Honestly, I don't think like stated by Paul Drucker's that "interactive service workers lack the necessary education to be "knowledge workers". Personally, I would phrase it differently: "interactive service does not require "knowledge workers" to satisfy job requirements". Drucker's statement is wrong because it draws a conclusion on a person based on the type of job that they hold without giving any importance to outside influencing factors.
For example, when I worker at Jack in the Box, most of my co-workers were Mexicans who lived across the border in Mexico and worked here during weekends to make some extra side income. Most of them held a job that definitely required them to be "knowledge workers". For example, one of them was a bank executive, other was a secretary, and other one was a air conditioning technician. These are jobs that arguably require at least some type of "knowledge workers" but just because they also work an "interactive service" job, does not mean they "lack education to be 'knowledge workers'".
It is true interactive service jobs don't require much of a "knowledge worker" to work them. The job itself is the exact same routine every day. Take orders, take them out as fast as possible, and every once in a while when there was a complaint, offer them a free cheesecake and if they were still mad, a free milkshake. In other words, I don't think it will take long until these type of jobs become completely automated, and hopefully it is soon, because they are the most stressing type of job in the world.
But back to Drucker's argument, it is wrong because it makes an assumption about the character of a person based on the type of job they hold, but like I said it undermines outside factors. The basic assumption in his argument is that jobs that require "knowledge workers" make you a better living than those who not. For this same reason, a person who has the necessary education to become a "knowledge worker" would then work at a job that requires "knowledge workers" and not at a "interactive service job". But besides the fact that a lot of "interactive service jobs" in the USA pay a lot more than some "knowledge jobs", there are many other reasons why one could have the necessary education to work a "interactive service job" while still having the education to be a "knowledge worker".
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
Monday, October 3, 2016
Blog #7: Mushfake
I believe everyone has mush faked at some point in their lives. That is because of the simple fact that we are born knowing nothing and are constantly shaping and developing existent and new skills. Whatever that skill is, whether teaching, selling, working... anything, you start knowing absolutely nothing about it and therefore you have to mush fake it! Like they say, fake it till' you make it.
A time where I mush faked before building the identity kit was at my first job tutoring my neighbor's kids for algebra and geometry. It all started with my dad telling my neighbors how great I was doing in my math class which was not the case with my neighbors. He offered to pay me $15 for every hour that I taught them. So without giving it second thought I agreed and went to my neighbors home for the first time.
I honestly did not know what to expect. I definitely had helped my own friends with their math homework and had not problem doing it, but not people who I didn't know too well like it was the case with my neighbors. I remember having a tutor once when I was in 7th grade. This guy was waaaaaaaay older than me, probably about 25 at the time I was like 12. This guy would be like a regular teacher to me, he would ask me to pay attention and get serious when I started day dreaming or so. I wondered whether me tutoring my neighbors would be more like this, or more like I taught my friends. On one side, I was the same age as my neighbors, so I would expect to feel some awkwardness if I asked him to stop playing around and do their work, I felt like I did not have that authority over them. On the other hand, I was getting paid and expected to do my job and teach them effectively.
Good thing I quickly built my identity kit. It consisted of half a friend and half a tutor. It was nothing like the tutor I had when I was in 7th grade, but also was different than helping my best friend with his math homework. We would make jokes every once in a while (something I did not do with my tutor) but also get serious and get work done.
I also think he mush faked his identity as a student... or friend? He started out as if I was his high school teacher giving him tutoring but I think he quickly noticed none of us were comfortable with that, and quickly adopted out half-friend half-tutor/student identity kits respectively.
A time where I mush faked before building the identity kit was at my first job tutoring my neighbor's kids for algebra and geometry. It all started with my dad telling my neighbors how great I was doing in my math class which was not the case with my neighbors. He offered to pay me $15 for every hour that I taught them. So without giving it second thought I agreed and went to my neighbors home for the first time.
I honestly did not know what to expect. I definitely had helped my own friends with their math homework and had not problem doing it, but not people who I didn't know too well like it was the case with my neighbors. I remember having a tutor once when I was in 7th grade. This guy was waaaaaaaay older than me, probably about 25 at the time I was like 12. This guy would be like a regular teacher to me, he would ask me to pay attention and get serious when I started day dreaming or so. I wondered whether me tutoring my neighbors would be more like this, or more like I taught my friends. On one side, I was the same age as my neighbors, so I would expect to feel some awkwardness if I asked him to stop playing around and do their work, I felt like I did not have that authority over them. On the other hand, I was getting paid and expected to do my job and teach them effectively.
Good thing I quickly built my identity kit. It consisted of half a friend and half a tutor. It was nothing like the tutor I had when I was in 7th grade, but also was different than helping my best friend with his math homework. We would make jokes every once in a while (something I did not do with my tutor) but also get serious and get work done.
I also think he mush faked his identity as a student... or friend? He started out as if I was his high school teacher giving him tutoring but I think he quickly noticed none of us were comfortable with that, and quickly adopted out half-friend half-tutor/student identity kits respectively.
Sunday, October 2, 2016
Blog #6: Discourse Communities
Like professor Erin, graduation high school was not big deal for my family. The celebration included getting invited to have some dinner at my local Oggi's pizza. I remember seeing my friends get cars, lots of money or even have family members come from different continents to celebrate such achievement. My family who lives across the border didn't bother coming to my graduation, and honestly, that didn't bother me. That is because I was expected to graduate high school. Graduating high school was not an achievement but an expectation. In a case in which I had not graduated, my family had seen it as a failure. Although college requires a little (a lot) more effort than high school, I feel like graduating college won't be that big of a deal either. My family expects me to be successful.
But not all successful people graduated college (some not even high school). Like professor's Flewelling post mentioned, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates did not graduated college, yet they are considered to be some of the most successful people in the world and they are the richest. But they are not exceptions, Paul Allen, Michael Dell, Amancio Ortega, Larry Ellison didn't graduate college either and are all considered to be billionaires.
But of course, dropping out from college won't lead to to become a billionaire. These people were already making so much money, and were so invested in their own company before graduating college that they figured time spent in college could be used wiser otherwise. Im sure not all of us have our own company or are making lots of money as of right now, so dropping out would not be the wisest of ideas. Our interest still are getting a degree so that we can prove that we can provide more value to a company than the average person can and thus get a better paying job than the average person.
But it is evident that there are people without a college degree that are more qualified to get a job in any given area than those who have put themselves through many years of college. I have a friend who is 24 years old who already owns his company and lives a more than comfortable lifestyle than the average family. He is a finance drop out. I am currently studying finance. But truth is, it is probable he is more qualified to work at a finance firm than the average college student graduating from finance. Although he would not have a way to prove that, other than showing he owns a company. But there are thousands like him out there, some may own a company, the majority might not. There are thousands of people who love to invest, dance, teach... you name it, who can learn and learn more of that topic through the internet and books that are not as expensive as college textbooks, than actual college, people that are not willing to spend $100,000 dollars to learn something that they can learn on their own. There are exceptions. As a medical student, you can't go to your local convenience store and buy a corpse to practice on. But for most majors, there is no reason you should be going to college other than your parents kicking you out of your house.
But not all successful people graduated college (some not even high school). Like professor's Flewelling post mentioned, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates did not graduated college, yet they are considered to be some of the most successful people in the world and they are the richest. But they are not exceptions, Paul Allen, Michael Dell, Amancio Ortega, Larry Ellison didn't graduate college either and are all considered to be billionaires.
But of course, dropping out from college won't lead to to become a billionaire. These people were already making so much money, and were so invested in their own company before graduating college that they figured time spent in college could be used wiser otherwise. Im sure not all of us have our own company or are making lots of money as of right now, so dropping out would not be the wisest of ideas. Our interest still are getting a degree so that we can prove that we can provide more value to a company than the average person can and thus get a better paying job than the average person.
But it is evident that there are people without a college degree that are more qualified to get a job in any given area than those who have put themselves through many years of college. I have a friend who is 24 years old who already owns his company and lives a more than comfortable lifestyle than the average family. He is a finance drop out. I am currently studying finance. But truth is, it is probable he is more qualified to work at a finance firm than the average college student graduating from finance. Although he would not have a way to prove that, other than showing he owns a company. But there are thousands like him out there, some may own a company, the majority might not. There are thousands of people who love to invest, dance, teach... you name it, who can learn and learn more of that topic through the internet and books that are not as expensive as college textbooks, than actual college, people that are not willing to spend $100,000 dollars to learn something that they can learn on their own. There are exceptions. As a medical student, you can't go to your local convenience store and buy a corpse to practice on. But for most majors, there is no reason you should be going to college other than your parents kicking you out of your house.
Monday, September 12, 2016
Opinions, opinions, opinions.
Well... here I am. 12:21 a.m. starting to write my blog post. Can't help but think about how comfortably you all must be sleeping already. The worst thing is I have not even read a single article yet, so I really don't know what I am doing right now. Brb. Btw, since every one of your blog posts contained memes, I included one here. I went on Google and typed "brb meme", which I'm guessing is what you all do. I can see why they're addicting. They are so relatable.
I wish ^
After reading three JSTOR Daily articles and three Op-eds, I can say I am relieved. What a difference from Devitt's article on critical genre awareness. I actually enjoyed reading these pieces. Reading the sentence just once was enough to understand it. Not only did they use more simple language, but were short and got straight to the point.
Guess Googling "straight to the point meme" didn't work out this time.
Anyway, one of the three JSTORs that I decided to read was "Stranger Things and the Psychic Nosebleed". The author cites three examples in which young girls with the ability to perform telekinesis, bleed every time they perform it. The author then explains how is scientifically unrealistic to bleed from extreme usage of your brain. The three girls addressed by the author are somehow being used to achieve someone else's interests. By the end, the author makes a point to how the scenarios in her example reinforce the gender stereotype that girls need a strong father figure to "focus their uncontrolled abilities".
The second JSTOR I read was "Where American Public Universities Came From" which provides much insight as to how is it that public education in the United States is free. Pushed first by the Puritans in New Hampshire, then Thomas Jefferson in Virginia and shortly after, all of the states. The author ends the author by stating how although many Americans find taxes annoying, no one denies the public responsibility of contributing to universal education.
Finally, I read "How Does the Language of Headlines Work?". This JSTOR narrates how headlines throughout history have changed with the purpose of making the readers more inclined to read a certain piece to keep on receiving revenue from advertising. The author then compares how the popular click bait we find on the internet every day with titles like "You Won't Believe What This 17 Year Old Did To Earn His First Million!", which attracts curiosity, to every day newspaper headlines.
What I noticed when reading these JSTORs is that it is that they are mainly informative. For this same reason, it is hard to find ways in which they appeal to you as a person. I don't feel any of these three articles appealed to my feelings. On the other hand, I could find some Logos in how the author explains how headlines have changed from passive sentences to sentences that make people want to read the article and why this has happened. I also found some ethos appeal when the author explained where public schooling came from. He sure seemed knowledgeable about the topic.
On the other hand, the three Op-eds that I read were the ones relating to politics. What I noticed about these are that there is a strong noticeable bias in every article you read that you didn't see in the JSTORs. For example, before opening the article "Liberals Are The Sort of People Who...", I knew the author wouldn't refer to liberals as intellectual, honest and trustworthy beings. Also, phrases like "just look at the glowing orange beacon on your tv screen" referring to a person does not suggest the writer have a high regard for that person. What about stating an article with a question like "Will American voters allow themselves to be insulted, taken for granted, and made fools of?" and continuing with "Donald Trump thinks yes"? Clearly authors in these op-eds don't really care much about at least, perhaps, maybe trying to appear unbiased. This reminds me of the typical middle-school fight that started not because someone called you dumb but because all of your friends would instigate you by saying things like "uuuuuh, you're gonna take that?". So, yes. I would say many of these op-eds used pathos more than any other appeal.
Well, I'll leave you with that to reflect on. I'm now going to sleep about 4 hours. Well, that'd be if I instantly fell asleep right now, which won't happen. See you all tomorrow!
I wish ^
After reading three JSTOR Daily articles and three Op-eds, I can say I am relieved. What a difference from Devitt's article on critical genre awareness. I actually enjoyed reading these pieces. Reading the sentence just once was enough to understand it. Not only did they use more simple language, but were short and got straight to the point.
Guess Googling "straight to the point meme" didn't work out this time.
Anyway, one of the three JSTORs that I decided to read was "Stranger Things and the Psychic Nosebleed". The author cites three examples in which young girls with the ability to perform telekinesis, bleed every time they perform it. The author then explains how is scientifically unrealistic to bleed from extreme usage of your brain. The three girls addressed by the author are somehow being used to achieve someone else's interests. By the end, the author makes a point to how the scenarios in her example reinforce the gender stereotype that girls need a strong father figure to "focus their uncontrolled abilities".
The second JSTOR I read was "Where American Public Universities Came From" which provides much insight as to how is it that public education in the United States is free. Pushed first by the Puritans in New Hampshire, then Thomas Jefferson in Virginia and shortly after, all of the states. The author ends the author by stating how although many Americans find taxes annoying, no one denies the public responsibility of contributing to universal education.
Finally, I read "How Does the Language of Headlines Work?". This JSTOR narrates how headlines throughout history have changed with the purpose of making the readers more inclined to read a certain piece to keep on receiving revenue from advertising. The author then compares how the popular click bait we find on the internet every day with titles like "You Won't Believe What This 17 Year Old Did To Earn His First Million!", which attracts curiosity, to every day newspaper headlines.
What I noticed when reading these JSTORs is that it is that they are mainly informative. For this same reason, it is hard to find ways in which they appeal to you as a person. I don't feel any of these three articles appealed to my feelings. On the other hand, I could find some Logos in how the author explains how headlines have changed from passive sentences to sentences that make people want to read the article and why this has happened. I also found some ethos appeal when the author explained where public schooling came from. He sure seemed knowledgeable about the topic.
On the other hand, the three Op-eds that I read were the ones relating to politics. What I noticed about these are that there is a strong noticeable bias in every article you read that you didn't see in the JSTORs. For example, before opening the article "Liberals Are The Sort of People Who...", I knew the author wouldn't refer to liberals as intellectual, honest and trustworthy beings. Also, phrases like "just look at the glowing orange beacon on your tv screen" referring to a person does not suggest the writer have a high regard for that person. What about stating an article with a question like "Will American voters allow themselves to be insulted, taken for granted, and made fools of?" and continuing with "Donald Trump thinks yes"? Clearly authors in these op-eds don't really care much about at least, perhaps, maybe trying to appear unbiased. This reminds me of the typical middle-school fight that started not because someone called you dumb but because all of your friends would instigate you by saying things like "uuuuuh, you're gonna take that?". So, yes. I would say many of these op-eds used pathos more than any other appeal.
Well, I'll leave you with that to reflect on. I'm now going to sleep about 4 hours. Well, that'd be if I instantly fell asleep right now, which won't happen. See you all tomorrow!
Wednesday, September 7, 2016
Blog #2: Genre
I've said before I am not such a good writer. I use as an excuse that I am really good at math and numbers but not at writing. Because of this, writing has never been my favorite subject. After reading the article by Amy Devitt, I remembered why reading isn't my favorite either. Im just kidding. I did have a hard time reading it, that, I'm not kidding about that.
I had never thought about genre in the way Amy Devitt expresses it. When it came to genre, I'd relate the word to movies, music, books, writing... etc. Never did I think about genre in such depth as Devitt goes in her article. Sure I had thought about how the purpose of a comedian is to make people laugh, how a horror movie is to supposed to make people scared, a sad song provide empathy for your unfortunate love life and so on... But had never thought "critically" about genre, like Devitt mentions in her article.
I think that if Devitt read that first paragraph, she would argue that I do not possess much genre awareness, if any.
Something that came to my mind is that a lot of the time, I believe we attach the genre of something to the purpose that something attempts to achieve. That is why a horror movie that is not scary is portrayed as a bad scary movie, because it failed to made us scared. Or a comedian that doesn't make you laugh, or a science fiction movie which has horrible special effects. In other words, most of the time we expect something from each specific genre.
After reading Devitt's article, I think this is due to the way Devitt believes genre is taught most of the time. That is: explicitly and outside of social meaning. By explicitly, I mean that genre often is taught in a way that restricts creativity and limits cognition rather than expanding knowledge. For example, Devitt talk about the 5-paragraph essay format which is used in the great majority of high schools. She explains how if a student were to include an anecdote in his/her writing, that anecdote would be limited to one paragraph. The way I interpret this is that by limiting the students' ability to write or reducing a an anecdote to something extremely simplistic such as a paragraph, you also limit that student's ability to write and think critically.
Another way Devitt explains how teaching genre "explicitly" limits the assessment of knowledge is by how a certain genre, if thought about uncritically, will make us write to an unrealistic audience. If we for example write two 5-paragraph essays, one with our professor as the audience while the other is written to a firm with interest in some research we conducted (which it is usually not the case), the genre of the 5-paragraph essay would be completely different while being the same genre, a 5-paragraph essay.
By using an article by Viva Freedman, Devitt asks "whether learners could in fact gain full access to the languages and forms of genres" (338). And from what I understood, the answer to that is no because teachers can not possibly have knowledge for all possible students might want to learn and so their instruction about genre will never be complete. On the other hand, students can be taught "critical genre awareness" which is a skill that results in students distancing themselves from the topic addressed and that way obtain more credibility or ethos to write a certain topic.
Although it was a article which took me a while to read, "Teaching Critical Genre Awareness" by Amy Devitt, gave me a view of genres in a way I had never seen them before. Before reading this article, I didn't give much importance to the implications and norms each genre involves and how they influence our way of writing if it happens to be a written genre or speaking if it happens to be a speech or so. But now I do. Kind of.
I had never thought about genre in the way Amy Devitt expresses it. When it came to genre, I'd relate the word to movies, music, books, writing... etc. Never did I think about genre in such depth as Devitt goes in her article. Sure I had thought about how the purpose of a comedian is to make people laugh, how a horror movie is to supposed to make people scared, a sad song provide empathy for your unfortunate love life and so on... But had never thought "critically" about genre, like Devitt mentions in her article.
I think that if Devitt read that first paragraph, she would argue that I do not possess much genre awareness, if any.
Something that came to my mind is that a lot of the time, I believe we attach the genre of something to the purpose that something attempts to achieve. That is why a horror movie that is not scary is portrayed as a bad scary movie, because it failed to made us scared. Or a comedian that doesn't make you laugh, or a science fiction movie which has horrible special effects. In other words, most of the time we expect something from each specific genre.
After reading Devitt's article, I think this is due to the way Devitt believes genre is taught most of the time. That is: explicitly and outside of social meaning. By explicitly, I mean that genre often is taught in a way that restricts creativity and limits cognition rather than expanding knowledge. For example, Devitt talk about the 5-paragraph essay format which is used in the great majority of high schools. She explains how if a student were to include an anecdote in his/her writing, that anecdote would be limited to one paragraph. The way I interpret this is that by limiting the students' ability to write or reducing a an anecdote to something extremely simplistic such as a paragraph, you also limit that student's ability to write and think critically.
Another way Devitt explains how teaching genre "explicitly" limits the assessment of knowledge is by how a certain genre, if thought about uncritically, will make us write to an unrealistic audience. If we for example write two 5-paragraph essays, one with our professor as the audience while the other is written to a firm with interest in some research we conducted (which it is usually not the case), the genre of the 5-paragraph essay would be completely different while being the same genre, a 5-paragraph essay.
By using an article by Viva Freedman, Devitt asks "whether learners could in fact gain full access to the languages and forms of genres" (338). And from what I understood, the answer to that is no because teachers can not possibly have knowledge for all possible students might want to learn and so their instruction about genre will never be complete. On the other hand, students can be taught "critical genre awareness" which is a skill that results in students distancing themselves from the topic addressed and that way obtain more credibility or ethos to write a certain topic.
Although it was a article which took me a while to read, "Teaching Critical Genre Awareness" by Amy Devitt, gave me a view of genres in a way I had never seen them before. Before reading this article, I didn't give much importance to the implications and norms each genre involves and how they influence our way of writing if it happens to be a written genre or speaking if it happens to be a speech or so. But now I do. Kind of.
Wednesday, August 31, 2016
Santiago Gayón Introduction
 |
| Sagrada Familia. More than 100 years since it started being built. |
Hello!
First of all I want to say I’ve had a really busy summer and have
not had much time to spend with my friends. For this reason, I thought I would
never say it but I am really excited to start school again. As hard as it might
be to believe, coming to school feels like a break from all the other
responsibilities I have.
My
name is Santiago but you can call me Santi if you’d like. I like them both. I
was born in Mexico City “the most beautiful of Sunday mornings” (or so says my
mom) on November 17th, 1996 where I lived for the first 9 years of
my life. At age 9, I moved to Spain where my mom and my whole family on her
side are from. As hard of a transition as this was, it didn’t take me long to
make new friends and adapt to my new country. While living there, I developed a
love for fishing. Every day after school I used to go down to the dock and fish
until the sun went down. At first, I started going by myself but a couple of
months after we were a group of six going fishing every day. I also really
enjoyed playing tennis and played a couple tournaments while living there.
 |
| Park Güell @Barcelona |
After
four years of living in Spain, I moved here to San Diego to live with my dad. Many
people often ask me where I like it better to what I always answer “hmmm… not
sure”. There are pros and cons to every place. For example, there is no food
like the authentic Mexican food, but living in a city with almost 9 million
people can get a little overwhelming. You know… making two hours to get to
school and two hours to get back home everyday wasn’t really that fun. Spanish
food is ok, but their lifestyle is something else. For example, they literally
have a national naptime in which every store closes from about 2pm to 5pm.
Restaurants are more generous and remain open until 3pm before the employees go
home and take a nap. So if you wanted to eat somewhere else other than McDonald’s
(which by the way, sold beer), you had to eat before 2. Another thing worth
nothing about their lifestyle is that they drink alcohol consistently throughout
the day… and it’s so cheap. I remember having to pay extra for wanting to
substitute the cup of wine my meal included for a Sprite. I won’t say much
about USA because you are all from here but I am extremely happy and grateful
to be living here.
 |
| How people party in Spain. Out on the streets until 4am or so when they head to the club for a couple hours. |
I
am currently a Junior and have studied here ever since I graduated from
Olympian High School in the Sweetwater Union District down in Chula Vista.
I am a finance major, and the reason for that is that I enjoy studying
specific, objective, binary, right-or-wrong topics rather than those in the
abstract zone such as art or music where opinion and subjectivity are of
great importance (perhaps that’s why I never was such a great writer). I also love
managing risks as much as I love making money. Emphasis on “making”. Don’t get
me wrong, I also like spending it but making it has been a passion I’ve had
every since I was little. I remember finding ways to grow the $1 dollar my mom
gave me every week when I was eight. For example: I bought supplies to make
bracelets and sold them at school for about 10 times the cost price. Some other
time, I bought two guinea pigs for about $5 each and ended up having about 30
six months after which I sold for $3 a piece in a black market at my elementary. Eight year old me didn't know incestuous breeding was a thing though, sorry guinea pigs.
 |
| Santander. The city where I lived for 4 years. |
My
ultimate goal after I graduate college is to land a job at a hedge fund, which
is a place where you invest other people's money (hopefully making them a
profit) and charge a commission for it. Like I said, I love managing risks and
risk is a big factor to consider when investing.
Anyway,
I don’t have much else to tell you about myself. I put some pictures of Spain throughout the text so you don't get bored from reading it. I look forward to meeting some
of you guys and good luck this new school year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)