger kid can end up being better for you, and can help to push you to reach your own goals. I truly believe the words Wang and Aamodt have written; and this article is pretty interesting to me. In the end, you can say that I am a supporter of Wang and Aamodt's theory, that starting something late can actually be a disadvantage.
Monday, September 24, 2012
GT Seminar 1: All About Being Gifted
I guess you could say I'm gifted. I get straight A's, and still manage time to play travel softball, tennis, and even have time to hang out with friends. Concepts come easy to me, and I always look forward to learning something new. I guess you could say I'm gifted.
According to this website, the term "gifted and talented", means students, children, or youth who give evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who needs services or activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities. Luckily we do have a G&T program in our school.
To me, being gifted and talented means that you quickly understand concepts, and are very open to learning new ideas. No matter how it is written, being gifted is something special, I believe, and if one is gifted, they should embrace it, and use their gift to its fullest advantage.
Being gifted, however, has some ups and downs. Some pros to being gifted include having a higher learning maturity, you are considered "smart", and certain lessons can come easier to you. This can make it easier for some students to get better grades. Though, being gifted can have some cons. Gifted children receive a lot of pressure. In my life, I know that I am extremely pressured! I am always compared to my younger brother. Our house has a sort of rivalry over grades. I am extremely competitive, and I feel like I can't lose anything. That's another downside to being gifted. I strive for perfection. I really wish I could control this, but I can't. If something isn't perfect, I have to redo it until it is. Also, some people think of being gifted as a bad and abnormal thing. In my own life, I can relate to is very easily, because people judge me by the way I look and act outside of school and they judge me. They figure that I'm just some dumb girl. Though, in reality, I feel like there's a lot more to me than my appearance. I just wish that being "gifted" was considered a normal thing, and not something that should be a big deal. Being gifted and talented should be thought of as "cool" and " by your friends, and not "weird" or "stupid."
According to this website, the term "gifted and talented", means students, children, or youth who give evidence of high achievement capability in areas such as intellectual, creative, artistic, or leadership capacity, or in specific academic fields, and who needs services or activities not ordinarily provided by the school in order to fully develop those capabilities. Luckily we do have a G&T program in our school.
To me, being gifted and talented means that you quickly understand concepts, and are very open to learning new ideas. No matter how it is written, being gifted is something special, I believe, and if one is gifted, they should embrace it, and use their gift to its fullest advantage.
Being gifted, however, has some ups and downs. Some pros to being gifted include having a higher learning maturity, you are considered "smart", and certain lessons can come easier to you. This can make it easier for some students to get better grades. Though, being gifted can have some cons. Gifted children receive a lot of pressure. In my life, I know that I am extremely pressured! I am always compared to my younger brother. Our house has a sort of rivalry over grades. I am extremely competitive, and I feel like I can't lose anything. That's another downside to being gifted. I strive for perfection. I really wish I could control this, but I can't. If something isn't perfect, I have to redo it until it is. Also, some people think of being gifted as a bad and abnormal thing. In my own life, I can relate to is very easily, because people judge me by the way I look and act outside of school and they judge me. They figure that I'm just some dumb girl. Though, in reality, I feel like there's a lot more to me than my appearance. I just wish that being "gifted" was considered a normal thing, and not something that should be a big deal. Being gifted and talented should be thought of as "cool" and " by your friends, and not "weird" or "stupid."
Within this topic, there are many myths and misunderstandings about being gifted and talented, and they are clearly stated on the website of National Association for Gifted Children. For example, people assume that gifted children don't need extra help. The truth behind this myth is that this is entirely wrong. For me personally, I need help. Whether I ask the teacher, or do some google searches at home, I need help to succeed. Another myth is that everybody is gifted. When looking at this myth, I can uncover that while everybody has a special ability and attribute, not everybody is gifted. The last myth I picked, was that gifted children are "nerds" and "losers". The truth to this myth is very far off. While students can be gifted and very smart, it does not automatically classify them as an outcast. Everybody has so much to offer, including me, and I'm honestly tired of being judged. I wish schools weren't classified with labels, and everybody could just go about their day and pick the classes according to their abilities. I'm sure that this class could be about twice the size it is, but some kids are scared of being labeled a "loser." Being gifted is not something to be ashamed of, as uncovered from this myth.
http://specialed.about.com/od/iep/u/formsandreports.htm
GT Seminar 1: First Post
I'm Megan & I'm in 9th grade. I 'm pretty athletic, and I have a very sarcastic sense of humor. Some of my likes include, softball, music, tumblr, this class, writing, free wifi, instagram, hanging out with my friends, going to school, and vacationing! Some of my dislikes are stress, small yappy dogs, the pressure to be perect, grades, being the oldest, post limit on tumblr, cereal, losing, car rides, umpires, getting up early, and split ends. The highlight of my summer, was definitely our annual family trip to LBI. We've made it a family ritual where my family, some cousins, and a few more family friends rent a huge house in Long Beach Island for the week. We swim, kayak, eat lots of food, tan, just hang out, go the beach, and its just a lot of fun. We cut back on electronics, and have a good time. I am looking forward to the 20% project. It seemed like a very interesting project! Though I'm not sure of my project's topic yet, I know it will be one of my favorites! I am also very looking forward to this class!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)