Month: February 2021

Question 1: There was not much difference that I saw between the Core Handbook and Ungar/Scheuer’s ideas. The ideas of these authors is that a liberal arts education is going to create a more well-rounded and intellectual individual who is better at oral and written presentations. And the UNE Core Handbook wants to create an environment that is going to give students a better chance at being successful and giving them knowledge that will be key for their future, meaning the way they use their words verbally or through written works. UNE wants to create a type of student that Ungar and Scheuer believe are going to be the most successful and the ones running our societies someday, because these students are going to have an advantage in the job market and workplace due to the fact that they got a liberal arts education. There is one difference that I spotted between the Handbook and Ungar and Scheuer, which is science and where it stands in a liberal arts education. Scheuer believes that science, and STEM, are not supposed to be a part of this education style and that while they are important, they are just not what should be included in this education style. While ungar believes that the liberla arts are going to create a better science student. That this background in the liberl arts, while focusing more on the science based academics, will create better employment opportunities for those students. When trying to find a job in the STEM field, this background in the humanities and communication is going to set them apart. And in the UNE Handbook, science is recommended each semester. It is a staple part of this liberl arts education that we are getting. The students here at UNE are going to be getting science related topics to learn about, while still having a more liberla arts based education. 

Question 2: The two classes I talked about in the 2/26 homework were my english class and chemistry class. My chemistry class fits into the laboratory science section and my english class fits in the english section or the humanities section. Ungar believes that a background in the liberla arts, or humanities, is going to create a more well rounded student and with UNE’s handbook, I am going to become that student. With my english class and future humanities classes I am going to take, it is giving me a better foundation for my current chemistry class and future chemistry classes. This diverse background for myself is going to make me be able to do a better job conceptually understanding my chemistry and science classes, and like Ungar said, set me apart from other students. 

Question 4: In the UNE Core Handbook it talks about Critical Thinking, which is a big part of Scheuer’s ideas of the liberal arts and its education style. The Handbook states, “In short, the third year core requirements invite students to accomplish the difficult tasks of integrating disciplines and applying knowledge of the core and core theme to their majors. In particular, students will be challenged to define complex problems in their major and solve them, taking into account a variety of approaches and awareness, deciding what they need to know and how to get to know it, and learning to collaborate with others” showing that critical thinking is going to become a type of thinking that is going to be developed and truly worked on during out third year here at UNE. which is something that many schools probably do not have. The students at UNE are going to be spending an entire year learning and creating this type of thinking for themselves. When critical thinking is applied like this as a core part of a student curriculum, you are going to be creating students that are going to be understanding this type of thinking and are going to be the ones who can easily access this higher level thinking. Scheuer states that, “Critical thinking is the intellectual engine of a functional democracy: the set of mental practices that lends breadth, depth, clarity, and consistency to public discourse” and this is what UNE is saying they are going to be teaching to their students. This mental practice that Scheuer talks about is going to be ingrained in our brains, making us better thinkers 

UNE’s model for a liberal arts is for their students to develop a foundational knowledge and critical thinking skills that are necessary for the students future. The handbook talks about instilling “fluency, creativity, and imagination in thought and expression” in the students. With these goals, the university then creates a curriculum that will hit the students necessary needs for their major, but also give them the tools to develop this type of knowledge and critical thinking skills stated earlier in the handbook. The whole point of the Core Curriculum in UNE’s handbook is to integrate these values to create a well prepared student who is responsible for caring for themselves and others. UNE believes that they can achieve these goals that they have set for the students through the liberal arts education model, which Ungar is a big advocate for. Ungar believes that “An astounding 89 percent said they were looking for more emphasis on “the ability to effectively communicate orally and in writing,” and almost as many urged the development of better “critical thinking and analytical reasoning skills.” Seventy percent said they were on the lookout for “the ability to innovate and be creative.’” which is what UNE is trying to create. Students who are able to communicate both verbally and in writing, and the best way to create this well-rounded type of student would be the liberal arts model. With this model UNE is going to be creating better, more well rounded students that are going to be top choice when it comes to the job market. This type of education is a game changer for many students and without knowing it, they are going to be getting the best education possible. 

Looking at my classes from this semester and the fall semester, I can see from the handbook where they all fit in the curriculum. My english class fits into both the english section and the humanities explorations course, both my chemistry and biology classes fit into the laboratory science classes, my introduction to environmental issues class last semester fits right in as the key piece of my first year, and both of my calculus classes fit into the math section. Everything has a place in the curriculum. We are asked to see if there are a few classes that don’t fit the model of this liberal arts curriculum but all of my classes fit. The only thing that seems off to me is that I don’t have a specified explorations course. This english class could count toward it but then i would have to take english again, I think the fact that i am taking two science classes with labs is what is creating the issue for me. What I do think is hard, for my major especially, is that I am going to get less of the humanities classes and ideas that the liberal arts education wants because I am focused on the sciences. But the handbook does show me that those classes pertaining to the liberal arts ideas will be there someday, it is just I have to get to them first. Besides missing those few pieces of the liberal arts education, I think that all my classes lineup with the curriculum and my classes for future semesters are lining up as well, which makes me happy to know that I am going to have a great grasps and knowledge in not only the liberal arts but also in the sciences. 

Download this to see the PDF version of my table!

The Misconceptions:

The liberal arts is a type of education that many people talk about. There are reasons that it is a good education for students but there are also people who argue what truly the liberal arts are. There are 7 common misconceptions that are brought up when someone talks about the liberal arts education, and while these points are valid they are easily dismissed with the facts of what this type of education truly entails. People believe that this style of education is too expensive, only for the rich families, is based upon the beliefs of a certain political party and much more. But once you have a true look at what the education stands for you will see that this type of education may put you at an advantage when it comes to future employers. You are going to be developing skills that others are not, and that’s all thanks to the liberal arts education. We need to help people see what it truly is and what it truly means before we jump to the conclusions and misconceptions about this type of education.

Ungar’s Response:

Sanford Ungar wrote a paper called, “7 Major Misconceptions About the Liberal Arts” which discusses the 7 biggest misconceptions of this education style and debunks them all and shows what it is truly about. Ungar is an activist for this type of education, he believes that this type of education is going to give you many intellectual advantages over your peers and a leg up in the job market. Ungar believes that with the help of a liberal arts education you are going to go farther in life, no matter if you are from a low-income family or a first-generation college student. This education and knowledge is going to help you greatly when you truly enter the real world and start to see the type of well-rounded citizen you need to be.

Pre-Reading:

The title of this text is “Critical Thinking and the Liberal Arts”, meaning that the author is going to be discussing critical thinking and how it applies to the liberal arts. The author is going to be explaining to us what critical thinking is and how you use it. And they are also going to be explaining and helping us understand what Liberal Arts are. I believe that liberal arts is a type of curriculum taught to students that encompasses history, sciences, and literature. 

Section 1: What Are The Liberal Arts?

The Liberal Arts are a type of education. It is an integrated curriculum that brings together all nonprofessional higher learning. It is a higher level of thinking that doesn’t rely on a “normal” education, it brings in pieces from real world experiences that will create a more well rounded individual. “But however we define the liberal arts, no unique approach and no single method, text, or institution perfectly exemplifies the idea” is how the author describes the teaching of the liberal arts, there are many different variations of the liberal arts and how they can be presented in the classroom. 

Section 2: Why Do We Need The Liberal Arts?

The liberal arts are a big part of democracy, and is what helps keep democracy going. There are three levels of the citizenship that the liberal arts cover, civic dimension, economic citizenship, and cultural citizenship. These three levels are just the stepping stones of democracy but they are heavily influenced by the liberal arts and what they stand for. “But we all need to be well-informed, critical citizens. And the liberal arts prepare students for citizenship in all three senses—civic, economic, and cultural”, as the author is saying here, we need well-informed citizens and it is the liberal arts duty to show people what it means to be a well rounded and educated citizen. 

Section 3: What Is Critical Thinking?

“Critical thinking is the intellectual engine of a functional democracy: the set of mental practices that lends breadth, depth, clarity, and consistency to public discourse. It’s what makes thinking in public truly public and shareable” is how the author would describe critical thinking. It is taking the ideas discussed earlier about liberal arts and actually applying them. Critical thinking is part of the same umbrella that contains the liberal arts but it is a bit deeper, there is more that goes into thinking critically. It is creating independent ideas about a topic and trying to truly understand it, by drawing connections to other ideas and pulling in outside perspectives to understand what you are talking about and presenting to someone. 

Section 4: The Importance of Critical Inquiry

Critical Inquiry has more to do with than philosophy, it has no rules and creates an openness between people. It is meant to create and stir up conversations between people that can take a deep turn. It is meant to reflect your knowledge and understanding of important ideas. “The college-level progression toward more sophisticated reasoning isn’t just a matter of analytic thinking as a formal process. It is also reflected in certain organizing concepts that (like critical inquiry itself) transcend the various disciplines and unify the liberal arts curriculum” showing here that there are many ways to think at this deeper level to create more understand for yourself and for others.

Today I met with Olivia. We had a great conversation about the class itself and how I was doing. She hasn’t spent much time in our class yet this semester, so we took the beginning of our meeting just checking in on how I was doing and feeling in this class. We then talked about my essay and my concerns about it. I truly only had one question about my essay and I feel like we solved it. In my meeting with Prof. Cripps on Monday, he gave me suggestions and ideas on how to condense my first two body paragraphs about the authors. I did that for my homework yesterday but I felt as if the way I arranged them together seemed a bit choppy and as if I was trying too hard to get these pieces to fit. Olivia had me read her my new paragraph and she agreed that it was a bit choppy, that I did have a good idea and execution on adding them together but something was missing. We did a bit of brainstorming until she helped me come up with the perfect way to tie the authors ideas together. I am very happy with how the meeting went and how we were able to create this change, even if it was small, in my paper that is going to help show my ideas and position on the texts.

Ellipses: “First of all, we can praise wisely, not praising intelligence or talent. That has failed…. But praising the process that kids engage in, their effort, their strategies, their focus, their perseverance, their improvement. This process of praise creates kids who are hardy and resilient.” 

Brackets: “And universities will have reinforced the belief that it’s okay to filter out the positive. If students graduate believing that they can learn nothing from people they dislike or from those with whom they disagree, we [educators] will have done them a great intellectual disservice.”

Signal Phrasing:

Original: “Attempts to shield students from words, ideas, and people that might cause them emotional discomfort are bad for the students. They are bad for the workplace, which will be mired in unending litigation if student expectations of safety are carried forward.”

Revised: When these college students are continuously hiding from the hard conversations that are very present in the real world, they may be considered not fit to be a part of society. And this is very evident when Lukianoff and Haidt say, “Attempts to shield students from words, ideas, and people that might cause them emotional discomfort are bad for the students. They are bad for the workplace, which will be mired in unending litigation if student expectations of safety are carried forward.” 

Original: “Let’s not waste any more lives, because once we know that abilities are capable of such growth, it becomes a basic human right for children, all children, to live in places that create that growth, to live in places filled with “yet.’”

Revised: If we don’t try and create this change with these students, we are going to see that their full educational potential has been wasted. “Let’s not waste any more lives, because once we know that abilities are capable of such growth, it becomes a basic human right for children, all children, to live in places that create that growth, to live in places filled with “yet.’”

In-text citation:

“First of all, we can praise wisely, not praising intelligence or talent. That has failed. Don’t do that anymore. But praising the process that kids engage in, their effort, their strategies, their focus, their perseverance, their improvement. This process of praise creates kids who are hardy and resilient” (Dweck, Around 04:00).

“And universities will have reinforced the belief that it’s okay to filter out the positive. If students graduate believing that they can learn nothing from people they dislike or from those with whom they disagree, we will have done them a great intellectual disservice” (Lukianoff/Haidt, Paragraph 57).

“Attempts to shield students from words, ideas, and people that might cause them emotional discomfort are bad for the students. They are bad for the workplace, which will be mired in unending litigation if student expectations of safety are carried forward” (“The Coddling”, Paragraph 58)

“Let’s not waste any more lives, because once we know that abilities are capable of such growth, it becomes a basic human right for children, all children, to live in places that create that growth, to live in places filled with “yet’” (around 09:32).

Long Quote:

When Dweck gave this children a task here is what she observed: “I wanted to see how children coped with challenge and difficulty, so I gave 10-year-olds problems that were slightly too hard for them. Some of them reacted in a shockingly positive way. They said things like, “I love a challenge,” or, “You know, I was hoping this would be informative.” They understood that their abilities could be developed. They had what I call a growth mindset. But other students felt it was tragic, catastrophic. From their more fixed mindset perspective, their intelligence had been up for judgment, and they failed. Instead of luxuriating in the power of yet, they were gripped in the tyranny of now” (Around 00:35). When she gives this challenge to the students she sees the difference in the mindsets and how the fixed mindset student truly struggles with how to solve the problems. 

Here I just picked a longer quote from Dweck that shows the difference between the two mindsets and then included a citation at the end.

Original: In both Dweck’s TED Talk and in Lukianoff and Haidt’s article they talk about the issue of not being able to handle hard conversations and problems that are common in life. In Dweck’s Talk she talks about what goes through a person’s head when they are faced with a problem and  they have a fixed-mindset. When she is showing the audience the difference in the two types of mindsets, she says “On the left, you see the fixed-mindset students. There’s hardly any activity. They run from the error. They don’t engage with it” (around 01:51). What she is saying here is that students with this type of mindset don’t engage with a problem, she is showing real evidence taken from scientists and showing exactly what the difference is between the two students. They do not see the issue as a puzzle and aren’t trying to solve it. They are stuck in their ways and are not able to get past what they think they know. Similarly in Lukianoff and Haidt’s article they talk about people being very sheltered and not having hard conversations about things that are important in our lives. Lukianoff and Hadit talk about the hard conversations that we need to have in our life, about topics that are sensitive but also very crucial to parts of our history. “Attempts to shield students from words, ideas, and people that might cause them emotional discomfort are bad for the students. They are bad for the workplace, which will be mired in unending litigation if student expectations of safety are carried forward” (Paragraph 58) this is a quote from the text, and they are talking about how these people are not the kind of people that society wants. They want someone who will see a problem and effectively address the issue and find ways toward a solution. The people that can have these hard conversations and are able to keep themselves composed, even if they don’t like the way the conversation is going and not say that this is triggering them, are the ones that are going to go far in life. Because these people can see past their own selfishness and be able to be a contributing member of society. In both the TED Talk and “The Coddling” article, we see examples of students who have a fixed mindset. These students do not take the time to think outside of the box, and stop and realize that they are not the only ones who live in this world. Because this mindset  that they have immersed themselves in is going to create more issues for them in the future if they don’t try and grow their knowledge. 

Revised: We get stuck in this repeating cycle of running away. Everyone is guilty of this pattern when faced with difficulty, we just tend to run away when it gets hard. And if we can’t handle these hard things we just collapse, which will lead to nothing ever changing. It’s a mindset that we believe we have no control over, but actually we do. In Dweck’s Talk she talks about what goes through a person’s head when they are faced with a problem and they have a fixed-mindset. When she is showing the audience the difference in the two types of mindsets, she says “On the left, you see the fixed-mindset students. There’s hardly any activity. They run from the error. They don’t engage with it” (around 01:51). What she is saying here is that students with this type of mindset don’t engage with a problem, she is showing real evidence taken from scientists and showing exactly what the difference is between the two students. They do not see the issue as a puzzle and aren’t trying to solve it. They are stuck in their ways and are not able to get past what they think they know, they just continue to run away from the issues at hand. Similarly in Lukianoff and Haidt’s article, they talk about people being very sheltered and not having hard conversations about things that are important in our lives. Lukianoff and Hadit talk about the hard conversations that we need to have in our life, about topics that are sensitive but also very crucial to parts of our history. “Attempts to shield students from words, ideas, and people that might cause them emotional discomfort are bad for the students. They are bad for the workplace, which will be mired in unending litigation if student expectations of safety are carried forward” (Paragraph 58) this is a quote from the text, and it is  talking about how these people, the ones that run away from the problem, are not the kind of people that society wants. They want someone who will see a problem and effectively address the issue and find ways toward a solution. The people that can have these hard conversations and are able to keep themselves composed, even if they don’t like the way the conversation is going and not say that this is triggering them, are the ones that are going to go far in life. Because these people can see past their own selfishness and be able to be a contributing member of society. In both the TED Talk and “The Coddling” article, we see examples of students who have a fixed mindset. These students do not take the time to think outside of the box, and stop and realize that they are not the only ones who live in this world. Because this mindset that they have immersed themselves in is going to create more issues for them in the future if they don’t try and grow their knowledge, and stop running from the difficulties that life throws at us. 

Original: Carol Dweck is a researcher taking the idea of expanding knowledge to a new level. She believes in two different types of mindsets in students: a Fixed Mindset and a Growth Mindset. A Fixed Mindset is when you are faced with a problem you run away from it and are unable to solve it. These are students who do not understand a way to think at a deeper and higher level. While a Growth Mindset is a student who when you are faced with the same problem see a way to solve the problem. They think at a different level and see the problem as a puzzle to solve. Dweck did research on it and showed her audience during her TED Talk, “I wanted to see how children coped with challenge and difficulty, so I gave 10-year-olds problems that were slightly too hard for them. Some of them reacted in a shockingly positive way. They said things like, “I love a challenge,” or, “You know, I was hoping this would be informative.” They understood that their abilities could be developed. They had what I call a growth mindset. But other students felt it was tragic, catastrophic. From their more fixed mindset perspective, their intelligence had been up for judgment, and they failed. Instead of luxuriating in the power of yet, they were gripped in the tyranny of now” (Around 00:35). She is showing her audience what happens to the students when she approaches them with an issue. She notes that the fixed mindset students were upset with the challenge and felt as if they had failed but the ones that she believed had a growth mindset or could develop that mindset were very happy with the challenge and accepted it with a new way of thinking.The idea of her TED Talk is to show the difference and then give ways to see the change in the fixed mindset students and have them become a student with a growth mindset. She wants educators to find ways to engage with all the students and encourage this higher level of thinking. Dweck says “First of all, we can praise wisely, not praising intelligence or talent. That has failed. Don’t do that anymore. But praising the process that kids engage in, their effort, their strategies, their focus, their perseverance, their improvement. This process of praise creates kids who are hardy and resilient” (Around 04:00), which is a way for educators to encourage this type of thinking. She wants the education system to create students who are able to think outside the box and have a more creative way to solve problems they are faced with. 

Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt are authors of The Atlantic article called “The Coddling”, which has to do with the coddling of the education system and creating a sheltered environment for students. Their beliefs are that students are being sheltered from what is happening in the outside world due to trigger warnings in colleges. They explain them as, “Trigger warnings are alerts that professors are expected to issue if something in a course might cause a strong emotional response” (Paragraph 2) which is just the first steps in creating this sheltered and censored environment. Lukianoff and Haidt believe that the environment that colleges, and most of the education system in general, are creating is becoming harmful to the student and their future in the society. “Classroom discussions are safe places to be exposed to incidental reminders of trauma (such as the word violate). A discussion of violence is unlikely to be followed by actual violence, so it is a good way to help students change the associations that are causing them discomfort. And they’d better get their habituation done in college, because the world beyond college will be far less willing to accommodate requests for trigger warnings and opt-outs” (Paragraph 38) is a quote directly from their text showing that they believe that classrooms should be a safe place to have discussions and prepare students for the types of conversations they will hear and or face in the real world. Lukianoff and Haidt want students to be able to be safe while still talking about things that matter.

Revised: Carol Dweck is an education researcher taking the idea of expanding knowledge to a new level. She believes in two different types of mindsets in students: a Fixed Mindset and a Growth Mindset. A Fixed Mindset is when you are faced with a problem you run away from it and are unable to solve it. These are students who do not understand a way to think at a deeper and higher level. While a Growth Mindset is a student who when you are faced with the same problem see a way to solve the problem. They think at a different level and see the problem as a puzzle to solve. The idea of her TED Talk is to show the difference between these mindsets and then give ways to see the change in the fixed mindset students and have them start to gain a growth mindset. She wants educators to find ways to engage with all the students and encourage this higher level of thinking. She wants the education system to create students who are able to think outside the box and have a more creative way to solve problems they are faced with. Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt are authors of The Atlantic article called “The Coddling”, which has to do with the coddling of the education system and creating a sheltered environment for students. Their beliefs are that students are being sheltered from what is happening in the outside world due to trigger warnings in colleges. They explain them as, “Trigger warnings are alerts that professors are expected to issue if something in a course might cause a strong emotional response” (Paragraph 2) which is just the first steps in creating this sheltered and censored environment. Lukianoff and Haidt believe that the environment that colleges, and most of the education system in general, are creating is becoming harmful to the student and their future in the society. Dweck and Lukianoff and Haidt all have these ideas of mindsets and what they do to the developing mind. Whether it be running away from a problem like Dweck says or saying something triggers you like Lukainoff and Haidt say, they are both talking about mindset and how to overcome the fixed way of thinking.

Lukianoff and Haidt are right that trigger warnings are becoming more apparent on college campuses, but he seems on more dubious ground when he claims that having a professor give a trigger warning at the beginning of class is still wrong. If the teacher is going over a hard topic, that may be upsetting to people, they may state that this is what we are going over just so everyone knows. If they don’t do this they can cause chaos in the classroom that they do not want to deal with. Creating this open conversation between teachers and students will create a better learning environment for everyone. 

By focusing on the growth the students are making, Dweck overlooks the deeper problem of not praising the students for their natural knowledge. If we don’t tell these kids they are smart they are not going to push themselves to either eb better or gain the knowledge their classmates have. By telling them that they are smart, and praising their intelligence as well, we are going to boost their confidence and help them become even better students with a higher Growth Mindset than if we don’t.

Lukianoff and Haidts theory that trigger warnings create a person who is not ready to be a part of society is extremely useful because it sheds light on the difficult problem of trigger warnings. Trigger warnings are creating students that are not able to think on their own, they rely on someone else to change topics and conversations for them. If we continue to let trigger warnings run our lives then these students will not be able to face the challenges that come with the real world.

Dweck’s theory that we are wasting lives by not capturing the true knowledge that students have is extremely useful because it sheds light on the difficult problem of a fixed mindset. If we help students become the best version of themselves, education wise, then we can create a type of person who is equipped to handle tough situations in the real world. By creating this growth mindset in students we will be bettering them for a future in a society that does not have room for a fixed mindset.

What big concerns did you have about your draft as you completed the first draft? 

The biggest concerns that I had once I finished my first draft was the length of if. I thought that there were too many words and that I had too much information in my paper that would make it boring to read. When I get in the groove, the words just start to flow out of me and makes it very hard to create a shorter essay. The length was my only concern, because I knew that I hit all the important points in both texts and had done a good job explaining them. 

What did your peers like about your paper?

Bridget was my peer in this and was the one to read over my paper. From our conversation in class, she continued to bring up my ending of the essay, “ Let’s stop wasting the potential of the future generations, and have a better and more understanding future”, she said that it was really good and was a good way to wrap up my essay. She did also say that she liked a lot of my explanations and how they brought together my own ideas and opinions as well as the ideas and opinions of the other authors. 

Where are you working best with Dweck? What do your peers think you can do to improve that section?

I am working best with Dweck when I use her quote, “On the left, you see the fixed-mindset students. There’s hardly any activity. They run from the error. They don’t engage with it” (around 01:51) because in my essay I engage with the fixed-mindset and how we can fix it. And in this quote you see exactly what Dweck believes a fixed mindset is and what these students do when faced with a problem. Bridget also said that she enjoyed the way I explained the quote. “Very very good explanation of the quote and it supports the argument well. The explanation of fixed mindset in regards to students is crucial to your argument” this is Bridget’s comment from that section. And when she and I talked in class we both agreed that while I do a good job explaining sometimes I can explain too much, which is seen with other quotes as well. And I can definitely see how she liked the way I ended this quote, but I can also see the issue with the explanation as well. 

Where are you working best with Lukianoff and Haidt? What do your peers think you can do to improve that section?

I am working best with Lukianoff and Haidt  when I am using this quote,  “Attempts to shield students from words, ideas, and people that might cause them emotional discomfort are bad for the students. They are bad for the workplace, which will be mired in unending litigation if student expectations of safety are carried forward” (Paragraph 58). I think that this is a fantastic quote and you can really see their perspective on trigger warnings. This quote has so many layers to it and I can really explain and dive into my ideas since my ideas are similar to Lukianoff and Haidt. Bridget also commented on this quote for me saying “I can see your perspective coming out here, you use the quote to segue into your own idea. i think it is a valid point and supports your claim well”. She sees how I agree with this quote and how it works for my argument in my essay. But similarly to the Dweck quote I need to just me more precise and shorten my explanations. 

According to my peers, what are your two biggest challenges in your work with the texts? How do you think you can address those challenges in your revision? 

According to Bridget, which I also agree with, is that in some parts of my essay there is just too much explanation that is making the essay longer. She said that in some parts it is necessary but in others it is just too much. And I completely agree with her, a bad habitat of mine is either too much detail or too little detail so I need to find the perfect medium. To fix this issue I am going to go back and reread each of my paragraphs and take out the unnecessary detail and explain things that I probably have already said in my essay, and make it concise and easier to read. The second challenge that Bridget pointed out is spelling mistakes, which I am aware of. When I am writing I just get going so fast trying to get my thoughts out onto the page that I make spelling mistakes or sentence errors. And for a rough draft that is alright, but for the final draft I need to go back in and get rid of those mistakes and the run on sentences. Overall I just need to do some clean up to make it a more enjoyable read. 

Using guidance from your peers, put your overall perspective into a sentence or two. How will you help your reader “get” your perspective?

Trigger warnings are creating a fixed mindset in students, that they cannot function without them. And this is creating a person that is not going to be able to thrive in the real world.  Both Bridget and I talked a lot about perspective in both of our essays, and I believe that my perspective is very apparent in my essay. But in order for the readers to understand my perspective, I will be using powerful quotes from Lukianoff/Haidt and Dweck that show what trigger warnings are and what a fixed mindset is. And then explain how they connect and just what the issue between the two is. Making sure the explanation is there in my essay will show my perspective and what I want the readers to get from reading my essay. 

Quote 1: Carol Dweck believes that there are ways for educators to praise their students and have them believe in themselves to create this type of mindset. “First of all, we can praise wisely, not praising intelligence or talent. That has failed…. This process of praise creates kids who are hardy and resilient” (Around 04:00). If we continue this praise and encouragement, then the students will see their progress and see the positive side of thinking in a more critical way. 

With this quote I decided to use the ellipses. I got rid of the clutter in the middle of this quote that did not add anything to the quote. When I got rid of this middle part of the quote, I made sure that my audience was understanding what I was trying to convey with this quote. This shows my readers that praising the intelligence of students is a problem but if we praise the understanding their knowledge and how they develop the knowledge.

Quote 2: When looking at students with fixed mindsets, Dweck sees a big difference in how these students are performing. “On the left, you see the fixed-mindset students. There’s hardly any activity. They run from the error. They don’t engage with it” (around 01:51). These students don’t understand a problem and they get scared and run away without solving the problem they are faced with. 

This quote I left the way it was because it was a shorter quote and it got right to the point. It described everything that I wanted my readers to see and understand what my message is here. I knew that this quote is short enough to get right to my point and really shows the reader just what a fixed mindset is and what it means. This is a really important quote to leave on its own and not change.

Quote 3: Lukianoff and Haidt see the hardships of what will happen when you continue to let students use trigger warnings on campuses. “And universities will have reinforced the belief that it’s okay to filter out the positive. If students graduate believing that they can learn nothing from people they dislike or from those with whom they disagree, we [educators] will have done them a great intellectual disservice” (Paragraph 57). They are stating that they are creating students with this mindset that will hinder them from going far in life, because they are so stuck in their ways and cannot expand their minds.

With this quote I added a bracket to my quote , to make my readers understand who the “we” are that Lukianoff and Haidt were talking about. I added this in so that my readers would be able to see the bigger picture instead of guessing who this “we” was. Being able to have this labeled and showed in my essay will help show my perspective and how I feel about the issue that Lukianoff and Haidt are talking about.