What if rappers are the modern-day Shakespeare?

Think about it: Shakespeare's poetry was probably considered low-brow in his day. He used the common folk's vernacular instead of lofty formal English or Latin. He used curse words and explored topics like sex and violence. People sometimes found his work offensive, but he wrote poetry that rang a bell with the "lower class".

I don't even really like rap, but just a thought.

Why would you want to be a teacher?

“Those who educate children well are more to be honored than they who produce them; for these only gave them life, those the art of living well.” 
― Aristotle

Things have changed a bit since Aristotle's day. 

When I consider some of my peers who have not only graduated with a degree in education, but have successfully found teaching jobs, I shudder at the thought that they will be shaping our future generations. More often than not, they were lackluster students in high school who struggled to grasp even simple concepts.*

My first reaction is to wonder who in their right mind would hire them as teachers. Surely there are more qualified candidates.

Then it occurred to me: what if there aren't?

Here's the unpleasant truth: smart people don't want to be teachers.

It makes sense. A high school chemistry teacher earns, on average, $57,770 a year (and that's the average- the lowest paid high school teachers make only about $36,000 a year). Compare that to chemists, who make on average $76,870 a year.

That's nearly a $20,000 difference (for those of you who did not have good math teachers). With the rare exception of the individual motivated by the altruistic desire to educate young minds, someone who has the ability to be a chemist will choose to go work as a chemist rather than teach chemistry. But isn't this exactly the person we need to be a teacher? Don't we want our children to be educated by teachers who actually know what they're doing?

It's common knowledge that our education system is failing. Legislators grasp for solutions, none of which ever seem to make any difference- such as merit pay systems and more rigorous standardized testing.  Meanwhile, American students continue to fall behind their peers in other parts of the world, raising significant concerns about America's ability to compete in an increasingly global economy. 

If we want to fix the education system, we need to find ways to attract more bright minds to the teaching profession, particularly in public schools (about 90.6% of students attend public schools). This could be accomplished not only by better pay, but also (ironically) by removing or at least reducing programs intended to improve the system, such as merit pay and standardized testing. Many teachers express extreme dissatisfaction with these programs- this February a group of teachers in Seattle even boycotted their state's standardized test, and merit pay systems have been called "demoralizing."

Until we change the system, we will perpetuate the cycle of unqualified teachers churning out under-educated pupils, who graduate unable to compete with their foreign counterparts in a global economy.

What would Aristotle say?

*Of course, there are exceptions. I know several aspiring educators who will make excellent teachers. 

Why I'll always be proud to be an Auburn Tiger

The National Championship game was rough. I grew up a Seminole fan and currently attend law school at Florida State, but I went to Auburn for undergrad. During the brief years I was there, Auburn captured my heart.

I never thought football would be a problem since FSU and Auburn hadn't played each other since 1990.

Boy, was I wrong.

In the weeks leading up to the game, I couldn't decide which side I should choose.  I couldn't bring myself to cheer against either team. When the game started, though, I felt like I was back in Jordan-Hare stadium as a freshman watching the eagle circle the field for the first time, and I knew I had to cheer for Auburn.

My first "war eagle" experience

Although we lost, Auburn didn't disappoint me. The Tigers gave the Noles the most challenging game they've had all season, and both teams proved that they truly deserved to be in the championship game.


As the game unfolded, I found another reason to be glad I had chosen the Tigers: fan attitudes.

Don't get me wrong, I have plenty of friends and family who are completely classy FSU fans*. But when FSU didn't take its usual obscenely large lead in the first half, my newsfeed began to fill up with comments like this:

FSU went on to make an incredible comeback and win the game, and Auburn fans reacted to the defeat a little differently. Here's what appeared from the Auburn fans in my newsfeed:

I couldn't be prouder to be a part of a family of fans that supports its team, win or lose. Maybe my assortment of Facebook friends is biased, but I didn't see a single status from an Auburn fan belittling the team or blaming the players.

FSU fans- shape up! Make me feel just as proud to be a part of the "Nole Nation" as I am to be a part of the "Auburn Family." Enjoy the win-- it came from hard work and lots of talent, and I'm thrilled to be a student at another National Championship school. Just remember that if you truly love your team, you love them through the wins AND the losses.

War eagle and go Noles!





*Seriously guys, I love you. This blog is not directed toward the fans who have been there through the thick and the thin, and I know that there are some fans who would never post things like this. Don't be mad. :)

** Also, please excuse me for stealing your statuses

Duck Dynasty and "Free Speech"

My Facebook feed is abuzz with people who are enraged about Phil Robertson’s suspension from the A&E show “Duck Dynasty” over anti-gay comments he made in a recent GQ interview. Most of their outrage centers on what they see as an abridgment of “free speech.” Why, they ask, is Phil being punished for speaking his mind? We live in a free country, they assert, and Phil should be allowed to express his beliefs.

Well, you’re partially right, Facebook universe. Phil DOES have the right to speak his mind, but A&E also has the right to fire him for it. You see, only the government can get in trouble for conditioning a benefit (like employment) on you refraining from exercising a right. Private businesses, however, can hire and fire whoever they want as long as it isn’t contrary to some anti-discrimination law. Forcing them to keep him on the show would violate their right against compelled association.

For example, government employees can’t be fired for expressing their political views in an op-ed article in the newspaper, or discussing their religious beliefs at the water cooler (there are exceptions if your comments were somehow tied to your position, but nevermind about those right now). 

However, a private entity can exclude someone for almost any reason. A Republican store owner could fire his cashier because she’s a Democrat. A privately-run parade can choose to exclude gay activists groups from marching. This may seem unfair when it’s a member of your group that’s targeted, but the First Amendment also grants an implied right against compelled association-- the government can’t force you to associate with someone whose beliefs clash with your own, because doing so might alter the message you project and violate your own right to free speech.

Let’s assume A&E really does have a heartfelt commitment to promoting gay rights. If they permitted Phil to remain on the show, viewers might interpret that as their acceptance of his opinion. A&E has a right to choose which message it expresses, and that includes the right to fire cast members who vocally disagree with that message. If E! suddenly decided that it disagreed with the Kardashians’ promiscuous lifestyle, they would have the right to cancel the show. If you want to preserve this right, you have to preserve A&E’s right too. Freedom goes both ways.

So if you support Phil’s view, then support Phil’s view. Say that you agree with him, say that you support him. Stop watching A&E shows, if you disagree with their actions that strongly. You have that right.

But don’t lament the failure of our political system, because A&E is merely exercising the same right as Phil.

How Choosing a Boyfriend is Like Adopting a Dog

Like finding a boyfriend, adopting a dog can be stressful. The biggest decision: where should you get it? Should you buy a pure bred from a breeder? Should you adopt a grown-up dog? Or should you get an adorable little puppy? Each option has pros and cons, and they are surprisingly similar to the pros and cons of different boyfriends.

Option 1: Buy a pure bred.

This is like dating a guy for his money/family name, or a guy who is good-looking and knows it.

Pros: You know their family pedigree. They look good walking beside you, and you can show them off.

Cons: They can be high-strung and high-maintenance. Often, the money and effort it takes to get them is not worth the attitude problems.

Option 2: Adopt a fully-grown dog who has had previous owners.

This is like dating a guy who has had lots of relationship experience.

Pros: Already trained. You don’t have to put in the effort to train him to stay off the couch (or buy you flowers on your birthday).

Cons: You don’t know what kind of emotional damage he brings to the relationship. Will he run away every time you squeak a squeaky toy? Will he hide under your bed when you have company over? Will he get insanely jealous if another guy texts you? It’s a risk.

Option 3: Get a puppy.

This is like dating a guy who hasn’t had many (or any) serious relationships.

Pros: A puppy will be crazy about you. It will go nuts and lick your face every time you walk in the door. It will grow into the most loyal dog ever, and you can train it to behave exactly the way you want.

Cons: You have to put in the time and effort to train it. He may pee on the carpet a few times or chew up a few shoes before he gets it right. You may have to break out the rolled-up newspaper a few times to get your point across. 

On the flip side, women are like cats. It doesn't matter where you get them or how hard you try to train them, they will just do what they want to do anyway. 

DIY Budget Throw Pillows

I don't know if you've noticed, but accent pillows are EXPENSIVE.


Here's an easy and cheap alternative: stuff cloth napkins.

It's easy: just unstitch a hand-sized section at the edge of the napkin, stuff it, then sew it back up. Voila, custom throw pillows!

These napkins are from the Privet House collection at Target

Two bags of stuffing fills about three pillows. It's always good to buy an extra bag just in case. 

Make sure your napkin has two layers of fabric

Voila! Beautiful pillows!

Glitter & Twine Photo Display

I just moved into a new apartment, and you know what that means.... DIY projects!
This is a simple (It took me like 30 minutes) and cute way to display your favorite photos, and it's way cheaper than buying frames for all of them!

What you need:
- Clothes pins
- Glitter
- ModPodge (or Elmers glue) & paint brush
- Twine (or some other rustic-looking string)
- Two nails & hammer
- Photos and/or old postcards

What you do:
1. Lay your clothes pins out flat, and paint the tops with Mod Podge.
2. Sprinkle glitter on the tops.
3. While those dry, put your nails in the wall. Mine were about 2.5 feet apart.
4. Cut two pieces of twine: one a few inches longer than the distance between the nails, one a few inches longer than the first.
5. Tie the ends of the twine to the nails, with the shorter one on top.
6. Once your clothes pins are dry, use them to clip your photos to the twine. I also put up a few vintage postcards I found at an antique shop for 25 cents apiece (score!)

Enjoy! :)