Tag Archives: college & university

Not simply deriding suburban life

Posted on by

An AP story discusses a supposed movement to take the suburbs more seriously and move beyond common negative stereotypes. One scholar accurately notes:

“Change your mind about what the suburbs are,” said Robert Puentes, a suburban scholar at the Brookings Institution. “They’re not just bedroom communities for center-city workers. They’re not just rich enclaves. They’re not all economically stable. They’re not all exclusively white.”

“These are not your father’s suburbs of the 1950s and 1960s.”

Efforts toward this end include a new museum in Johnson County, Kansas and several academic centers.

These stereotypes will take time to overcome. Common stereotypes, dating back to at least the 1950s, include: bland homes and people, desperate housewives, whites only, lifestyles centered all around children, wealthy people only, conservative, low-brow, garish (from strip malls to shopping malls to McMansions).

The story cites two academic centers for suburban studies. For much of the last 100 years, academics have often led the way in deriding suburbia. To fight some of these stereotypes, more academics would need to be able to move beyond knee-jerk reactions and acknowledge suburbia’s complexities.

Quick Review: An Education

Posted on by

An Education is set in Britain during the early 1960s. It begins with a 16-year old British girl  (Jenny, played by Carey Mulligan) studying hard in order to pass her exams to get into Oxford. But she soon meets an older man (Daniel, played by Peter Sarsgaard) who introduces her to a new world of jazz, art, vacations to Paris, and general excitement.

Quick thoughts:

1. This might be a period piece…but it might not be.

On one hand, the film takes place in the early 1960s, an era just before Britain moved from post-World War II austerity to the Swinging Sixties. Jenny’s parents are of the previous generation: her father is provincial and blustery (but only willing to stand up to his family members) and her mother fades into the background. Jenny starts the film wanting to go to Oxford but spends much of the film chasing a more exciting life. In a key scene involving Jenny and the headmistress of her private school, Jenny explains these differences: “It’s not enough to educate us anymore, Mrs. Walters. You’ve got to tell us why you’re doing it.” Without having a “why,” Jenny is unwilling to go on.

On the other hand, this movie is similar to numerous other stories that have simply taken place in other settings. Jenny is a typical middle-class girl and expects to go to college. She thinks she wants what her parents want, a good education. But all this changes as she “grows up” by interacting with the outside world. This is a classic “coming of age” tale as Jenny overcomes adult obstacles. Some of the characters are a little stale: the parents are typical suburban parents who fall apart when confronted with the complexities of the world.

2. I enjoyed the atmosphere of this film. I could feel the drudgery of the middle class home. I could see the excitement when Jenny went beyond the walls of her home and private school. Britain is shown as both dull and alive, as surely most places are.

3. There are a number of enjoyable short and sharp dialogues between Jenny and her parents.

4. Daniel is somewhat creepy, not quite of the Lolita variety but is still an older man chasing a teenager. We are never really told what motivates him or how he got to this position. Perhaps this is the case because Jenny is the main character and she never digs very deep into who Daniel is. Since Jenny just sees Daniel as a source of excitement, the audience doesn’t need to know much about Daniel either.

5. The overall question of the film is one that everyone can relate to: what kind of education are we seeking? One based in books, thinking, and analysis? One based in experiences? Or something else?

(The film was well-received by critics: on RottenTomatoes, 170 reviews with 159 fresh/94%.)

“The Triumphant Decline of the WASP”

Posted on by

A NY Times opinion piece from Harvard law professor Noah Feldman makes this argument: “The decline of the Protestant elite is actually its greatest triumph.” Feldman explores the changes in the Supreme Court (the appointment of Kagan would make it 6 Catholics, 3 Jews) and Princeton (“As late as 1958, the year of the “dirty bicker” in which Jews were conspicuously excluded from its eating clubs, Princeton could fairly have been seen as a redoubt of all-male Protestant privilege).

So what changed? Feldman provides some reasons: “the anti-aristocratic ideals of the Constitution,” education was an important defining trait for WASPs so opening up universities was a big step, and the American value of fair play. The result:

Together, these social beliefs in equality undercut the impulse toward exclusive privilege that every successful group indulges on occasion. A handful of exceptions for admission to societies, clubs and colleges — trivial in and of themselves — helped break down barriers more broadly. This was not just a case of an elite looking outside itself for rejuvenation: the inclusiveness of the last 50 years has been the product of sincerely held ideals put into action.

These may be accurate reasons. But they seem to ignore the historical context: something happened in the 1960s that changed institutions like Ivy League schools and led to a very different looking Supreme Court. In that decade, the Civil Rights Movement plus an explosion in higher education for the burgeoning US population plus higher rates of immigration from non-European locales plus cultural change (rock ‘n’ roll, television, more open questioning of authority, etc.), changed, or at least began to change, the socioeconomic status of WASPs.

Quick Review: Toy Story 3

Posted on by

Toy Story 3 is in its second week in theaters. Featuring the same band of characters, Woody, Buzz Lightyear, and friends, plus some new toys and humans, Pixar has served up another successful film. My thoughts:

1. Andy is off to college. An interesting plot device as the toys have to switch gears – but also seems connected to a Pixar interest in chronicling life changes. Up contrasted an old man and young boy. Cars looked at changes in a small town. These films are not just about a moment of time but they involve complicated contexts for the current story. These transitional periods, such as a move from childhood to college or from mourning and grumpiness to meaning and joy after the loss of a spouse, have much potential for exploration.

2. There does seem something a little strange about watching a movie about a kid playing with toys. Andy is depicted in his youth running around his house with his cast of toys – no shots of him sitting at a computer, in a movie theater, texting. Older Andy is tied more to his computer. Yet we are paying money to see a sentimental movie about a kid playing with his toys. Does a movie like this inspire kids to be more imaginative with their toys or simply encourage them to watch more movies?

3. Pixar is really good at invoking sentimentalism without being mawkish. Andy eventually reflects on what the toys mean to him – and it is a touching moment. The typical sweeping Hollywood soundtrack is not present (thankfully) and the characters are not overdramatic. Even though Pixar makes animated stories, the key to their success are engaging stories.

4. If you were curious, the door is left wide open at the end for another film with a new set of human characters.

An argument for reducing the amount of poor research

Posted on by

Several academics  make an argument in The Chronicle for Higher Education for reducing the number of published research articles in order to limit low-quality publications. The measure of “poor research” is linked to the idea that later science should build upon previous findings:

Consider this tally from Science two decades ago: Only 45 percent of the articles published in the 4,500 top scientific journals were cited within the first five years after publication. In recent years, the figure seems to have dropped further. In a 2009 article in Online Information Review, Péter Jacsó found that 40.6 percent of the articles published in the top science and social-science journals (the figures do not include the humanities) were cited in the period 2002 to 2006.

The authors go on to say that uncited articles are akin to “useless information.” This seems a bit premature: uncited articles might be the result of studies in new fields or new approaches to old problems. Graduate students are often told to specialize and perhaps this article glut is due to very specific knowledge and more recent articles that have less of a broad appeal. Regardless, good journals are still publishing these pieces, indicating that somewhere in the peer review process, editors and reviewers thought the authors made a scientific contribution.

Some of the proposed solutions include a greater emphasis on citation and journal impact scores.