META POST

It's the end of the semester and the school year, and I am here to wrap up my year of blogging with another META POST.

There has been a lot of improvement on my blog as the year went on, especially comparing first semester to second semester. Since January, I have actually made an effort to continue blogging every single week, which is something that I definitely did not do first semester. I have 16 or so posts this semester, which is substantially more than my 10 posts first semester. More times than not the posts have been spaced once a week, which is great because it shows consistency (which was not seen 1st semester). At the end of the year I don't feel the need to cram in an extra half dozen posts in less than a a week (unlike some classmates), which is always a great feeling.

Not only have the quantity of my posts increased, I feel that the quality has as well. In an early second semester post (my favorite) titled "NFL Concussions: Something has to be done", you can really see an improvement in the post as a whole. The post is about a very current topic that is being talked about almost daily on ESPN and other news channels. I was interested in the topic, so I decided to blog on it. After reading articles online for about 15 minutes, I found one that I could mention in my post. I was able to mention the article in the post, and also discuss my feelings on it, which I believe add up to a good post.

The NFL Concussions post is a great way to summarize how my second semester blogging went. I really feel that I improved on the quality of posts, as well as the quantity. My growing ability to talk about current topics and "joining in a discussion" is very evident with several of my posts. All in all, I am very happy with how I blogged second semester, and had a fun time the entire year blogging.

Truth about coffee

I've noticed a recent trend in this school of people starting to drink coffee. Personally, I have drank it since 2nd grade (I even did a project on it in 5th grade and brought in samples. No one wanted any). Many people have told me that I should quit drinking because coffee is bad for me and my health, so when I read this report that was published on Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine, my heart jumped. The report analyzed coffee-drinking habits of over 400,000 people from age 50 to 71. The 400,000 people made it the largest study of coffee ever.

Previous studies have offered different results on the relative benefits or harms associated with regular coffee consumption. While coffee contains caffeine, it also has hundreds of unique compounds and antioxidants that may confer health benefits. Further confusing much of the research into coffee is the fact that many coffee drinkers are also smokers, and it has been difficult for the researchers to judge the different health effects of coffee and cigarettes.

The researchers were able to differentiate the effects of smoking and coffee, and thee data showed that the more coffee a person consumed, the less likely he or she was to die from a number of health problems, including diabetes, heart disease, stroke, infections and even injuries and accidents. 

Not to think that drinking coffee will be able to save you from a freak accidents like car crashes or drowning, at least I can be happy that my morning cup won't be the death of me.

Gender equality in sports: a one way street?

A couple of days ago I was reading an article on ESPN about a girl who was playing on a high school baseball team. The reason that this got some much attention from the media is because the opposing team forfeited the game before it even started because this girl (Paige Sultzbach) was playing on the baseball team. In all of the different articles I read from ESPN, Yahoo!, and other sources, the media outlet has tried to make the opposing team look like the bad guys for forfeiting. I think that decision to forfeit by the opposing team was completely warranted for many reasons.

Wie practicing before a PGA Tour event

First off I want to say I am completely for what Title IX stands for (gender equality in sports). I think it is necessary for schools to be fair with the amount of money and equality put towards both men's and women's sports. Title IX came up because women were fighting for equality in sports and behind the idea that they should get everything that a male athlete gets. So, after hearing this, you may think it's fair for the Sultzbach to be playing for a men's baseball team, but I don't.

By the logic that women and men should have equal opportunity in sports to the point where women can play in a men's sports, why shouldn't a male be able to play in a women's sports? Why would it be unfair for me to try out for the women's softball team, but when a baseball team doesn't want to play against a team with a girl on it, they get scrutinized? This "equality" that women are fighting for seems like a one way street.

Let me give you another more popular example. Female golfer Michelle Wie was a phenom since she was a teenager. She was thought to be so good that feminists and other supporters believe that she should compete on the PGA Tour (top men's professional golf tour). At the time, she was competing on the LPGA (top women's professional golf tour), and because of all of the support she got, she got sponsor's exemptions to play in a couple of PGA Tour events (she missed almost every cut). The feminist movements worked, crossing the gender line that they believed leads to equality. But, once again, by their logic that men and women should have equal opportunity in men's and women's sports, why can't Tiger Woods play on the LPGA? Some may say that is ridiculous and unfair, but if there is such aforementioned gender equality in sports, then it should be fine and uncontested.

To me, this whole gender equality in sports issue seems to be a one way street. Women are able to compete in men's sports, but men aren't able to compete in women's sports. It just doesn't seem fair. The solution is to keep sports in the sections where they belong, men's and women's. I am completely for the equality in support for both men's and women's sports, and I think Title IX is fair and I support it as well. But things like what Sultzbach and Wie have done might be going a step too far.

Overschooled?

As May comes around I can't help but feel the end of the school year approaching. Only one more month of waking up at 6am and working from 8:40am-3:25pm, plus homework. Thats 6 hours 45 minutes of schoolwork, plus about 2 hours of homework everyday. So 8 hours and 45 minutes of every school day is spent working. Add that to 8 hours of sleep and 1 hour of preparing for school, we students only end up with 6 hours and 15 minutes to spend on our own (give or take). I may be alone on this, but I feel like school is taking up to much of our time, and I realize this during the summer when I have all the time in the world to explore my actual interests.

So I raise the question, are we being schooled too much? In my opinion, I think so. My life literally revolves around school as it takes up the most time in my day for 9 months of the year, and I have been in classes for the past 11 years. Because of this ridiculous amount of schooling, I am heavily leaning toward taking a gap year, but thats a different subject (see: To Consider a Gap Year by myself). After reading what I have written so far, you may completely disagree, but bear with me. I have a couple ideas of how to reduce the schooling and stress that comes with it, allowing students to truly explore their interests, not what the school wants them to be interested in.

Two day weekends feel short to me, so whenever we get a Monday or Friday off any reason at all, I become ecstatic. The weekend feels so much longer, and I am actually able to catch up sleep that I may have lost during the week I spent doing schoolwork. What if we extend the weekend to include Friday? Having 3 days to spend as we wish would be a considerable change, and I feel that schoolwork would improve because students wouldn't be as stressed or overworked as they are now.

The other solution (which I feel would be a much better idea), would be to completely eliminate homework. Students (especially at New Trier), end up with 3-4 hours of homework every once in a while, and that astounds me. That is basically as if we extended the end of school from 3:25pm to 7:25pm. Are you kidding me? That leaves nearly 3 hours of free time per night, and then you have to wake up early to do it all again. Eliminating homework would solve this problem. Once school ends for the day, the student would be able to relax and spend time doing things that they enjoy. In a book by Nancy Kalish and Sara Bennet, they write " [Homework] robs children of the sleep, play, and exercise time they need for proper physical, emotional, and neurological development. And it is a hidden cause of the childhood obesity epidemic, creating a nation of 'homework potatoes'." I couldn't agree more.


Now, in respect to length of the this post I will conclude it by saying this. I haven't done much research about what I have said above, but as a student at a very competitive school like New Trier, I feel my opinion is as valid as anyone else, and I hope that some change occurs by the time my children go through the school system to make them enjoy it more and develop their interests naturally.

What's Next for NASA?

NASA's shuttle program has come to successful end. You may have seen it in the news, online, or seen some of the amazing pictures like the one I have shown to the right, but the final destinations for both the Enterprise shuttle (to the right) and Discovery have been set.


Discovery was transported via a modified 747 to the Smithsonian Air and Space museum, taking the place on the Enterprise. Discovery took the place because it had actually been in space, whereas Enterprise had not. Enterprise ended up at the Intrepid museum in New York, marking the complete end to NASA's shuttle program. So, what's next for NASA?


In a news release posted by NASA 2 weeks ago, "The agency is moving forward with an ambitious plan to develop cutting-edge space technologies to advance human and robotic exploration, reach new destinations, and launch revolutionary science missions". In fact, the New Horizons spacecraft that was launched in 2006 will get us the first flyby of the planet-that-was, Pluto (in only 1169 days). This scientific mission should be an indicator of what NASA is capable of. I fully believe that we should put the time, money, and effort into exploring the final frontier. 


There are many things out there in the unknown that we are capable to making become known, including possible habitable planets. In fact, the number of these habitable planets have increased by the billions. These kind of discoveries and explorations should be enough to continue funding NASA, and hopefully something can become just as important as the shuttle program was 50 years ago.

Wrapping up Junior Theme

As my last post related to my Junior Theme topic (why are NCAA student-athletes not paid?), I decided to put my opinion to answer this question here on my blog. In my paper I had to focus on the reasons why they haven't been paid, but now I want to express my own beliefs I picked up throughout the entire process.


First and foremost, I think that Division I college-athletes should get paid. The NCAA is making a ridiculous amount of money based upon these athletes performance, and using it as entertainment to sell to the people of the US. With all the sponsorship deals schools make along with ticket sales, college sports has become a billion dollar business. The athletes that put more time into their sports than most people put in their jobs should not be treated as they are now. With all the time that they do end up putting in, it is nearly impossible to get another job to feed themselves throughout the school year.


Now, I realize that it would be highly difficult to pay every single college athlete in Division I, but it can definitely happen. The student-athletes don't need to sign million dollar contracts or anything remotely close to that, but if they get roughly $200 a month to feed themselves, that would definitely be enough. The Division I universities are making enough money to pay each student-athlete this much without losing money, and it would encourage more students to participate in sports during college. Division II and Division III sports do not make enough money from college sports to pay their players, so I feel that they should be exempt from doing so.


A $200 stipend per month could solve many problems that schools have with breaking NCAA infractions, but another problem still remains. I think that players have a right to speak to agents during their college career, and even accept money from them. Schools should not have a right to limit who a student-athlete can or can't talk to, as long as it doesn't affect his performance on the field and in the classroom. Speaking of classrooms, a new rule could also be implemented that (along with suspensions), stops any money a player can receive if he is not performing well in the classroom. This would make there be much more incentive to actually learn in college rather than just play sports.


To summarize, a $200 stipend can solve many different problems the NCAA has, but unfortunately with the current system in place, it may be very hard make any changes. If there is a large enough group to go with this idea, change could be possible within the next 10 years, before the NCAA grows even larger to a larger multi-billion dollar industry that it is today.

Paying high school athletes? C'mon now

I was talking to one of my friends about my Junior Theme topic, why NCAA student-athletes aren't getting paid, and he brought up a good point. He asked me if collegiate athletes started to get paid for their participation, why shouldn't high school athletes also get paid? It's an interesting idea that I have never really considered, and it definitely isn't an important enough issue to include in my paper, so I thought I would write about it here.

Even if college student-athletes begin to get paid, I see no reason why high school students should. The amount of time that HS athletes put into their sports is not even close to the amount of time college players do. For HS sports, once the season is over, practices and workouts basically come to an end. For some sports there may be once a week workouts a month or two before the season starts, just so players can get in shape, but it isn't nearly as demanding as college athletes.

Another main point is the fact that high schools make nearly nothing off of sports, as most of the events are free of charge to attend. There aren't many sponsors to these events, and if there is, it is mostly a local pizzeria or sports shop that pays a marginal amount of money just to put up a poster by the entrance. The level of revenue for college sports is at least 100 times the amount of high school sports (college sports is a multi billion dollar industry, and I am assuming that high school sports is nowhere near that). The schools are barely financially benefiting from these sports, so why should the players?

Lastly and most importantly, high school athletes have parents that can pay for food and housing. Collegiate athletes are mostly on their own, and need the money more. As a high school student who has participated on a couple of the teams at New Trier, I can say that I have never ever thought that I should be paid for my work. For me I had to spend maximum 20 hours a week to devote to my sport, and college athletes are almost 3 times that number. They spend more time and need the money more, so I hope that if college athletes start getting paid, the problem doesn't continue on to high school sports.

NCAA Revenue is Ridiculous

Some of the highest revenue schools in the NCAA earn between 40 million and 80 million dollars in profits each year from athletic. With this money, they pay their coaches million dollar salaries to bring home the championship for their respective sport, and with championships comes money.The combined salaries of the highest-paid college football coaches in 2011 was $53.4 million. An example of these huge salaries is Ohio State University agreeing to pay head coach Urban Meyer $24 million over six years, or $4 million a year. The estimated average compensation for head football coaches at public universities is more than $2 million per year, a 750 percent increase. 

This increase is more than 20 times the percentage increase for college professors. In Division I basketball, average coach salaries now exceed $4 million a year. College football and men’s basketball are huge business enterprises, generating more than $6 billion a year in annual revenue—even more than the NBA, and the NBA is a professional program.

Some people who want things to go back to the way it use to be, when education comes first at a college, fit right in to a quote in Don DeLillo's White Noise. "Nostalgia is a product of dissatisfaction and rage. It´s a settling of grievances between the present and the past. The more powerful the nostalgia, the closer you come to violence." In this case, violence can also mean changing things back to the way it used to be. Unfortunately for these people, more and more money is going toward the NCAA and its athletic programs. 

Big brands like Nike, adidas, Reebok and Under Armour are writing huge checks to schools, but the marketing of sports shoes, equipment, and clothing through college sports  is just the tip of the iceberg. Food, alcohol, credit card and auto companies (to name a few) are also spending money on college sports. According to Sonny Vaccaro, the former sports marketing executive who signed Michael Jordan with Nike, 90 percent of the NCAA’s revenue is produced by one percent of the athletes. These athletes mostly come from the football and basketball programs, which generate the biggest fan bases and highest revenue. So with all of this money, why don't these programs pay their student-athletes?

Paying College Athletes Summary

Don't understand why college athletes should be paid? Let me give you a hypothetical.

Imagine an owner of a company that is predominantly made up of unpaid interns. These interns are subject to some of the most physically demanding duties in their work environment, and risk blood and body everyday. At their work place they are constantly verbally and physically harassed often in a demeaning matter, and are evaluated solely on their superficial talents. Despite the fact that their boss occasionally makes more $100 million, he refuses to pay his interns. The interns therefore, without enough time in the day to work another job, fall deeper into poverty.

Now, most would agree that the above stated working environment is something that should not be endured by anyone. However, it is. Not only has it become an excepted work place in our society, but every Saturday 100,000 fans cheer for it at America’s coliseums. Ridiculous right?

College football players in the NCAA risk their well being everyday for no pay. They put on pads and a helmet to play games that rack in millions of dollars for their schools, yet often return home to a family that couldnt even afford to go tothe game. This is an issue that has been discussed by many sportswriters and bloggers alike, and it is why I chose to do my Junior Theme on this topic.

Rooting for the underdog

March Madness is upon us, and it is time to fill out your bracket. After I completed my first go, I realized that I had all #1 seeds in the final four. In the history of the tournament, this has happened once (2008). So, I thought why not pick a couple of Cinderella's to upset them early on? I always love rooting for the underdogs in the tournament because it makes it interesting, but when I think about it, people should want to root for a good, winning team. So why pick the underdog?

Recent Cinderella VCU celebrating an upset

Researchers have found plenty of support for what seems like an obvious notion: In sports, we're drawn to a winner. Other factors (like where you live and who your friends are) can influence your choice of a favorite team.  Team success is kind of like the icing on the cake at that point

Which brings us to that peculiar situation, so common in college basketball, where too much icing ruins the cake. In 1991, a pair of researchers at Bowling Green State University, Jimmy Frazier and Eldon Snyder, published a paper called "The Underdog Concept in Sports". They posed a simple hypothetical scenario to more than 100 college students: Two teams, A and B, were meeting in a best-of-seven playoff series for some unidentified sport, and Team A was "highly favored" to win. Which team would the students root for?

Eighty-one percent chose the underdog.

Then the students were asked to imagine that Team B had somehow managed to win the first three games of the series. Would the subjects root for the sweep or switch allegiance to the favorite? Half of those who first picked the underdog now said they'd support Team A. It was the same, ridiculous approach I am taking this year, rooting for #15 Detroit to upset #2 Kansas. Let's go Titans!

Who watches what?

How come we watch so much TV?

Maybe because it is there. But analysts have studied the appeal of various TV categories, and advertisers and TV networks have invested tons of money in attempts to reach audience categories of a particular age, sex or income level. Studying TV Tokenism, we step into the mostly unknown world of TV programming.

Most of these efforts have focused on answering the question, "Who watches?" But analysts have gone beyond the demographic categories to focus on how television viewing fits in with other leisure time decisions including other media choices like movies, magazines, newspapers and sports events.

Even a basic look at the categories creates some common assumptions. For example, young, blue-collar males watch TV sports less frequently than any other male group. African american viewers watch more television but also read the highest percentage of newspapers. Teenage boys like programs that poke fun at male authority figures, perhaps because they want to see someone "stick up to the man". 

This rebel is sometimes caused by parents, teachers, or any other adult that has some control of their life. At one point in our lives we always wanted to stick prove ourselves that we are in control, and perhaps for some young adults they turn to these TV shows for guidance. 

For us students, we are starting to reach the young adult age group, so get ready to watch much more sports and prime time television.

Scrubs

Source




Scrubs
NBC (2001-2008)
ABC (2009-2010)

Donald Faison (far right) won 2 BET Awards for Best Supporting Actor in a comedy. Faison was in every single episode (182), while Zach Braff (main character, middle), was only in 175. Faison plays Braff's best friend, and they are almost always together joking around (that's what the show is based off of).


I believe that this show is an example that goes against Mr. Bolos' thesis. One of the main characters of the show is African American (Faison). Faison's character goes through struggles that are considered normal. He and his wife have relationship issues, he is starting a family (having kids) with his wife, and he is also worried about his career path (he ends up becoming Chief of Surgery). Although the show is a comedy, it consistently aired from between 7:30 and 8:30 on network channels. At one point, the show was getting easily just as many views as many network dramas. However, in its last couple of seasons, the viewership definitely dwindled off.

Google Glasses? Really?

People who reach into their pocket to check a smartphone for information will soon have another option: a pair of Google-made glasses that will be able to receive and project information to the wearer’s eyeballs in real time.

According to several Google employees familiar with the project, the glasses will go on sale to the public by the end of the year. These people said they are expected “to cost around the price of current smart phones,” or $250 to $600.

The people familiar with the Google glasses said they would be Android-based, and will include a small screen that will sit a few inches from someone’s eye. They will also have a 3G or 4G data connection. 

Now, I am all for new technology that makes things easier on people (like smartphones), but c'mon, this seems a little ridiculous. Having a screen a couple of inches away from your face so you can be updated on your Facebook, Twitter, or whatever other information you need seems kind of ridiculous. Personally, I don't have a Facebook or Twitter because I find it is ridiculously time consuming (time which I could be doing much better things), so I find these glasses completely ridiculous. To the average social network user thinking of getting these glases, are you really to lazy to walk to your computer, or grab your phone from your pocket, or even pull your tablet out of your backpack just so you can stay updated on your internet life?

If anyone reading this thinks this is a cool idea for some new technology, I would love to hear your opinion on my paragraph above.

50 Years Since the First Orbit

Glenn on the cover of TIME

On February 20, 1962, astronaut John Glenn squeezed into the cockpit of a Mercury spacecraft called Friendship 7. The spacecraft was launched by an Atlas rocket from Cape Canaveral, Glenn circled the Earth three times, becoming the first American to orbit the planet. This spaceflight that took all of 4 hours, 55 minutes and 23 seconds of it — showed the nation what we are able to accomplish.

Glenn saw three sunsets and sunrises that day, from an altitude of 162 miles. At each sunrise, an explosion of what looked like fireflies appeared outside the window, mystifying him. Then came a signal of a suspected problem that had ground controllers bracing for an uncertain, possibly catastrophic re-entry into the atmosphere.

Luckily, the ending was a glorious one. A collective sigh of relief was heard across the land. The president rushed off to Cape Canaveral to hail the returning hero. Bands played. People cried. Never mind that a Soviet cosmonaut had already spent 25 hours in orbit. As author Tom Wolfe has written, “John Glenn made us whole again!”

What we need now is another moment like that to bring the nation together. With the economy still struggling and people divided by their political beliefs, we need some sort of event to bring us all together like the first orbit of Earth in 1962. With NASA not as big as it was back in the 60's and 70's, what will be the event that causes us to come together as a nation and celebrate together?

This post is  meant to commemorate John Glenn's feat rather than to talk about current issues.

The Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence

Operating on money and equipment scrounged from the public and from Silicon Valley millionaires, a band of astronomers (SETI) recently restarted one of the iconic quests of modern science, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, which had been suspended last year by a lack of financing.

Early in December, 42 radio telescopes, known as the Allen Telescope Array came to life and resumed hopping from star to star in the constellation Cygnus, listening for radio broadcasts from alien civilizations. The lines are now open, but with lingering financial problems, how long they will remain that way is anybody’s guess.

Under terms of an agreement still being negotiated, the Air Force will pay for a share of the operations at Hat Creek, which costs about $1.5 million (plus another $1 million a year to pay the astronomers). The money raised so far will buy a few months of work at best.

Should we be spending time and money searching for this "needle in a haystack"? Well, on SETI's Wikipedia page, there are some naysayers. "Some in the UFO community, such as nuclear physicist Stanton Friedman, say there is no basis for the search and it is therefore unscientific". These claims, along with many others, have plagued SETI's funding and progress throughout the years, but now they hope to make an amazing discovery with their funding from the Air Force.

Personally, I love the idea of searching for extraterrestrial life. The idea of another living thing being out there somewhere really grabs my interest, and I only imagine what we could learn from these people, and what we could teach them. The drive that these astronomers are showing is remarkable, and I really hope that they find something in the billions of light years that surround us, both for themselves and mankind.

NFL Concussions: Something has to be done.

Hunter Hillenmeyer was a linebacker for the Chicago Bears from 2003-2010 and a key component of the Bears Super Bowl run in 2006. On September 14, 2010, Hillenmeyer was placed on the injured reserve due to conditions from a concussion he had sustained in his previous game. This would prove to be his last game in the NFL.

A player being carted off the field
after receiving a concussion.

Along with Hillenmeyer, dozens of NFL players have sustained career ending concussions from all their hard hitting years in the NFL. There are new regulations being set by the NFL to help players be much safer on the field regarding concussions, but Hillenmeyer doesn't think so. "“It makes me sick to see (the NFL) claim it is driving concussion research and putting player safety first,” Hillenmeyer said. “The whole system is designed to do one thing: make owners money". Hillenmeyer is currently in a lawsuit with the Chicago Bears and the NFL to get $900,000 he believes is owed to him after being released. Doctors recommended that he retire after suffering his concussion. He has teamed u[ with the NFLPA (NFL Players Association) to attempt to get half of his contract money for 2011 ($900,000).


But the concern of concussions go past just money owed. In an article written by Stephanie Smith in 2009, there were conclusive evidence to show brain damage sustained by players in the NFL. "But today, using tissue from retired NFL athletes culled posthumously, the Center for the Study of Traumatic Encephalopathy (CSTE), at the Boston University School of Medicine, is shedding light on what concussions look like in the brain. The findings are stunning. Far from innocuous, invisible injuries, concussions confer tremendous brain damage." This evidence really amazed me and led me to look around the internet to see what the NFL is doing to protect the players.


After an hour or so of searching, I found that the NFL is trying to start conducting studies to delve deeper into problem of concussions. Personally, I think that there must be some way to protect the players more, whether it helmets with better protection, or suspensions given out to players who make plays that put other players at risk for concussions. Either way, the risk for concussions increases as more and more players become stronger and stronger, so the NFL better figure out a way to solve this issue, and fast.

Meta Post

Looking back at my blog posts from the beginning of September, I have noticed lots of similarities but also lots of improvements. I have written almost a dozen blog posts since then, and every post I take a step toward being a better blogger.I took journalism for the last 2 years at New Trier, so when I started blogging I treated the posts as mini articles. I wasn't "joining the conversation" per say. My posts were generally just like news stories, meant to inform people of what is going on. The goal of this blog is to be able to join a conversation, whether it be something from class or an article read online. 

The first post that I had that really achieved this goal was the 9/11 Advertisements post. We had discussed the hot issue of whether or not these corporations should air these advertisements, and I was really interested in the topic, so I blogged. Although my post was extremely opinionated and wasn't really accepting of other opinions, it still joined in a conversation that we had in class and that other students posted about.

I've always been interested in astronomy and the present studies of what lies beyond our hemisphere. I decided to dedicate a couple of posts to this topic. Browsing through the science section of the New York Times, I found a couple of interesting articles that I could blog about. They were relevant ideas (i.e. Another Habitable Planet?), but I forgot to attempt to connect them to a present discussion. I stated some facts and what I felt about it, but I never mentioned what other people were saying about the discovery of another habitable planet. It was an interesting post both to write and learn about, but it didn't really fit into the requirements for a post.

My best post has to be my most recent one, To Consider a Gap Year. I am very interested in taking a gap year, and since college has become a bigger thought in all junior's minds, I thought it would be relevant to share my ideas. I looked online for any articles relating to gap years that I could connect it to, and luckily I found exactly what I was looking for. There was an article that talked about all of the things that I was talking about too, so I quoted it and shared my opinions. I feel that it was my best post because of the comparing of my own thoughts and that of the article. What I also find really promising is that my best post was my most recent. Hopefully I can continue improving throughout 2nd semester to craft more posts like the one I just mentioned.

To Consider a Gap Year

Every year no more than 40 seniors at New Trier decide to do a gap year once they graduate. I always have wondered why it isn't more. Taking a year off to be free from school and do anything that interests you has always been something that I have wanted to do, and as I get closer to finishing high school it seems more and more like a reality. Whenever I mention gap year, I occasionally get the response like "Really? What are you thinking?". That response normally comes from students that have parents breathing down their necks about ACT scores and their grades. These students are the ones who are aiming for the prestigious colleges, like Princeton and Harvard. In reality, lots of prestigious colleges actually encourage it.

Why might this be? In an article by MSNBC's Danielle Wood, Wood explains, "The reason behind higher education’s support of the gap year is clear: Better-prepared students mean higher completion rates. And it’s completion that matters. Parents should remember that getting a kid into college is only half the battle." Now that we have that out of the way, let me explain what intrigues me about a gap year.

After 12 years of schooling without a break (a legitimate break, not like summer vacation where we still have to do lots of summer reading), I feel like I haven't had the opportunity to do what I want. A gap year gives me that opportunity. I plan to do a road trip across the US for a couple of months, and experience life in a way that I want to. Not that I hate school or anything, but I feel restricted in the classroom, learning things like the periodic table, something that I know I will personally never use again. Being forced to learn these mundane tasks has let my mind wander. A kid needs an adventure every once in awhile, that's how we learn. School has not supplied me of that, so taking a year off to do what I want, when I want, seems like a perfect opportunity. If you are reading this and seek that adventure in your life, rather than brushing the idea of a gap year away, look into it, there are lots of different things you can do, and lots of experiences to be had.