The Tinder Mentality- Beyond the Dating World

It seems that articles on dating and relationships in the world today have been flooding my newsfeed as of late. Perhaps it’s the summer wedding season taking its toll on my non-married friends (and, honestly, the rest of the world)– a need to say “look, this is really hard for some of us.” Two recent articles have haunted me: the first, Vanity Fair’s graphic look at Tinder and today’s hookup culture (http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2015/08/tinder-hook-up-culture-end-of-dating), the second, a sweeter, more personal individual’s account of a brief romantic encounter that never went anywhere but could have from the New York Times (http://nyti.ms/1KTAZ35). I read these articles with a strange mixture of intrigue, fear, and triumph.

Triumph because I’m a survivor. I am, essentially, an online dating success story (if online dating success is defined as forming a long term relationship with someone you meet online). I met my now fiancé, A., in February 2014 on Hinge, a dating app that connects you with single friends of friends on facebook. It didn’t hurt that we happened to attend the same graduate school and even had a class together in the past. We were “facebook official” in March, moved in together in August, and were engaged on New Year’s Day 2015, less than 11 months from our first date.

I experience fear when I read these articles because I’m only a year and a half removed from that world, and I never want to go back. Before meeting A., I dabbled in online dating, but didn’t have the time, self-esteem, or, frankly, interest, in hooking up with different guys every night, like the Vanity Fair article describes. I was looking for a serious relationship- a partner- though I certainly interacted with people looking for other things. In a “market” seemingly saturated with people looking for low-commitment high sex encounters, I feel lucky to have found someone looking for the same things I was. I would seriously fear re-entering that world.

The social worker in me also reads these articles with intrigue. I, like so many others, want to know how this culture developed and what it reflects about the needs and fears of those in the dating world today. Writers have argued that the ways millennials operate in the dating world reflects the world we have grown up in - a world of endless choices and instant gratification- where there’s always a newer model in development and divorce seems more common than long lasting relationships.    

But the truth is, this attitude and its behaviors are not limited to the worlds of consumer electronics and dating, and they are not only being enforced by technology and sex obsessed millennials. Take the job market and hiring process, for example. Now, I remember learning from the first sessions I went to at my college’s career center, that one of the hardest parts of the job search was getting your foot in the door. Sending out blind cover letters and resumes would likely result in no response. Thus the importance of networking to find people to help to bring your application to the top of a pile. So, when A. embarked on a job search this past spring, I knew that there would be jobs he would send initial applications to and never hear a word from. Annoying, but the way things work.

What I wasn’t prepared for was how organizations would continue to treat him further along in the hiring process. He’s had a number of jobs reach out for a first round phone interview, and once that’s completed, never follow up. Even worse, he’s had skype interviews with entire hiring committees without timely follow up. I’m an optimistic but realistic person. I can accept that A. may not have been the perfect fit for some of these positions or that there may be other, more qualified, applicants. But these are the facts: A. is a person, he is a qualified professional, and he deserves a response.

It struck me a few nights ago as we grumpily made dinner at the close of day 11 after an interview promising “next steps” in 7-10 days that this process feels like a complete mirror of the dating culture all of these articles have described. Instead of a guy or girl you’ve gone on a seemingly good first date with “ghosting,” that is, disappearing and not responding to any follow up messages in order to avoid the awkwardness of stating rejection or to keep options open in case someone better comes around, it’s a potential employer.  Meanwhile applicants wait with their hopes and lives and livelihoods on the line.

Our society seems to have developed another kind of double standard where a thank you note (or, let’s face it, e-mail) post interview is essentially a requirement, but employers feel no obligation to keep applicants updated on their application status. And, let’s be clear, the people making these hiring process decisions are not the millennials who act out these same behaviors in their dating lives- they are the professionals who write and talk about these behaviors like they are new and unique to a particular generation.

The fact is our avoidance of rejection, of difficult conversations, and of commitment - our beliefs that there is always a better option and that people can infer what we mean without us having to state it -- These are not just characteristics of millennials- these are characteristics of our entire society that permeate every aspect of our lives from shopping to dating to applying for jobs. We seem to have forgotten that commitment is OK, and so is outright saying no. But it’s the in between, the “limbo” place, which is harmful, painful, and oh so pervasive. I think this should change. And, call me biased, but I think HR policies would be a great place to start. 

Final Morocco Reflection

Written May/June 2014, never posted. 

In our final reflection time together as a group, one of our group members spoke about how much she appreciated our group dynamic and our interactions with members of the Moroccan Jewish community, saying that “we all understand what it means to be Jewish.” This comment struck me, in somewhat of a humorous way, as I thought about the fact that each one of us had a completely different definition about what it meant to be Jewish. We have differing beliefs, practices, values, backgrounds, cultures, and even languages. And yet, there is no denying that we felt a sense of commonality with each other and with the Moroccan Jews who we met. I suppose that we would call this sense of commonality “Jewish Peoplehood”, but what does that mean? What are the elements that make up Jewish peoplehood? What is the thing that makes X% of American Jews claim that they are proud to be Jewish, while simultaneously holding vastly different ideas about what being Jewish actually means?

The answer that comes to mind, though it is morbid and I’m not sure that I like it, is that when I meet another Jew, even if that person is completely different from me on every level, there is a voice inside of me that says: if someone wanted to kill this person because they are Jewish, they would want to kill me too. History has proven this: those who have persecuted the Jewish people have done so without regard for how assimilated or observant we were. In the concentration camps, Chassidic rabbis and wealthy secular business men worked and died next to one another- it did not matter.

I have to admit, I find it disturbing. Have Jewish peoplehood and the concept of common Jewish identity been established and defined by our enemies? I want to answer: No! What about the biblical notion of B’nei Israel. From the times of the Torah, the ancient Israelites identified themselves as a separate, different people. They were different because of their belief in only one God, their rituals and practices related to cleanliness and purity, and their moral behaviors. Now, however, we no longer share common beliefs or rituals or practices or behaviors, and I can’t help but feel that what defines us as a people is merely the fact that our enemies would hate each one of us equally. And as we move further and further away from the tragedies of the pogroms and the Holocaust, how many Jews will continue to feel the unifying force of that common threat? What happens to Jewish peoplehood and common Jewish identity when we are left to define it for ourselves?

Luckily, I am far from the first person to ask these questions, and I know that Jewish organizations throughout the country are working to answer them. Personally, I believe that the answer starts with education. Increased Jewish literacy may not produce more devout or observant Jews, but it will give us a common language and toolkit with which to approach the conversations about who we are and what defines us.

"The air peculiar to us": Reflections on our second day in Morocco

Originally posted 5/28/2014 on http://jdcentwine.org/blog/1021

One of the reasons that I wanted to go on a trip with JDC Entwine was to have the opportunity to interact with a Jewish community outside of the US or Israel and to explore the concept of global Jewish peoplehood. Our second day in Morocco gave me that opportunity.

We spent the day visiting different organizations that JDC helps to support in Casablanca which included an all Jewish primary school, a Jewish and Muslim high school, a free health clinic, and two residences for the elderly. It was incredible to see how JDC helps to support the Moroccan Jewish community throughout the life course.

Throughout our visits, one word kept coming to mind: "language." More specifically, I kept thinking about the role that language played in uniting or dividing our group with the members of the Jewish community who we visited. I do not speak French or Arabic, the main languages in Morocco and many of the people we visited with do not speak English- this created a natural barrier between us. It is much more difficult to really learn about someones life without being able to engage in a meaningful conversation with them and I found it frustrating!

Despite my frustration, there were incredible moments of connection during our visits. We found that a number of the elderly residents, particularly those who were originally from northern Morocco, spoke Spanish. A few members of our group are fluent in Spanish, and while I have not really made use of my Spanish since high school, I can understand a lot when I hear it. Suddenly, a large language barrier was diminished. I also witnessed language being defined as much more than native dialect as I watched our group connect with the Muslim and Jewish high school students over soccer, Justin Timberlake, selfies, and plans for the future.

Amidst all of the connections that I witnessed, what was most striking to me was the impact of having a common Jewish language. In the primary school, the students were too young to have started learning English, which meant that most of us interacted with them through gestures and games. When we went into classrooms to observe, however, they pulled out their siddurim and I felt an immediate connection. Sure, they were using a different version than I do at home, but the liturgy was the same. As they began singing prayers for us, I found myself joining in on common tunes. In the last class we visited, we sang "Yerushalayim Shel Zahav" together, a reminder of our shared love for Israel. In the old age home, we also found ourselves singing Hebrew songs with the residents, many of whom could not interact verbally with others in any language.

As we went through the day, I couldn't help but think about an article I read in graduate school by Leon Wieseltier entitled "Language, Identity, and the Scandal of American Judaism" (2011). Wieseltier's main claim in the article is that American Judaism is in trouble because American Jews are largely illiterate in Jewish languages. This illiteracy means that American Jews can neither fully learn about their people’s history nor can they create authentically Jewish works. Now, I don't think that this is the time or place to engage in a full conversation about this article, but it definitely came to mind as I thought about the commonalities that unite Jews across the world and the role that Hebrew knowledge does and could play. In the article, Wieseltier writes that: “Our language is our incommensurable inflection of our humanity, our unique way of presenting, not least to ourselves, what is our unique way through the world. Our language is our element, our beginning, our air, the air peculiar to us” (Wieseltier, 17). On our second day in Morocco, I think that we learned that language can be defined in many different ways and that Jews all over the world do share many things in common. Our visits are also challenging me to think about the ways that we can strengthen our common language and thus our connections to one another.

Mid Year Post

Originally posted on 1/29/2012 at http://behindtheconcessionstand.blogspot.com/2012/01/mid-year-blog-post.html

This time of year marks the halfway point in my term of service, and to commemorate that we were given letters that we wrote to ourselves during orientation. I was pretty skeptical about the whole activity, mostly because it reminded me of things like new years resolutions where you set goals for yourself that you are inevitably going to struggle to keep up with. Having those goals and hopes in writing, I figured, would only make me feel worse if they weren't followed through on. In some ways, that is true, but in other ways, this letter has served as a good reminder of the things I find important.

"Dear Self,

The whole point of this letter is to capture the optimism and energy of orientation to be looked at in 6 months- probably when we're heading towards burn out. To be honest, I'm not really feeling the positivity at the moment, so I'm sorry if this might not be the type of letter you might want or need right now.

Despite my kind of "meh" mood at the moment, I have a lot to be proud of. I've gotten good at articulating what I want and going for it. I've done quite a few things in the last couple of weeks that have involved making myself quite vulnerable- and I've made it through each one mostly unscathed. I hope that when I read this in the future, I am still doing these things because I really think it helps me be my authentic self as much as possible.

I hope I've made a name for myself in this organization. I know that I have a lot of insight and dedication to give and I am ready to really show that to everyone I serve with.

I hope you still love your job. I hope you are more firm with your students and that they are succeeding because of that. I hope that team Harding still takes time out of the day to have fun, and that despite everything, you're still not ready to leave on friday afternoons. Mostly, I hope you feel empowered, trusted, and loved in every area of your life, and if you don't, that you are working to change it.

Hang in there,
Abigail"

Be the spark!

Originally posted on 1/24/2012 at http://behindtheconcessionstand.blogspot.com/2012/01/be-spark-fuel-fire.html

To Ben, who knew long before we ever could about the flames our sparks could cause and who supported and believed in us the entire way!


In my opinion, January is terrible. It’s cold, it’s dark, the holidays are over, and when I got up this morning the wind chill was -25. Sometimes, in these conditions, it’s hard to stay motivated or to remember why we leave the warmth of our beds in the morning.

Today, one student reminded us.

By the end of session, we had three students left (let’s just say the students are lacking some motivation too). We decided to show them the video that was made about our organization as part of an award we received in the fall. At the end of the showing, we were all in tears. The students started to reflect on the movie and then the program itself.

Victoria’s student, K., sat at his desk clearly deep in thought. Nearly always in his NJROTC uniform, K. is incredibly polite, loyal, kind, and surprisingly insightful. For most of the year, his case manager told him that he would have to go to a 2-year school because his baseline ACT score was a 9 and he has a diagnosed learning disability. The day K. got accepted to his first school was one for the memory books.

Finally ready to share his thoughts, K. started to talk about the impact of our program. He told us that this program changes everyone’s lives, inside and out. His friends can see what he has accomplished and are inspired to make their lives better too. He thanked us for our hard work, and we told him that we couldn’t do what we do without motivated and promising students like him. His response to this was a powerful analogy. He compared himself and the other students in our program to fires and us, their coaches, to the gas that keeps the flame going. Flames can sometimes get really small, he said, and without something to keep them going, they can burn out.

Hopefully this can serve as a reminder to all of us that the work/service that we do is making a big difference. In these cold months, stay motivated and keep fueling the fire!

Classism in the college application process: why fee waivers are not enough

Originally posted on 11/16/2011 at http://behindtheconcessionstand.blogspot.com/2011/11/classism-in-college-application-process.html

As I work through the college application process with my students, I have flashbacks to my own application process:

It was winter break 2005 and I spread out all of my college application materials across our expansive kitchen island. I had been rejected from the school I applied early decision to and it was cram time. In about a week I managed to crank out 11 applications which we then sent overnight express to each campus. I have a distinct memory of my mom being around during this whole process. I know that part of the reason was for moral support, another part was because I had her look over all of my applications and essays before I considered them final, but another reason was because she was the keeper of the check book, and each application required a check.

Luckily, most schools have come to the realization that for low income students especially, a $35-$55 application fee is simply not feasible, and they allow/provide fee waivers for students who are receiving free/reduced price lunch. My students would not be able to apply to nearly as many colleges if they were required to pay the application fees for all of them and I am glad that these types of provisions are in place to promote equal access to higher education.

Unfortunately, there are still costs that have yet to be fully addressed, especially by many more elite/selective schools. I have one student who is applying to a number of incredibly selective schools, many of which I applied to or considered applying to. While all schools require official ACT/SAT test scores, most will accept the scores as reported on student transcripts. Others will often accept a copy of the reports we have mailed to our organization's office. Today I had to deal with a school that accepts nothing but the official score reports sent from the testing website.

The process for sending official ACT score reports goes like this: When students register to take the ACT, they can send up to 4 score reports for free along with their registration. After they've taken the test and received their scores, reports cost an additional $10 per report, per test, per school. My student has taken the ACT 4 times; two of which he was able to take for free using a fee waiver, but the other two he paid nearly $50 each to take. The college in question requires students to sign an agreement that they will submit the official reports from every test taken. This would be a $40 cost for my student (one for each of the ACT tests he took). After explaining the situation to admissions staff, I was able to get them to agree to accept just the reports from the tests my students want considered, but he will still have to pay for the reports from those tests. What about the students who do not have an advocate?

It is incredibly difficult to talk with my students about the fees and costs related to college applications. For many of my students, the decision ends up being between paying for an additional score report(s) and giving their 1-3 hours of wages to their family or into their savings account for college. These fees are ridiculous and could be the difference between a qualified student applying to a college or not. As an higher income student, I had the luxury to apply to as many schools as I wanted, send scores to as many schools as I wanted to, an complete applications on my own time line since my parents covered all of the costs and fees. Low income students do not have such luxury. Even when fees can be waived, these students have limited time frames to get things completed and submitted or a limited number of reports they can get. I don't believe that we can consider access to higher education to be equal until students of all income backgrounds really do have the same opportunities.

I find it particularly frustrating to see these policies being implemented to schools that claim to be committed to economic diversity on their campus. These schools identify themselves as being ready to meet full financial need of their admitted students, yet they cannot comprehend the financial burden of applying to their institutions.

Some Overwhelming Thoughts

Originally posted on 10/20/2011 at http://behindtheconcessionstand.blogspot.com/2011/10/some-overwhelming-thoughts.html

On Saturday morning, my student who is 7 months pregnant will take her second, and final ACT. Next to her, or perhaps in a different classroom, will be the student who didn't take the test in June because his father was in the hospital and, soon after, died. Finally, my only student who never took the ACT, the one whose house I drove to and whose family I woke up at 7am one day, will take the test after battling months of crippling depression and absence from school. And still, a few seats away, will be my students who opted to take the test for a 3rd time and who are currently paying me back for the $49 registration feel in installments from their pay checks.

Each day, this job humbles me.

A new school year has begun, and it has taken no time at all to feel overwhelmed, under-rested, and as though I will never be able to do or give enough to my students. Although, I suppose, that is the nature of the service that we do: to realize how incredibly vast and deep the gap is between the options and achievement of low income students and their higher income peers in our society, and to commit to battling it day after day until more people and more institutions take notice and commit to change.

I have already experienced my first celebrations and my first disappointments. My first student was accepted to college, and my first 7 students were not awarded a scholarship that I nominated them for. I know that this year will be full of such ups and downs, and my hope is that the ups overwhelmingly outweigh the downs.

Can low income students afford to be untalented?

Originally posted on 4/15/2011 at http://behindtheconcessionstand.blogspot.com/2011/04/can-low-income-students-afford-to-be.html

So, I haven't posted in a bit and have a ton to catch up on with this blog, but I'm up late waiting for a brisket to cool and reflecting on my day, and here are some thoughts.

Right now our students are applying for summer enrichment program- basically any program of any length over the summer that will keep them active mentally or physically, help them explore an interest, aid in developing college related skills, or give them some experience on a college campus. One of my students is applying to do a summer program at a local art school- a 2-week pre-college program on comic illustrations. Anyone who applies to the program has to fill out an application with the basic types of question about parents and emergency contacts and a brief statement of interest, and most students pay an application fee and a multiple hundred dollar tuition, though there are scholarships available. However, to apply for a scholarship, students must not only fill out the regular application, but they must also submit a portfolio of 10 of their pieces of artwork. When I learned this it started to rub me the wrong way: basically students who could afford it could just sign up for the class, but lower income students have to prove their interest and talent in ways that wealthier students do not. In some ways, it makes perfect sense. How could anyone expect to get free money without proving some level of skill or talent? Scholarship money, of any sort, should go to students who truly want and need it- and in this case, to students who show an active interest (and probably talent) in art.

So, despite the fact that this policy does make sense to me, I continue to feel kind of icky about it, especially when I think about my childhood experiences. Growing up, I would be the kid who decided two days before the due date that I wanted to do a program like this art program. I would write a little paragraph about how great art is and how learning blah blah blah would help me develop some skill or understand the world or reflect on blah blah, my parents would write a check, and I would be set- excited to try something new and my parents happy to have something to entertain me over the summer. I was a child of many extracurricular activities. Seriously. I took lessons on 3 instruments, ice skated, horseback rode, played 3 racket sports, and did gymnastics. In fact, the only activities I can think of that I never tried are organized field team sports, speech or debate, and karate (or similar combat sport). And, for the most part, I was/am terrible at every activity I tried. In fact, I'm actually best at making fun of myself, shopping, baking oatmeal chocolate chip cookies, and arguably writing- and I learned none of these things through private lessons over the summer or school year. Despite being terrible at every activity I tried, I still had the opportunity to try many new activities and meet a lot of different people- gaining a large amount of cultural and social capital along the way.

My students, for the most part, do not have the opportunity to explore activities the way that I did and that's because, for the most part, they have to prove an actual talent or incredibly strong interest in something to make a commitment to it. Their families require this proof in order to legitimize dedicating their time, effort, and sometimes money to this activity for their child and the activities themselves require it to allow fees or tuition to be waived or subsidized.

This whole phenomenon is mirrored perfectly within college as well. I have written a number of times about my privilege to be able to "tool around" in my elite liberal arts school majoring in religion and taking courses like "Jewish Ethics"- a path that is somewhat impractical but interesting. Many of my students, on the other hand, are incredibly focused on finding schools with the pre-professional programs they think that they want. Because while I had the luxury to try out a number of activities, classes, etc, with the hopes of finding my "calling" or interests, many low income students must find the most direct and practical path that draws on their strengths and talents.

To end this babbling I have two big questions:
- First, does this phenomenon of low income students having less opportunities to explore areas where they have yet to develop any particular talent only contribute to the lack of socioeconomic mobility in society? I ask this because it seems that having the ability to explore a number of paths or activities connects someone with many people, ideas, or organizations that will ultimately be helpful in the future. For people without the access to such resources achieving the same types of mobility may be difficult.

- Second, I wonder if any studies have been done on the success or achievement of low income students in various extra curricular activities versus their wealthier peers. I would hypothesize that low income students in such activities are often better at them than their wealthier peers because they often have to demonstrate a talent in order to become involved instead of simply signing a check.

A Classist ACT Prompt?

Originally posted on 2/6/2011 at http://behindtheconcessionstand.blogspot.com/2011/02/classist-act-prompt.htm

Last weekend my students took their third practice ACT. This is an exciting time because they have finally had a few good weeks of ACT strategy and they are eager to see if their scores have improved. This is also an important time for me to figure out which students are understanding the material and which students need some extra attention. While most of my students seemed confident that they had at least improved a little on each section, they left the test with defeated looks on their faces after finishing the last section, the essay. After reading the prompt, it's not hard to see why my students felt this way.

The prompt goes:

"Most people enjoy having a yard so that they can design both the exterior and the interior of their homes. Some people prefer landscaping that is polished and controlled, with lush green lawns, carefully trimmed shrubs or bushes, and flowers that are replaced each season so that they remain fresh and colorful. Proponents of this type of landscaping believe that the visual design of a yard is the most important factor and that neighborhoods should have standard guidelines so that the area looks uniform and consistent. Opponents of polished landscaping believe that yards require a variety of treatments, based on factors such as the climate conditions of the region, and advocate for choices that incorporate water conservation, native species, and edible plants. In your opinion, should people follow standard landscaping guidelines that focus on a yard's visual design, or should they vary their landscaping design out of consideration for other factors like climate or conservation?"



As I see it, there are two main problems with this prompt:

1. We told our students that every prompt they would get on the ACT would have something to do with their lives as students, something they could relate to. We gave examples of debates surrounding school uniforms, year round schools, single sex education, serving fast food in the cafeteria, weighted grades, the list goes on. This prompt has nothing to do with the lives of the majority of high schoolers in this country and I'm pretty sure that most high schoolers would have no opinion on the issue whatsoever (unless you're one of my good friends who worked summers with a landscaping company).

2. This prompt certainly has no relevance or context for most low income or urban students- who may be living in housing without yards or might not have the income to afford landscaping. This is the issue I will be focusing on for the remainder of this post.

Most of my students qualify for free or reduced lunch and if they don't, they definitely make well under the average income for the state. The neighborhoods surrounding the school where I work have small yards, but, as far as I can tell, no neighborhood association regulating landscaping or anything else. When I think of neighborhood associations, I think of wealthy neighborhoods where the residents can afford to pay dues to have a council that puts on BBQs and gives gifts to the mailmen. That is certainly not the kind of neighborhood my students come from. For those who don't live in single family homes, they live in apartments or town homes without yards. Thus, this prompt brings up a concept that almost none of my students have any experience with.

In fact, quite a few of my students did not know what landscaping was- and this was true among my coworkers as well. In their essays we had students argue for having landscapes instead of yards or having a back yard, or what to put in your yard (think swimming pool and playground). It was clear that besides not having any personal experience with landscaping in their own yards, they had never even encountered the term.

To me this begged the question: 'is this a classist prompt??' And honestly, I believe the answer is yes. The definition of 'classist' is "biased based on social or economic class." For a writing prompt to be classist it would have to give an unfair advantage to those of a certain social or economic class. I believe this prompt does just that. If I had this prompt when I was taking the ACT (or SAT in my case), I would have had absolutely no trouble answering the prompt. Why? Because most if not all of the neighborhoods I lived in growing up had guidelines for landscaping. More than that, I'm pretty sure that for at least the last 13 years my family has had a LANDSCAPER. I grew up seeing drawings for new gardens in our yard, hearing about the installation of underground sprinklers, and watching my parents ask permission from neighborhood councils to put fences in my yard (and wouldn't you know they even cared about what material the fences were made out of). I grew up surrounded by this information because my parents had the expendable income to pay for everything that comes with landscaping and because we belonged in a social class that expected it of us.

Most of my students do not have the same exposure to landscaping as I did, giving them an unfair disadvantage when approaching this prompt. In the words of one of my co-workers: "they might as well have asked if hired help should be full time or part time or if neighborhoods should be gated or not!"- this prompt was clearly aimed towards a set of students with a certain life style, one which, from my knowledge, most urban low income students do not share.

It's incredibly frustrating to think that a standardized test, one which is supposed to put students on an even level regardless of their high school, background, religion, race, etc. can so blatantly give an advantage to some students over others. What's worse is that it is really difficult to help our students overcome this type of disadvantage. We can teach our students how to write a well structured essay, but we cannot give them life experiences they've never had- and when a whole prompt is based on such an experience, having it can make or break one's score.

Numbers and Their Meaning

Originally posted on 12/15/10 at http://behindtheconcessionstand.blogspot.com/2010/12/numbers-and-their-meaning.html 

The organization I work for uses a lot of numbers and statistics. After all, it is due to some sobering and unfair statistics that the organization exists at all, for example: low income students are almost 30% less likely to enroll in college as their wealthier peers, every year there are 200,000 low income student who graduate from high school and are capable of going to college but do not go, and, in a 2005 article I just found, only 6% of low income students can expect to earn a bachelor's degree by age 24, compared to 51% average nationally.

It is only logical, then, that since we base our existence on statistics, we must be able to show statistics that prove our effectiveness. The amount of numbers floating around my head and our organization-wide friday meetings is overwhelming: number of students, rate of reliability for rsvps for a college visit, number of schools applied to, amount of scholarship money received, average baseline score, percentage increased, number of students enrolled, number of students dropped... the list goes on and on.

Yesterday, a new set of numbers came out: ACT 2 scores and percentage increase from baseline scores. With 82% of my 41 students tested, they've had a 7.7% score increase. Victoria, of course, blew me out of the water with 97% (functionally 100%) of her students achieving a 13% score increase. In a desperate attempt not to feel like such a loser, I began breaking my numbers down into more numbers. 22 of my students increased their scores with an average of an 18% increase. Six of my student got the same scores. 5 of my student's scores decreased an average of 11%, and I have one outlier, we'll deal with him later. Before I knew it I had a major excel document with every students baseline and ACT2 score and their score increase/decrease percentage color coded by percent attendance. It was getting a little scary.

With all of these numbers floating around in my head, I went to session and began having brief check-in meetings with each of my students, and it was then, cheesily, that I realized that my statistics, no matter how specific, broken down, high, or low, could never do justice to the experiences of my students. No percent could make me more happy than the smile on my student's face who improved from an 11 to a 17, or more determined to solve the mystery of my incredibly attentive student who dropped from a 16 to a 12, or more proud of my ridiculously high achiever who started with a 28 and has made it a goal to improve by 2 points every practice test and might actually do it, or more frustrated with the student who overslept and went from a 6 to a 10 on his reading section but got 1's on English and Math because he completely missed those sections.

So while I might sit here wishing that 7.7% score increase could be just a few percentage points higher, I must constantly strive to remember that the 7.7% is actually 41 different stories of happiness, triumph, frustration, determination, confusion, sadness, hope, and faith, each one as statistically significant as the next.

Is a 4-year degree program right for every student?

Originally published on 11/3/2010 in http://behindtheconcessionstand.blogspot.com/2010/11/is-4-year-degree-program-right-for.html

One of the primary goals of the organization that I work for is to get all of our students accepted to and enrolled in 4-year degree programs. The idea behind this is that graduates of 4-year program make more money over their lifetimes than graduates of 2-year programs or those who do not go to college. Additionally, students who go to a 4-year school are more likely to stay in school than those in other programs. Lastly, more often than not 4-year programs have a greater emphasis on the Liberal Arts than two year programs which usually focus on specific occupations, thus 4-year programs are considered simply better or more intellectual.

So, sitting here with my Liberal Arts school degree in Religion, in a job I adore but which is in no way financially supportive, with the knowledge that if I decide to finally get a "real job" I'm going to have to go back to school to get a degree in something actually useful- I find myself wondering if a 4-year degree really is the right thing for every student.

Is getting a liberal arts degree specifically and a 4-year degree generally more of a privilege than a necessity? Is forcing our students into 4-year programs only setting them up for failure?

When talking about this with Mitch yesterday after session he mentioned the cases of a few of his students who he is not sure should be going to 4-year schools. Some, he worries, are simply not ready for college- they rarely show up for session, they have poor writing skills, or they have a very difficult time verbally communicating in English. He worries that these students, even if they get into 4-year schools, will end up dropping out because they will be too discouraged and not receive the support they need. Or, there's the student who has a child and very little motivation. Could a 2-year program be a quicker path to a career for this student so that he could start truly providing for his family? Then there's the student who is dead set on being an auto mechanic- there are a few 4-year programs that do exist in that area, but the majority are definitely two year programs. Should that student be forced into a 4-year program simply because that's what the organization has decided is the best place for him regardless of the incredible additional expense and potential time wasted by choosing that program over a 2-year program in the same area?

Then I think of some of my students who are in similar situations. One of them, who wants to be called AMP in this blog (she'll be mentioned again, so I guess it's good for her to have a fake name) really wants to be an orthotist or a prosthetist- aka someone who designs and makes orthotics and prosthetics. When she approached colleges at the mini college fair held at our school all of the representatives told her about pre-med programs and how she would need to go to medical school for that degree. In reality, its a 2-year program at most. Or, there's my student who wants to be a pastry chef and would love to go to the Culinary Institute of America or Le Cordon Bleu. However, both of these schools are considered for-profit institutions that we are supposed to steer our students away from because of their less than stellar retention and graduation rates. I understand the concern, especially with for profit schools that are not specialized, but I also have no interest in sending my students to schools where they cannot study what they want.

So I wonder, then, if our emphasis on 4-year degree program is really motivated by theories of social mobility. Education is widely considered one of the primary sources of social mobility. All of our students are low income and I'm sure that parts of the unspoken goals of the organization is to help them move up in the socioeconomic class ladder. Is it then classist of me to believe that some of our students would be in some ways better off to do shorter programs that would land them in jobs faster rather than enrolling in longer term, less career specific, more expensive programs? Or, is that a good suggestion that would help our students more gradually change their social class standings: instead of jumping from low income, potentially non-educated groups to over educated liberal arts minded groups- taking a brief stop at the educated, hard working class that would actually allow them to support their families and communities?

What this is

I love to write- and in the past, I've written some things that I'm quite proud of. I've created this blog to collect and share some of my favorite blog posts and essays from the past, present and future.