12 Matching Annotations
  1. Oct 2019
    1. I used to have this one-liner: “If you want to emasculate a guy friend, when you’re at a restaurant, ask him everything that he’s going to order, and then when the waitress comes … order for him.” It’s funny because it shouldn’t be that easy to rob a man of his masculinity — but it is.

      If this statement is implying all guys has the same level of sensitivity and pride, then that is clearly wrong. I, for example, this situation won't strip my masculinity away as well as many guys. But if the author is implying that a man's masculinity is sensitive, then yes, I agree that is true. But each man have a certain degree of masculinity, and how they respond varies. (This is just an introductory to their point of their article, I will continue reading)

    2. Last week, 17 people, most of them teenagers, were shot dead at a Florida school. Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School now joins the ranks of Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech, Columbine and too many other sites of American carnage. What do these shootings have in common? Guns, yes. But also, boys. Girls aren’t pulling the triggers. It’s boys. It’s almost always boys.

      Yes and No...It is true that these horrific events happened. The articles are all over the web with a simple search. So the facts are true. But the last few statement contradict each other. It is true that the events she specifically provided all involves a male culprit. But by saying "Girls aren't pulling the trigger"..."many other sites of American Carnage"..."its boys. It's almost always boys" is contradicting, thus false. There are female shooters too. Here's some examples. 1) A women shooter at YouTube Headquarters in California, a very recent event. 2) A women who shot up a elementary school in the lates 1900s: Brenda Spencer. So far of what I have read, I believe that gender has nothing to do with shooting and crimes. The causation is more related to gun laws, federal/city laws, and mental illness, but that is another argument.

      But what I agree on is that there are more male shooters/criminals that male. But why is that? What I believe is that is has to do with biological, psychological, and social factors, which I will answer a bit more as I get through the reading.

    3. Men feel isolated, confused and conflicted about their natures. Many feel that the very qualities that used to define them — their strength, aggression and competitiveness — are no longer wanted or needed; many others never felt strong or aggressive or competitive to begin with. We don’t know how to be, and we’re terrified.

      I believe that this is related to something called hyper-masculinity I believe that the testosterone in males are also responsible for why there are more male shooters. This shows that it is a biological thing and has happened throughout history. Every violent things all involves mostly men no matter what setting it takes place, dating/love, war, competitive games/sports, money, fame, and survival. Only if it involves some sort of loss, hurt, or hurting their pride. However, ALL men are not like this. ONLY those who are incapable of handling the mental/emotional stress, those who are delusional, those that have "guts" and sinister courage JUST to defend their pride from being attacked, which can be summed up as mentally ill. I will refer back to toxic masculinity, most boys with a certain level of mentally illness tends to not get help and are are not as open. This tend to make things worse, and their aggression can turn to physical violence. Girls on the other hand as mentioned are more open and more capable of achieving this help, and will often have other ways other than alcohol/drug abuse to help distract them.

      There are many many many many factors, and it's nearly impossible to list them all. But the general reasons to why there are more men shooter or just male criminals then females is as mentioned biological, psychological, and social factors.

  2. Sep 2019
  3. May 2019
    1. Men feel isolated, confused and conflicted about their natures. Many feel that the very qualities that used to define them — their strength, aggression and competitiveness — are no longer wanted or needed; many others never felt strong or aggressive or competitive to begin with. We don’t know how to be, and we’re terrified.

      I believe that this is related to something called hyper-masculinity I believe that the testosterone in males are also responsible for why there are more male shooters. This shows that it is a biological thing and has happened throughout history. Every violent things all involves mostly men no matter what setting it takes place, dating/love, war, competitive games/sports, money, fame, and survival. Only if it involves some sort of loss, hurt, or hurting their pride. However, ALL men are not like this. ONLY those who are incapable of handling the mental/emotional stress, those who are delusional, those that have "guts" and sinister courage JUST to defend their pride from being attacked, which can be summed up as mentally ill. I will refer back to toxic masculinity, most boys with a certain level of mentally illness tends to not get help and are are not as open. This tend to make things worse, and their aggression can turn to physical violence. Girls on the other hand as mentioned are more open and more capable of achieving this help, and will often have other ways other than alcohol/drug abuse to help distract them.

      There are many many many many factors, and it's nearly impossible to list them all. But the general reasons to why there are more men shooter or just male criminals then females is as mentioned biological, psychological, and social factors.

    2. Last week, 17 people, most of them teenagers, were shot dead at a Florida school. Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School now joins the ranks of Sandy Hook, Virginia Tech, Columbine and too many other sites of American carnage. What do these shootings have in common? Guns, yes. But also, boys. Girls aren’t pulling the triggers. It’s boys. It’s almost always boys.

      Yes and No...It is true that these horrific events happened. The articles are all over the web with a simple search. So the facts are true. But the last few statement contradict each other. It is true that the events she specifically provided all involves a male culprit. But by saying "Girls aren't pulling the trigger"..."many other sites of American Carnage"..."its boys. It's almost always boys" is contradicting, thus false. There are female shooters too. Here's some examples. 1) A women shooter at YouTube Headquarters in California, a very recent event. 2) A women who shot up a elementary school in the lates 1900s: Brenda Spencer. So far of what I have read, I believe that gender has nothing to do with shooting and crimes. The causation is more related to gun laws, federal/city laws, and mental illness, but that is another argument.

      But what I agree on is that there are more male shooters/criminals that male. But why is that? What I believe is that is has to do with biological, psychological, and social factors, which I will answer a bit more as I get through the reading.

    3. I used to have this one-liner: “If you want to emasculate a guy friend, when you’re at a restaurant, ask him everything that he’s going to order, and then when the waitress comes … order for him.” It’s funny because it shouldn’t be that easy to rob a man of his masculinity — but it is.

      If this statement is implying all guys has the same level of sensitivity and pride, then that is clearly wrong. I, for example, this situation won't strip my masculinity away as well as many guys. But if the author is implying that a man's masculinity is sensitive, then yes, I agree that is true. But each man have a certain degree of masculinity, and how they respond varies. (This is just an introductory to their point of their article, I will continue reading)

  4. Jun 2018
    1. Madeline Hunter conceptualized the interplay of effective instructional practices with the theories of motivation, reinforcement and the transfer of learning in the 1980s. She understood the complexity of teaching and integrated research-based teaching practices and brain theories with schoolhouse practicalities. Her methodology was popularized to an extreme in the 80s and 90s and later berated because it seemed too repetitively mechanical and overdone. In the rush to reform, the clarity and directness of Dr. Hunter’s methodologies were set aside for newer trends, especially trends that de-emphasized the importance of the teacher and emphasized the perceived needs of the learner. Interestingly, the current political mandates for improving the achievement of all children in U.S. schools is returning Madeline Hunter’s instructional practices to the front of the classroom. In his 2011 book, Focus: Elevating the Essentials to Radically Improve Student Learning, Mike Schmoker expounds on the values of Hunter’s methodologies.

      Hunter understood the complexity of teaching and integrated research based teaching practices. Her methods were set aside for newer trends but recently returned. (Compared to Dewey who liked clear and simple instruction that challenged children.)

    1. Hunter defined teaching as a series of decisions that take place in three realms: content, learning behaviors of students, and teacher behaviors. Content refers to the specific information, skill, or process that is appropriate for students at a particular time. Content decisions are based upon students' prior knowledge and how it relates to future instruction; simple understandings must precede more complex understandings. Decisions regarding learning behaviors indicate how a student will learn and show evidence of that learning. Because there is no best way for all students to learn, a variety of learning behaviors is usually more effective than one. Evidence of learning must be perceivable by the teacher to ensure that learning has occurred. The third area of decision-making, teacher behavior, refers to the use of principles of learning–validated by research–that enhance student achievement. <!-- google_ad_client = "ca-pub-4803409109489353"; google_ad_width = 728; google_ad_height = 90; google_ad_format = "728x90_as"; google_ad_type = "text_image"; google_ad_channel = "5066729692+9901418216"; google_color_border = "FFFFFF"; google_color_bg = "FFFFFF"; google_color_link = "000099"; google_color_url = "999999"; google_color_text = "000000"; //--> In order to successfully implement Hunter's methods, teachers undergo extensive professional development that conveys the types of decisions they must make. Training includes viewing videotapes that demonstrate effective decision-making in the classroom, and the Teaching Appraisal for Instructional Improvement Instrument (TAIII), administered by a trained observer or coach, which diagnoses and prescribes teacher behaviors to increase the likelihood of student learning.

      Teaching as a series that takes place in three realms: content, learning behaviors of students, and teacher behaviors. Content refers to the specific information, skill, or process that is appropriate for students at a particular time.

    1. Direct instruction and checking for understanding – This part involves quickly assessing whether students understand what has just been demonstrated or presented.

      Direct instruction model of teaching (I do, We do, You do) Teacher demonstrates, class tries, individual practice.

  5. May 2017
  6. Jan 2016
    1. Nomadic hunter-gatherers, they traveled in small bands following megafauna–enormous mammals that included mastodons and giant horses and bison–into the frozen Beringian tundra at the edge of North America.

      Image Description

      I find it amazing that the nomadic hunter-gatherers traveled in small groups, but followed these massive creatures. Looking at this photo of the size comparisons, I can only imagine what it must have been like to hunt them.