If I had to say either one, I'd say I prefer PowerPoints. Firstly, they give you the opportunity to be creative - although I'm a science major, I do love the arts too. Secondly, they are fairly quick. Last but not least, it gives your fellow peers, co-workers, citizens, whomever, the opportunity to know you personally. Essays are on the other hand usually have a very strict criteria, which leads to unwanted stress among other things. Furthermore, essays don't give you the opportunity to express your visions (w/ pictorials.) Well, technically you can, but you are fairly limited most of the time to the amount of photographs and such that you can have in academic writings. I won't "bag" on essays entirely, I'd prefer an essay over a powerpoint if the topic is interesting and I truly want to voice my opinion...verbally on paper. Powerpoints are pinpointed for visual aids; essays are pinpointed for your words on paper. Both have their pros and cons...
Regardless of how I feel about either; I'd complete both and complete them well. After all, I do love seeing A's.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Saturday, February 25, 2012
kudos to Ms. Taylor Swift
Saw an amazing article, thought I'd post it. It's an article dealing what our society needs more of, generosity, kindness, and inspiration.
Here's the link of the article :)
http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/our-country/cancer-fighting-teen-invites-taylor-swift-prom-gets-214655227.html
Here's the link of the article :)
http://music.yahoo.com/blogs/our-country/cancer-fighting-teen-invites-taylor-swift-prom-gets-214655227.html
Monday, February 20, 2012
Florida has the greatest accumulation of chemical wastes than any other state. The writer goes further stating, "thanks to the phosphate chemical industry centered in Polk County, has a volume of toxic and radioactive waste products three times as large as any of them." Meaning the more industrialized states, such as Texas and Ohio. Much of the waste was stored behind earthen dikes in thousands of acres of acid waste ponds. Also, another reason of why Florida had the greatest accumulation of chemical wastes were because of the rupture of a reservoir dike built by the Florida Power and Light Company to store cooling water for an oil-burning generating plant. Interesting stuff.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=fsEqAAAAIBAJ&sjid=qmcEAAAAIBAJ&pg=6232,2014912&dq=environment+man+made+disaster&hl=en
Wednesday, February 15, 2012
Environmental Question
What Should the Relationship between religion and the environment be?
First, I must say religion and the environment goes hand & hand, or together. God created the Heavens and the Earth; therefore, to be religious, you must respect the environment that our Heavenly father blessed us with. After viewing the video of Dr. Grim and Dr. Tucker, the co-directors of the Yale University forum on Religion and Ecology, I realized that both of the educated individuals believed science and humanities (prime example: religion) will save the current generation, and will continue to save future generations. Earth is a beautiful place that stores all of our lives, so why not take care of it? Why pollute it? Why create adversities for your future children, grandchildren, great-grand children, among others? Why upset our God?
With the help of scientist and humanity people, they can work together to discover new innovations, ideas, creations that will provide help for global crisis, such as climate change (global warming), including many other highly important things that are affecting us for the worst. I agree with their ethics, but I don't agree with a statement made by Dr. Tucker on that, "the bible should be re-written." I feel as though no one is worthy enough to re-write any verse of the bible, period. Respect both, respect God, and the creations that we have be so fortunate to have.
I guess you can say I'm sort of biased, its' because I am a true believer in Christ.
First, I must say religion and the environment goes hand & hand, or together. God created the Heavens and the Earth; therefore, to be religious, you must respect the environment that our Heavenly father blessed us with. After viewing the video of Dr. Grim and Dr. Tucker, the co-directors of the Yale University forum on Religion and Ecology, I realized that both of the educated individuals believed science and humanities (prime example: religion) will save the current generation, and will continue to save future generations. Earth is a beautiful place that stores all of our lives, so why not take care of it? Why pollute it? Why create adversities for your future children, grandchildren, great-grand children, among others? Why upset our God?
With the help of scientist and humanity people, they can work together to discover new innovations, ideas, creations that will provide help for global crisis, such as climate change (global warming), including many other highly important things that are affecting us for the worst. I agree with their ethics, but I don't agree with a statement made by Dr. Tucker on that, "the bible should be re-written." I feel as though no one is worthy enough to re-write any verse of the bible, period. Respect both, respect God, and the creations that we have be so fortunate to have.
I guess you can say I'm sort of biased, its' because I am a true believer in Christ.
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Towards Ecopedagogy: Weaving a Broad-based Peagogy theory
In towards Ecopedagogy, Richard
Kahn argues about environmental education being unresponsive and how
ecopedagogy will affect the planet for the better. He also explains upon the
capitalism society in the century. He opens with, “It is urgent that we assume
the duty of fighting for the fundamental ethical principles, like respect for
the life of human beings, the life of other animals, the life of birds, the
life of rivers and forests.” He continues stating, “I do not believe in love
between men and women, between human beings, if we are not able to love the
world.”
First, is the environmental
education that is taught in school unresponsive to children? Second, are people so “selfish” or/and
“self-centered” with themselves that they don’t care for the good of the
environment? And finally, what
exactly is ecopedagogy according to the author? First, I do believe the
environmental education that is taught in the school system is unresponsive. Secondly,
absolutely, people are driven by money and they do not care for the
environment, as long as they can’t see that they are truly affected by it. And
finally, “ecopedagogy,” according to Richard Kahn is an interdisciplinary
mixture of theories from Joel Kovel, Paulo Freire, and many others, dealing
with race, anthropology, theology, poltical science, philosophy, geography,
class, gender, and species/nature liberation.
Ecopedagogy cannot be
“lowered,” to just the education that we learn about while in school. It’s a
lifelong knowledge and process that we must share with each other, with the
entire general public. Again, I tell you, environmental education in the school
system is surely not enough to help individuals improve their conservation of
energy and sustainability of the ecosystem. The environmental group, EcoVitality,
believes that “Education can seldom change self-interested choices in
circumstances where people can obtain higher incomes through ecologically
destructive activities than by conserving natural features.” Think of the
automobile industry, electricity industry, and how many companies there are
whose doing the absolute worst for the planet. Again, people are getting rich
by any means necessary, whether it harms other people, or the environment in
which they live in.
There was also an article in
The Undersea Journal that showed the widespread practice of dynamite fishing,
which is illegal in virtually all-coastal states. According to Kahn, “while
throughout the oceans, global fishing also has doubled resulting in a recent
report finding that approximately 90% of the major fish species in the world’s
oceans have disappeared.” In addition, “Forty mile-long drift nets are
routinely used to trawl the ocean bottoms, causing incalculable damage to the
ocean ecosystem.” Giant biomass nets are now commonly used and by 2048, it is
expected that there will be no extant commercial fishery left. To succeed with
change, we must show the public (everyone – rich, poor, young, old, you name
it) statistics, surveys’, and prime examples of how they can contribute to a sustainable
ecosystem. Many can fish less, or drive less, ride a bike, walk, there are many
ways that people can contribute to maintaining productivity, diversity,
resilience, and disturbance to the planet.
EcoVitality
– http://ecovitality.org/badeduc.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
