WHY PEOPLE DON’T GIVE UP THEIR SEATS TO OLDER PEOPLE ON PUBLIC TRANSPORT

The modern world is becoming an increasingly stressful place as the pace of life has reached epic proportions and people are always on the run. Everything needs to be finished yesterday and people are under continuous pressure to succeed. This relentless pace means that common courtesy and concern for others have fallen by the wayside. Nowhere is this more obvious than on public transport where the elderly stand while young people sit playing with their phones. There are various reasons why young people have become like this.

One reason for the apparent selfishness of the younger generation is the fact that everyone is living in their own little bubble thanks to modern technology. The more connected people become via technology, the more likely they are to shift their attention to the virtual world that they have started to inhabit. A lot of business and socialization takes place online, shopping is done online and education, to a large extent takes place online. Thus modern man inhabits two universes, the virtual one and the real world of his ancestors. Technology aids and abets the break from the real world and leaves young people turned in on themselves focused on their screens and their parallel world. With this kind of a mindset, they don’t even notice the elderly. The modern day zombies are too busy living a life the elderly are incapable of comprehending.

A second reason for young people’s seeming indifference to the plight of the elderly on vehicles of mass transit is the lack of social intelligence. The lack of quality contact with fellow human beings resulting from increased connectivity has also had a knock on effect on social intelligence. Social intelligence enables people to be more aware of their surroundings and to read situations correctly. Yet such a skill cannot develop without practice in real life situations and exposure to real life problems. The virtual world, the new reality of modern man, provides no opportunity to do this. The thus mentally impoverished young people fail to empathize with the elderly who have difficulty standing. They don’t sympathize with their plight and stare at them with blank eyes. In short, the upbringing the modern generation and the life they lead have lead them to lose some important social values.

To sum up, modern life and technological developments have made young people what they are. Understanding the source of the problem should enable us to address it as a community. What needs to be done is make children more aware of the real world and all that is happening around them. ‘Re-socialization’ is the key to making the world a better place.

  

THE CAUSES OF POVERTY

Everyone wishes to maintain a certain standard of living and enjoy a certain quality of life in society. At the very least, they wish to be able to afford their basic requirements and pay the bills. In order to do so, they seek gainful employment which they often find but sometimes do not. The lack of regular or an adequate income results in poverty which impacts the individual in question and his immediate social circle and family. There are various reasons for poverty of this kind some of which are linked to the political and economic landscape and some to the individual himself.

The current situation of a country can have a direct impact on the financial situation of an individual. Political uncertainty and/or civil war for example can destroy livelihoods and the customary way of life of citizens leaving them destitute and in need of aid and handouts from charitable organizations. An obvious example is modern day Syria where the civil war has destroyed communities, homes, livelihoods and a whole way of life. Another is Rakhine state which, due to the actions of Myanmar authorities, is being erased and from which the locals have been fleeing to neighboring Bangladesh. Macroeconomic problems in the country can also have a devastating effect on individuals. High inflatio , like in the case of modern day Venezuela or Zimbabwe, can make the salary or wages earned by people completely worthless very quickly. The rapid drop in the value of currency in both these countries has created mass poverty on an enormous scale. In cases such as these, there is very little individuals can do except, perhaps, up sticks and migrate.

Demographics can also be linked to poverty. In most developed countries, there is a smaller dependent population with respect to the working population who are generating an income and contributing to the economy. The dependent population, the children and the elderly, can thus be cared for by the resulting welfare state. Services like education, healthcare, home help and even government housing can be provided for free reducing overall poverty. Not so in developing and especially underdeveloped countries. In places such as these, there is a large young population; in other words, there is a huge dependent population competing for basic services and jobs. That they cannot all be helped in countries such as these which are also wrestling with economic problems and perhaps political uncertainty also goes without saying. The inevitable result is poverty and this is the fate of many youth in third world countries for example. In short, if one is unfortunate enough to be born in countries such as these, one is likely to have to struggle with poverty.

An individual may be faced with poverty for reasons unconnected to those listed above as well. In this age of rapidly developing technology and automation, certain hitherto viable professions are disappearing to be replaced by new ones. Labour intensive work and monotonous routine work is now being done by robots and computers leaving the people who used to do this kind of work without the ability to make a living. There is no call, in other words, for unskilled workers any longer. The sorts of people who are in demand are those with skills that are applicable to the 21^st century. Those who do not possess these skills, those who find it difficult or impossible to retrain and those who are perhaps too old to learn new skills may, therefore, be faced with poverty as there is no longer any call for what they have to offer. The key here is not to be left behind.

In conclusion, poverty may be a consequence of the times and circumstances one is living in or of a lack of training and education. The latter can be dealt with through individual effort and determination. The former is harder for the individual to deal with in the short term. The demographics of the country can only be bettered by means of government policy. The same goes for political stability and economic reform. Both need to be tackled on a nationwide basis with the correct government policies. Poverty can, therefore, become a life sentence in some cases, something global charities need to keep in mind.  

TATOOS AND PIERCING IN THE WORKPLACE

People have always worn clothes of one sort or another for protection from the weather, to fit in with the customs and way of life of the society in which they lived and to look good. The type of apparel has always varied across the world in accordance with climatic conditions and what was available in the region. Another common practice to complete the look people desired to achieve for one reason or another was to make use of adornment of various sorts. This often consisted of precious metals such as gold or silver which was beaten into intricate shapes and designs and embellished with precious stones. Jewelry of this sort came in the form of rings, tiaras, necklaces, bracelets and body piercing. The final form of body adornment was the practice of applying paint to the body in the form of makeup and tattoos. These practices have been around for a long time and are part of our culture so to suddenly turn round and declare that piercing and tattoos are in appropriate in the work place is completely illogical.

The use of makeup and body decoration of all sorts, including tattoos, has important cultural dimensions. In many parts of Africa for instance, the application of tattoos is an important part of the ceremony celebrating becoming an adult. The young person shows of both his tattoos and the body scaring he receives with pride. In a democratic country, it makes no kind of sense to argue that tattoos are acceptable for some and not for others. After all, in the global world, the human resources department of any big firm could be faced with applications from all over the world. Telling a qualified person who could be of great benefit to a company to have his tattoos removed and reapply would land the company in court. It follows that what is acceptable for some should be acceptable to all. A company cannot fight long established customs just because it hasn’t seen them very often. Fashion is a global business and is no longer restricted to small areas of the world.

The same is true is for body piercing which, contrary to what some may think, wasn’t discovered by hippies; it was around long before teenagers starting piercing their tongues, belly buttons and noses. The best known form of body piercing is ear rings and even our prehistoric ancestors wore them. There is no country in the world where ear rings are never seen. Telling people applying for a job that they can pierce their ears but not their noses would infuriate applicants from India or the Middle East where nose piercing, “hızma”, has been around for eons. Checking belly buttons and asking people to stick their tongues out during interviews would land the company on the front pages of the tabloids and all over the internet in seconds. The resulting negative publicity and court cases concerning unfair treatment are just not worth the hassle whatever the private views of the H.R. department are. All that has happened in the modern world is that the practice has spread to other parts of the world, something fashion tends to do.

The way an individual decides to present himself to the world is also a matter of choice. People are free in their choice of clothes, the colors and designs they decide to sport and the accessories they decide to complete their outfits with. Some wear jeans, some prefer dresses, others wear suits. Some prefer light makeup; some prefer a lot more and yet others prefer none. Some buy cosmetics, some wear henna and others have tattoos. Some wear valuable jewelry; some wear dress jewelry. Some wear ear rings; others pierce their noses or their belly buttons. Some wear bracelets on their wrists; others wear then round their ankles. People cannot be up in arms about some forms of body adornment and not others; it is irrational to say the least.

There are fields where some body piercing or any kind of jewelry may be inappropriate for various reasons. One such field is medicine: doctors and nurses are obliged to put the safety of patients above all else. You cannot have a surgeon excusing herself because her ring got tangled in the patient’s entrails for example. Hygiene needs to be maintained at hospitals hence the white coats, scrubs, the lack of jewelry and the disinfectant hand-washes. The same goes for the army where the apparel sported needs to be practical in terms of the job that needs to be done, defending the country and fighting the enemy. However, although jewelry may be impractical in both these professions, tattoos create no practical problems in terms of security and hygiene and are, therefore, logically perfectly acceptable.

The world of fashion includes both what we wear and how we accessorize. What aspects of fashion one decides to follow is a matter of individual choice. This choice is determined both by individual preferences and practical considerations. Workplaces would do better to shift their focus to applicants’ skills and talents and what they can do for the company. They should avoid being sidetracked by irrelevant details such as body piercing and tattoos.

OF COURSE MEN AND WOMEN CAN BE FRIENDS

Throughout history, men and women have lived together in society, initially struggling for survival, and later forming families and communities in which they cooperated and interacted. Rubbing shoulders in workplaces, in the home, on the streets and thoroughfares meant they had to learn to get along coordinate their behavior, cooperate in daily activities, share hobbies and interests and learn from each other. Such continual interaction requires a degree of friendship and understanding, which is after all natural. Claiming that men and women cannot be friends is completely illogical.

In the modern world, the traditional roles of men and women have undergone a transformation. In the past, women were expected to get a more limited education as they were destined to get married, keep house and care for their children. Their domain was the home and in that sense, it was more limited than men’s. The latter were expected to provide for their family and thus worked outside the home. They had far more experience of life and were often far better educated. This being the case, it could be claimed that men and women had less in common. Yet even marriage cannot be imagined without friendship and companionship as many spouses the world over will attest.

In the modern world, this is no longer the case. Women have entered the workforce and the business world. All professions are now open to everyone regardless of gender. The same is true in terms of educational opportunities: women can go to college and do graduate work. They become doctors, scientists, lawyers and economists. They enter politics and rule nations. They fight shoulder to shoulder with men in national armies. In short, their interests and concerns are much the same as men’s and as such, have plenty to share with them. The notion that women are not capable of grasping the complexities of anything outside the home and as such have nothing to share with men is an archaic notion with no merit. The world has changed, roles in society have changed bringing everyone closer together and providing for richer personal experiences regardless of gender.

Procreation is a natural instinct in all mammals including human beings. People, like all animals, wish their progeny to survive after them and continue to thrive. This does not mean, however, that this is all people think about. Claiming that men and women cannot be friends because there may be intimacy issues is degrading to men and women, and grossly unfair considering all the true friendships that exist between men and women. Human beings are highly complex beings and do not have one track minds. Women are not chattel and are not seen as such in all but the most backward areas of the world. In most modern democracies in The West, gender is no longer an issue; men and women interact on an equal footing in all walks of life thus enjoying richer and more fulfilling relationships with each other.

We are no longer living in the Stone Age; the world has moved on. The times have changed and traditional belief systems have been overthrown. Universal suffrage and widespread access to education have brought about enormous changes in the way members of society interact with each other. Men and women had been missing out; now they are not, and the world is a better place because of it.

  

TEENAGERS AND THEIR PEER GROUP

The teenage period is probably one of the most difficult periods in a person’s life. All manner of physical changes are taking place in the body, hormones are raging and cognitive development is still taking place. The person is neither a child nor an adult, his character is still being formed and he is very susceptible. It is no wonder that gangs, terrorist groups, cults and the like target impressionable teenagers rather than adults. This being the case, most parents worry continuously about their teenage children and the issue is made more problematic by the fact that they no longer have the kind of control over their lives that they had when the teenagers were much younger. The teenagers’ social circle has vastly expanded and so have the sources of influence in his life. His peers take pride of place among the various forces exerting an influence over teenagers’ life and it is the former’s view of life that is adopted not the latter’s.

An important point to realize is that as children get older, their social circle expands to include all the various people they come across in their life and by far the largest group they become a part of is their peers. People are, by nature, social creatures not loners so being accepted by this group is paramount. This being the case, standing out is not an option; fitting in is. The desire to fit in, be trendy and not weird means teenagers follow the latest trends in fashion wearing, for example, baggy jeans, oversized T-shirts, crop-tops, ripped jeans and the like in contrast to their parents who may go in for pants suits, pencil skirts and silk blouses or shirts. They may get into arguments with their parents to get their noses, ears, tongues or belly-buttons pierced or to get tattoos. They may die their hair pink and have weird haircuts.  Parents have no choice but to grin and bear it. If they try to interfere in any way implement changes, they will be fighting a losing battle as world war three will break out.

Change, one must remember, is a fact of life one is incapable of fighting. As Bob Dylan so aptly put it “The times they are a – changing”. He also recommends that parents should realize that their “sons and their daughters are beyond their command” and keep up. This is a bitter pill to swallow but such is the case. Parents will never be the major source of influence in their teenage child’s life anymore as the latter have entered a social group they value much more highly: their peers. Thus parents who enjoy classical music and who carted their child off to piano lessons for years may be horrified to discover that the said “child” now prefers grunge or heavy metal, wants to play the drums and wouldn’t be seen dead with his parents at a Mozart recital. He hangs posters of strange looking people in his room, is very protective of his private space, locks his bedroom door and posts a “do not enter sign”.  Family meals become a drag, and family outings begin to feel like a visit to the dentist.

Carpe diem becomes the motto of the teenager, who wishes to enjoy the moment and do things for a laugh in contrast to his poor parents, who are constantly thinking of the future and planning for it. The rift grows, parents and everything they do is deemed boring and communication is reduced to grunts and monosyllables. Risky behavior and the accompanying adrenalin rush are in, and sensible pastimes are often out. The desire for new experiences may put teenagers at risk, which is a constant worry for parents, but the grip the peer group has on teenagers is relentless. They may experiment with drugs or alcohol, go joy riding or shop lifting. They may do all manner of crazy things for a dare as their parents look on helplessly and try to pick up the pieces. In short, living with a teenager is truly difficult and stressful.

One piece of comfort is that the teenage period is part of growing up and it doesn’t continue forever.  Kids grow up, come to their senses, learn from their experiences and often become useful members of society. An important thing to remember is that despite the undisputed influence of the all mighty peer group, parents still have a crucial role to play in guiding the teenager through the choppy waters of the difficult period he is going through.

  

DISCIPLINE VERSUS GUIDENCE IN CHILD REARING

The languages of many countries are littered with sayings like ‘children should be seen and not heard’ or ‘spare the rod and ruin the child’. Sayings like these which have been handed down through the generations seem to imply a very unhealthy attitude towards our children. Harsh punishment, strictness, a complete lack of tolerance and a refusal to listen has meant that small children were banished to the nursery where every minute of their lives was strictly regulated and any infringement was punished mercilessly in an effort to mold the future generation into the kind of adults ‘we’ want them to be. Yet is playing God the best way to go about raising kids?

The traditional attitude to raising children envisioned kids as putty to be molded into a socially acceptable form and instilled with all the values, proclivities and ways of thinking that current society saw fit. Children were placed in a so called forge and battered into shape by unforgiving ‘blacksmiths’ who meant business. The penalty for any infringement was harsh words, the withdrawal of love and attention, the denial of the evening meal or the cane. The latter was wielded by fathers in the home and school masters at school. The physical pain and humiliation caused by caning was meant to encourage the child in question to rethink his behavior.   Corporal punishment left lasting scars, spirits were crushed and complexes were formed.  Resentment and a grave sense of injustice permeated children’s lives. The educational and developmental value of engendering such negative feelings should be obvious to anyone with a modicum of common sense yet the age old beliefs and practices linger on giving a whole new meaning to the concept of original sin. 

It is obvious that parents need to be disabused of the idea that every natural inclination of children needs to be crushed and every mistake should be punished. That children have much to learn in order to become fully functioning and useful members of society who have also fulfilled their own potential and reached their goals goes without saying. Yet arguing that the best way to do this is through firm restrictions and harsh punishments does not make sense. Why resort to aggression when a sensible conversation will do the trick? It is true that reprimands are sometimes necessary and punishments need to be meted out. Research has proven that corporal punishment is not the most affective form of punishment as it engenders a host of negative feelings in the child. It is far better to give the child time out, to ground him or penalize him in a more constructive way. Fortunately, laws have caught up in a lot of developed countries and even slapping is now considered child abuse. In short, guidance and constructive criticism are in and harsh discipline is out.

In conclusion, children are by nature naïve and they need to learn about the ways of the world, what behavior is acceptable and why and what behavior is unacceptable and why. The way this teaching is carried out by parents and educators can have significant implications for the child and the adult he will grow up to become. As such, it will have considerable impact on society as a whole as well. In short, the process of raising a child should not involve doing lasting damage; it should involve help, support and guidance.

ARE UNIVERSITY PREP SCHOOLS RESPONSIBLE FOR HELPING THOSE WHO CAN’T KEEP UP OR FAIL?

     The dream of every young person in a developing country such as our own is to enter a good university both for the purpose of receiving an education and for the purpose of getting ahead in life. Not being able to achieve this aim relegates young people to a sphere in life where they will likely receive a basic salary and struggle for the rest of their lives. This prospect being rather grim, no stone is left unturned in an effort to enter through ‘the pearly gates’ of good universities.  Having achieved their aims, students are once more thrust in the deep end in the prep schools of major universities. The punishing schedule in these prep schools is manageable naturally assuming students are on the ball 24/7. Yet humans are complex creatures and by the age of eighteen, they have all accumulated plenty of baggage.

     Assuming that every student who enters the prep school is an intelligent, well adjusted individual whose only concern and responsibility in life is learning English is a grave mistake. Intelligent they certainly are but taking the rest for granted leads to unfair treatment of students. First of all, many students come from all over the country and from all walks of life; some come from working class families, some from lower middle class families and some from families that have better prospects. Parents make huge sacrifices to put their children through university and the resulting economic burden is often shared by students who have to practice thrift on an industrial scale. That all this creates a serious undercurrent of anxiety that permeates students’ life goes without saying. Second of all, many of these students have left their hometowns and their families and friends for the first time and grapple with serious adaptation problems on being unceremoniously dumped into a program where they either sink or swim. The problems don’t end here.

       Big cities are very different from close knit agrarian communities where families have known each other for generations. The anonymity of big cities and the resulting alienation is radically different from the ever present safety net available in small communities where friendship, support and help are values that are deeply embedded in the culture. Efforts to disperse the loneliness may lead to the adoption of unsavory habits like drugs and alcohol or the befriending of undesirable characters. They could also lead students to anxiety disorder and depression. Assuming that everyone who enters the prep schools of universities is a happy-go-lucky extrovert who can be uprooted from one location and replanted in another is unethical to say the least. Blaming these students for having ‘issues’ and blithely moving on with the syllabus leaving the victims stranded by the wayside is grossly unfair. 

     There is also the issue of waste of human potential. That these students who manage to successfully pass the university entrance exam and enter university are assets their country needs to exploit for the greater good goes without saying. The engineers, medics, teachers and economists of the future to list a few are these young people who have entered prep schools. Developing countries cannot afford to waste human talent that can carry this country forward and benefit society as a whole. Who knows what they will be capable of once universities have furnished them with the necessary tools to do so. Waste not, want not declared our ancestors and they weren’t just referring to household goods or money. In short, helping these students in their quest to become professionals is our ethical and national duty. Giving them just one go at the hurdles they face is an attitude that just will not wash.

        Another issue to be considered is the pass and failure rates. All administrations like the statistics at the end of the year to reflect a high success rate and a low failure rate. Soaring failure rates, whatever the reason, reflect badly on the institution. The university must grapple with a double edged sword by trying to maintain high pass rates while at the same time trying to maintain the high standards it is renowned for. The university has another issue as well: it may have to answer to a central body. The international standing of the university is also influenced by the standard of teaching and success rates. All this being the case, even if all ethical and national concerns are ignored, it is in the interest of the university to reduce failure rates. It goes without saying, therefore, that prep schools should take certain steps to increase so called ‘through-put’ for the good of the individual, the institution, the country as a whole and the world in general. After all, what could be a more worthwhile endeavor than contributing to the betterment of humanity?

      The last aspect of the problem that needs to be faced up to is the fact the students are not the only actors on the scene: there is the syllabus, the material, how it is implemented in class by teachers and the teachers themselves as individuals and professionals. There is plenty of blame to go round and laying the whole blame at the door of the students is a suspiciously blinkered approach to the problem. The pace could be too fast or creep forward at snail’s pace to begin with and then pick up speed like a cheetah on the hunt. The material could be dull, inappropriate or badly handled. Teachers could be wrestling with a variety of personal problems, be disillusioned engineers for example who have had to dial back their ambitions or they could just see teaching as a job and a means to pay the bills. None of the above will contribute to high pass rates and ultimately, the institution is responsible for addressing these issues and picking up the slack. Arguing otherwise constitutes a most irrational and unethical form of escapism.

       When problems emerge with their software, Microsoft will design a patch to fix the problem. Some institutions mistakenly suppose that the same system will work with those who for one reason or another have thrown in the towel. The so called patches in the form of booklets hurriedly prepared and distributed to students, organizing classes for students and begging for volunteers to teach them and similar ventures are stop- gap solutions which will never bring a long term solution to the problem despite looking good on paper and enabling the administration to tick the relevant boxes. What is required is a formal and institutionalized approach involving the setting up of a support center which is accessible from the word go to lend a helping hand to those who fall behind and to those who fail. This institution should have a mission statement stating its responsibilities and aspirations. It should be staffed with experienced professionals just like other departments in the school. It should present a report of its activities to the administration at the end of the term and remain in close and continued contact with teachers, the curriculum committee and the testing office if they exist in the university. In short, the only answer to the problem is a concerted, continued and official one.

      In conclusion, students, unfortunately for teaching establishments, are not androids. They cannot have code uploaded into their brains and be expected to absorb it. They are complex creatures as are we all, and need to have other areas of their personality and past experiences to be factored in.  Only in this way can we help the next generation achieve their full potential.

HOW TO GET STUDENTS TO MAKE PRESENTATIONS

People are social creatures who thrive in each other’s company. The only way to establish close bonds with people in our immediate social circle and in the wider community is to engage with them through speech. It is through the direct exchange of ideas and through conversation that we form close relationships with people. This is true of friends, family members and professionals of all stripes. Sometimes, the ideas to be conveyed to others in a business or other public setting may require a person to take the floor and address his audience for a certain length of time. This form of public speaking comes easily to some people who by definition like the sound of their own voices or who engage in public speaking as a part of their jobs such as politicians, lawyers, priests and teachers. For others, it is an acquired skill and for yet others, it is something to be avoided at all costs. Universities try to encourage students to learn to speak in public about issues close to their hearts but sometimes it is an uphill struggle. There are, however, various reasons why some students may be averse to the idea of public speaking and presentations and there is also quite a lot teachers can do to change the situation.

There are various underlying factors that need to be taken into account before discussing ways to persuade people to address a crowd. One reason some people may be averse to the idea of public speaking in general and making presentations in particular is sometimes cultural. In some countries such as Japan, it is considered bad manners to stand out and put yourself forward. People who have grown up in such a culture may find it hard to get used to the idea of making presentations. A second reason may be the education system. A classroom environment which is very authoritarian, where teachers aim to deliver the knowledge to the students who are expected to ingest it, no questions asked is not conducive to public speaking to say the least. In fact, students are expected to be seen and not heard as passive recipients of all the teacher passes on to them. Come the age of 18, these students are suddenly plunged into the more liberal atmosphere of modern universities like Boğaziçi where they are expected to carry on like their counterparts in the US for example. Naturally, this does not come easily and takes a little getting used to.

A second reason why students in some countries may have more trouble than others is the way they have been treated in class throughout their primary and secondary education. The difference between the classroom atmosphere in various countries can be easily seen when a primary school classroom in countries like Finland is compared with one in countries like Korea or Japan. The former is colorful, attractive and child friendly, an inviting place for kids in other words; the latter has desks facing a board. In the former, students are encouraged and expected to actively participate in the lesson; in the latter they are expected to sit quietly and learn. In the former, they receive the message that their opinions matter; in the latter, they receive the message that they have no opinions worth considering. Students who have been through the former system will readily make presentations taking to the whole exercise like ducks to water; students who have been through the latter system however, need time to recover from the shock and brave the stage. In short, persuading some students to make presentations may take time.

A third reason why students may feel disinclined to make presentations is the methods which have been used to motivate them to study throughout their primary and secondary education. As can be easily surmised, students going through a system such as the one in Finland are accustomed to addressing their friends in class because their personal interests, their opinions and their take on things have always been valued. Conversely, in a more authoritarian country, this is not the case. The students are required to regurgitate what they have been fed by their teachers. Their reward is a good grade whereas the reward in the former system is the pleasure the student making the presentation derives from the whole experience and the interest of his friends. Grades play a negligible part in the whole process. In short, students who see only grades as their reward for doing what they are required to do will then, naturally, go on to do the math and decide whether to put themselves through the ordeal or not.

There is a magic solution to deal with students dragging their feet come the time for presentations. To be able to get the ball rolling teachers should be disabused of the idea that cracking the whip will do the trick because it won’t work unless the students’ lives depend on the presentation. The silver bullet is to adopt the approach that should have been adopted from the beginning. The students should be encouraged to think that they are doing this for themselves not for grades; they should be made to understand that it is a worthwhile activity which will benefit them and they should be told that their views matter. The lead up to the presentations needs to be carefully planned: the teacher or, better still, another colleague, should make a short presentation to show them how it works; the ways to make a good presentation should be explained and a blog should be set up. Students should be told that their presentations will be recorded and posted on the teacher’s blog so that they can look back and watch them and so that future students can refer to them and view them. Exams like the TOEFL and IELTS have a speaking component and recording presentations will help students improve their speaking skills. Another way to motivate students is to get students from other classes to come and make presentations. Telling a student that his presentation is so interesting that everyone should hear it is a very effective technique. The students in the class which is visited could then return the favor. In short, grades should be incidental not the reward.

To conclude, there are many reasons which make it difficult to get students accustomed to public speaking but the issue can be dealt with provided the teacher is enthusiastic and willing to get out of his comfort zone. A little effort on his part will help students blossom and become the kind of people who are really useful to society.           

HOW TO PREVENT PLAGIARISM

Plagiarism is basically taking information provided by others and presenting it as one’s own, and as such, is a form of theft. It is strongly criticized in academic circles leading students to fail and experts to be named and shamed. This being the case, one of the most important issues discussed with students who are being taught the correct ways of writing a research paper is how to avoid lifting chunks out of a text written by a second party and pasting it into their essay. Considering the strong negative attitude towards plagiarism and the number of programs devised to uncover it, it still takes place for various reasons. These reasons can be broadly categorized as ‘unintentional’ or ‘accidental’ plagiarism and ill-intentioned plagiarism.

Some plagiarism is carried out inadvertently and may seem innocuous but the reasons need to be understood in order to eliminate it. Students who have been through a more authoritarian education system where the focus is memorization and parroting have had no practice with using outside sources to do homework. Any paper they write in high school includes information copied from various sources and cobbled together. What is more, these so called papers are given top marks and the blatant plagiarism is completely ignored. In fact, the concept of plagiarism is never mentioned. Needless to say, these students have never mastered the skill of making notes from a reading text either. On entering university and asked to write a paper, they resort to the same tactics that worked for them up to that point with devastating consequences. The students may protest when their teacher, armed with a red pen, has scratched out most of the paper and peppered it with exclamation marks, that they could not have expressed the concept better themselves. It would be unfair to lay all the blame on the student in this case. What should be done is to first, teach them how to make notes from a reading text and second how to paraphrase. These two activities should not be just introduced and then forgotten about; they should be included in every reading lesson throughout the prep year at universities such as Boğaziçi.  Good writing habits and the accepted way of writing research papers should also be taught in a course open to all students at university in their freshman year. These measures should go hand in hand with a firm stand against plagiarism by the academic staff. In short, universities such as our own should not be too quick to criticize.

Not all plagiarism is carried out unwittingly though; some is completely ill-intentioned. Writing a research paper is a time consuming and cognitively challenging task, which is why some may wish to take the easy way out. There are plenty of websites cropping up on the internet which offer to write research papers for a price but it is far easier and cheaper to just mix and match information from previously written material and present it to the teacher. Just like the sites for writing papers, there are also programs that pinpoint plagiarism, which the teachers have access to so most papers of the latter kind are weeded out pretty quickly. There is no excuse for this kind of plagiarism, and it should be criticized in the harshest terms. A concerted effort to come down hard on all plagiarism of this kind will eventually put an end to the problem.

In conclusion, it goes without saying that stealing whole chunks of another person’s work and claiming it as one’s own is wrong and should not be tolerated. However, allowance should be made for students who, for no fault of their own, have not been given the opportunity to learn not to plagiarize. They should be brought up to speed as quickly as possible. That all plagiarism, no matter what the reason, should be severely punished goes without saying however.

IS YOUR WEDDING THE HAPPIEST DAY OF YOUR LIFE?

An argumentative comparison

Dedicated to “N” and “S” in the hope that they recover from the stress of their wedding and live happily ever after

A wedding is a ceremony held to announce to the community that two people wish to spend the rest of their lives together. It is a public declaration of love and commitment and as such, is cause for celebration. Weddings all over the world are, therefore, described as joyous occasions during which families and friends come together to celebrate the momentous decision of the couple. Logically, their wedding should be the happiest day of the couple’s life and so it is on some occasions, but it is far from being so on others. Wedding ceremonies can be a source of absolute joy but also of great misery. The key criterion is the type of society in which the ceremony is taking place.

In more individualistic societies such as those in the developed world, the individual, his desires, aspirations and proclivities are given precedence over culture and traditions. It is the individual who takes major decisions about his life and decides on the direction it should take. The notion of freedom is the natural culmination of movements such as the Reformation, the Renaissance, the Age of Enlightenment and the French Revolution to list a few, and is now entrenched in the West. There is a second factor that has a bearing on the issue and that is the age at which people get married. Marriage is not the end all and be all of life; people wish to receive a good education and pursue a career as well. This takes time, and when young people finally decide to take the leap, they are mature adults who know exactly what they want and intend to get it. They may, as a result, decide to tie the knot in the Bahamas, on a beach, with a priest and no guests at all. Alternatively, they may prefer a simple ceremony at the registry office or decide to go the whole hog and rent a stately home for the day. As far as choices go, the sky is the limit, no one interferes, and as such, the wedding is a day to remember.

Not so in more traditional, collectivist societies. In such societies, it is the customs, the traditions and social expectations of the society handed down through the generations that take precedence over anything the individual may desire or aspire to. The moment the decision is taken to get married, ritual and time honored practices take over reducing the couple to be married to puppets under the control of the puppet masters, the families and the rest of the community. Every step to be taken is set in stone and any wish to deviate from the prescribed path is met with harsh rebuke. For the puppet masters, marriage is the single most important step in life and concerns the community as a whole, but not so to all the so called “puppets”. Societies don’t exist in vacuums; there is, thanks to globalization, a wealth of opportunities to connect and discover, first hand, the way people live in other parts of the world. Another factor is education: Many young people in such parts of the world go to western countries and the USA to be able to receive a better education and while there, are subject to the influence of a far more individualistic society than the one they were accustomed to. Therein, lies the problem.

Individuals are subject to a multitude of influences throughout their lives; it is these influences along with personal interpretation that molds them into the kind of people they become. Parents of young people in more traditional collectivist societies are the way they are as a result of the cultural influences they have been subjected to. Letting go of such cultural norms as those espoused by the society is not an option. The young people however have been on the receiving end of a medley of cultural influences both from their homeland and from the more individualistic West. As a result, they have very different world views from their parents whose opinions they feel under no obligation to respect or accept. Neither party is interested in a compromise and is set on imposing their own opinions on the other. The resulting clashes come their wedding day cause much pain, angst and rifts that can last for years. The period leading up to the wedding, the wedding day itself and the following days cause stress and misery all round. A modern couple, for instance, would find the need to prove virginity to family members waiting outside the bedroom door the height of indignity whereas for the families, it is a matter of life and death. In short, weddings are not always all they are cracked up to be.

Assuming that one’s wedding day is always the happiest day of one’s life is a mistake. Societies come in different forms; traditions, customs and rituals come into play to varying degrees. Serious problems can occur depending on the extent to which people hold the accepted ways of doing things dear. As always the solution is civilized discussion and compromise or the acceptance of a serious rift.

REFUGEES: YOU COULD BE IN THEIR SHOES

There are vast differences in standard of living and quality of life between various areas of the world. While some live in the lap of luxury with all the mod-coms and all the latest technology, others can’t even take basic facilities and amenities for granted. Thanks to developments in the communications industry, the latter are well aware of how the other half live and the kind of life they enjoy. Wanting a seat at the table is only natural so they up sticks and brave deserts and stormy seas to reach the promised land. These people are migrants and their journey is planned down to the smallest detail. Then there are others who either turfed out of their homes and the country they have called home at a moment’s notice. This latter group of people is called refugees.

Refugees differ from migrants in the sense that they don’t wish to leave their homes, all their belongings and the life they have known to throw themselves on the mercy of complete strangers. They leave with tears in their eyes looking back on a country they love falling to wrack and ruin. Conflict regions like parts of modern day Syria, Rohinga state and the Sahel region of Africa are cases in point. In areas such as these, villages and towns have been razed to the ground by bombs, missiles and arson attacks; there is literally nothing left and people are obliged to flee for their lives. The lingering drought in certain parts of Africa has a similar effect on local populations. Facing starvation, people shoulder the old, the infirm, the babies and the little they can carry and set off on the path to safety. You would be excused for thinking that the miserable plight of such people would bring out the best in us and we would be falling over each other to help in any way we could. This is far from being the case, however.

Most people are conditioned to take care of number one; this is ingrained in their DNA. They may pay lip service to the values we hold dear and try to take the moral high ground but deep down they are very different beasts. They would much prefer the problem to ‘go away’ and the refugees to become someone else’s problem. First and foremost there is the obvious fact that refugees are ‘different’: they may subscribe to a different religion as in the case of the Rohinga who are Muslims living in the majority Buddhist country of Myanmar; they be a different race or tribe as in the case of Ethiopia or be looked down on for historic reasons as in the case of Arab refugees. This in itself is a formidable barrier to any hope of building bridges but there is also the economic cost. These people who come streaming across the borders are sick, injured, starving and exhausted; they need to be provided with food and shelter, medical attention and counseling. The initial burst of hospitality soon wears thin, funds are reduced to a trickle and the local population begins to grumble. Eventually, there is a spate of hate crimes, camps are set alight and all the misery suffered by the refugees is pushed to the back pages of newspapers and to the backs of people’s minds.

An attitude such as this is bound to bread a deep seated hatred fueled by years of day to day suffering which no amount of education can remove if it comes too late. The seeds of rage and resentment fester and grow in the children and the young who grow up in refugee camps resulting in a generation of youth who are beyond help. The outlook is very grim for these people and those who turned their backs on them in their hour of need. This should be reason alone to try and seek out a mutually beneficial solution to the problem. It goes without saying that the first thing the international community needs to do is deal with the problems that caused the refugees to take to the roads in the first place. Every avenue should be explored to address issues of minority rights in countries where the said minorities have had to flee. If it is proven that crimes against humanity have been committed, the international criminal courts should intervene. In sort, the leading powers of the world should not drag their feet. A second solution is to try and benefit from the skills refugees possess to transform them into useful members of the new society they have become a temporary part of. Refugees come from all walks of life: there are doctors and nurses, teachers and engineers and many more besides. These people would feel a lot happier if they were allowed to use their skills for the benefit of all. There will be far less resentment in the host country if the visitors are seen to be pulling their weight.

In conclusion, there will always be groups of people who are displaced for reasons ranging from natural disasters to civil war. The populations of host countries that receive refugees should explore every avenue to try and make these unfortunate people welcome. Making it easier for them to become productive members of society for the duration of their stay is a solution that should please all sides.

FORTUNATELY FOR DOCTORS AND PATIENTS, WE HAVE THE INTERNET

The human body is a miracle of creation but even some ‘miracles’ occasionally malfunction. Attacks by foreign forces such as bacteria, viruses and toxins can lay people low as can various forms of misadventure like accidents. In such cases a master mechanic, a doctor, is needed to provide his know-how and restore the victim to good health. Yet can doctors be expected carry out this momentous task on their own? In the modern world of instant connections via the World Wide Web, help is at hand thanks to medical websites, online forums and blogs.

Some may like to go back to the days before the internet, the dark ages, and leave doctors completely in charge. In fact, most doctors would probably agree but they only have themselves to blame. A patient obviously has a vested interest in trying to grasp what exactly is happening to his body, what the prognosis and the implications of the ailment are. Sticking one’s nose in the air and telling him to take such and such a pill, shooing him out the door and demanding an exorbitant fee is not going to wash. Unlike the dark ages, people in the current world are neither illiterate nor ignorant and understand what doctors say to them. Seeing oneself as second only to God in the sense that one is repairing what the Creator himself produced is hubris to say the least. Doctors need to remember they are human as well whatever they may personally believe and as such, are expected to act accordingly. Being economical with the truth, doctors leave patients no option but to turn to a resource which is only a click away. Many reputable medical schools like The Mayo Clinic and many organizations like the NHS now have excellent websites which are easy to navigate and fill in all the supporting details of the diagnosis the patient has been hit with. For example, a thyroid patient might learn that his itchy feet don’t mean he has athlete’s foot and that the itching is a symptom of his disease. A patient having a panic attack may realize that heart attacks don’t go on for hours and relax. In short, the internet seriously reduces doctors’ work load and helps patients to get a better understanding of their ailment.

It must be accepted that not all doctors are snooty and some would genuinely like to interact more with their patients, sooth them, allay their fears, clearly explain what is happening and what to expect. The reason they are unable to do so becomes obvious when you enter the ER on an average day and see the electronic sign above reception stating that the average waiting time is two hours.. This despite the fact that the 15 minutes rule is rigorously upheld, doctors in state hospitals are forever trying to catch up with impossible targets. Through put, spelt thru put, is the mantra and the average state hospital can be best compared to an assembly line. Add to this the fact that doctors, being second only to God, are expected to go a day and a half with no sleep, cat-nap when they can and forget about square meals, it is a wonder they can diagnose the common cold. This being the case, it is necessary to sympathize with the patient who goes into a state hospital coughing violently and is sent away having been given paracetamol and advised to drink honey and lemon and then discovers thanks to the internet that he has TB. The internet, in other words, can provide a valuable safety net preventing errors in diagnoses and helping out harassed doctors.

Nothing in the world is black and white; most things are shades of grey. The same is true for medical websites. So long as the sites referred to are reputable ones, medical websites provide a valuable service to both doctors and patients by providing the former with a more in depth understanding of their condition and lightening the workload of the latter. All one needs to do is to be sensible by dotting all one’s ‘i’ and crossing all one’s ‘t’.

PRESERVING WHAT IS LEFT OF NATURE

This is a problem solution essay with argumentative elements and I have dubbed it an argumentative problem solution essay. After all, one can perfectly easily have strong feelings about the solutions one presents. My second reason for using this style is to put the message out there that the so called templates that you have been tought are not set in stone.

Once upon a time, the world was a beautiful place: there were lush forests, emerald valleys, magnificent trees, beautiful flowers and crystal clear rivers, lakes and seas. Then man entered the scene and nothing has been the same since. Mankind has taken the phrase “like a bull in a china shop” to a whole new level. Nature is being devastated at an alarming pace to the extent that environmentalists are setting up so called nature museums, The Eden Project, to encapsulate slivers of nature in specially designed bubbles all around the world. If we don’t want The Eden Project to be the only place left to see nature in its full glory, we need to protect what is left of places of natural beauty. This can only be done by keeping man and the trappings of civilization out.

One important aspect of man’s life is heavy industry and it should never be allowed to enter places of natural beauty no matter what the reason. Heavy industry means bulldozers, building materials, toxic fumes, industrial runoff and large areas bereft of any sign of life. The fumes belched out by industrial complexes will cause acid rain, which in turn will destroy anything left standing after the bulldozers and cement mixers have left. The dense woodland in many parts of the UK for example is now finally going to be replaced thanks to a new project funded by the government. Another example is the protected zones and national parks on land and sea in various countries. If he doesn’t want to be left with a world akin to a lunar landscape, mankind should put nature first and preserve what little is left. Keeping industry out is not the only answer to the problem; there is more that can be done.

A second issue that needs to be considered if we are to preserve places of natural beauty is not allowing infrastructure projects anywhere near such places no matter how cost effective and practical. Roads that need to be built should circle such places despite the higher cost; pipelines, cables and the like should be laid elsewhere and in short, all the trappings of so called civilization should be kept out. The damage and destruction caused by such projects is monumental and there is no going back. This is why so many people were appalled when they heard about the third airport in Istanbul: the building of the access roads to the said airport has already wrecked havoc on the dense forests in the area laying them bare in readiness for the cement mixers. A second example is the infamous pipe line in the US which is going to pass through Indian Territory that has been preserved from destruction thus far thanks to Obama, but has now lost its protector. In short, a little more planning and forward thinking, and what is left of nature can be saved.

The last issue that needs to be addressed is man himself. In our modern world, travelling has become easier. People can wiz round the planet in a matter of hours and enjoy every luxury that modern travel can provide. Cities are the same everywhere: stone, bricks and concrete. Nature however, is a different story: there is still a lot to explore, to trample all over, dump remains of picnics in, and capture on video so others can come and continue the good work. Man has brought nothing but trouble to nature raging destruction where ever he went. This being the case, the ideal scenario would be to leave nature to its own resources for our own good. After all, nature doesn’t need us, we need nature.

In conclusion, if mankind is to preserve what little is left of places of natural beauty he should keep his grubby mitts off them. He should not try to improve on nature; he should restrict his activities to areas where the damage has already been done. The remaining places of natural beauty are the last bastions of a world which once existed; they should be allowed to remain so.

URBANISATION

The major cities of the world have come a long way since the process of urbanization gathered momentum in the 20^th century. They are forever expanding outwards, upwards and very soon downwards as ever higher buildings replace rambling baronial residences and Victorian terraces. Mega cities like Istanbul are like small countries. In fact the population of the latter is currently equal to the total population of Greece. Although urbanization has some definite advantages, the giant metropolises of the world have created certain disadvantages as well.

Urbanization  has various undeniable benefits. The different areas in a city are linked by a network of roads, subways, railways, and buses, bullet trains, private vehicles, lorries and the like travel these roads 24/7. Superb connections link people and services like never before. People can access their workplaces, schools, hospitals, public buildings and malls in minutes. The sick get treated, business is transacted, young people are educated and everybody is entertained. Every type of good imaginable from mangos to melons and sweet potatoes is available in supermarkets irrespective of season, all major fashion stores compete to dress urban dwellers and even daily newspapers from all over the world are available in every large metropolis. The practicalities of living in this type of an environment are obvious. There is practically no demand that cannot be met in big cities, which continue to attract more and more people from the countryside each passing day. Yet this is not the full picture: this unnatural way of living has done a lot of damage too.

The negative impacts of urbanization cannot be denied. The first is on the environment. The spread of cities has meant the destruction of forests, woods, copses, fields, valleys and the like, which has had a knock on effect on all the wildlife we share the planet with. The habitats of many species have been shrinking rapidly over the years leading some animals to the brink of extinction. The growing concern over what we are doing to our countries has prompted some countries such as the UK to start planting new forests. The second environmental issue which is a natural consequence of urbanization is pollution. The transport vehicles and factories belch out toxic fumes; the same factories dump unsavory chemicals in the rivers and lakes; residents produce mountains of trash, which has to be dealt with; the noise in the cities is deafening and the excessive light is deeply disturbing. In short cities are not the heavens they are made out to be. This is not all though; there are other problems as well.

Another negative impact of urbanization involves the changing relationships between people. Living in closer proximity does not mean people are closer together; quite the reverse. People in cities hardly speak to their neighbours or even know their names. Everybody is trapped in their own little worlds and pass others like ships in the night. Anonymity is what characterizes human relations in cities. The resulting alienation can lead to serious psychological problems. Depression, anxiety disorder and also more serious problems and their unwanted consequences are more common in cities. Those who cannot cope in the urban jungle we have created for ourselves may turn to drugs, alcohol or even opt out by committing suicide. Loneliness is rife and so is a nagging feeling that there should be more to life than the rat race. People feel dissatisfied without realizing the source of their problem. They feel they are missing something without knowing what. In short, cities may be tough places to live.

In conclusion, one thing that needs to be realized is that urbanization is not all it is cracked up to be.  There are undeniable up sides to city life but the picture isn’t as rosy as one would like to think. Cities change human nature and can cause an undercurrent of despair while addressing many practical issues. There are a lot of lessons concerning city living both municipalities and city dwellers need to be reminded of.   

TOYS

Bringing up the young as successfully as possible, preparing them for life and all that they will face is a problem that plagues modern parents. Couple this with their need to work full time and a very disturbing picture emerges. People cannot be in two places at once hence what are they to do with their precious children? The latter’s cognitive skills need to be developed, their intellectual capacity needs to be increased, their creative skills need to be fostered alongside their hobbies and interests. The only way out of the dilemma is to devise a way to do all this and remain at work during the day is to find the right medium to impart all these skills. Enter toys. The abundance of toys the modern child is showered with has to be seen to be believed. It cannot be denied that a certain number of toys are beneficial and provide various advantages but the modern playroom does provide some disadvantages too.

Play has long been the way mammals acquire various life skills and humans are no exception. Play helps develop all manner of cognitive and physical skills. The function of toys is to promote play and guide thinking thus providing kids with a means to self enhancement. Toys that are bought for kids can be classified into two groups as those which  support cognitive development and those that introduce life skills. In this respect, legos, jigsaws, building blocks and the like can be listed as educational toys. The former two are so popular that parents enjoy them as much as their kids. Board games on the other hand bring people together round a table, promote socialization and the learning of social skills. They encourage bonding in a family or among a group of friends. Dolls and doll’s houses introduce social roles and prepare girls for life. In short there is no denying that toys have their place in child development and serve a useful function but moderation is not something doting parents subscribe to.

Too much of most things is bad for one and that includes toys. The feeling of guilt experienced by absentee parents cannot be gotten rid of by buying kids every new doll that hits the shelves or every new corgi that emerges in a shop window. Retailers are very good at guilt tripping parents but the truth is that too many toys are bad for the kid. First of all, kids don’t learn to appreciate what they have. The average kid doesn’t need a dozen Barbie dolls for instance one or two will do. A cuddly toy to take to bed is useful but does the kid need a whole menagerie? There will usually be one favorite which will be adored anyway. Second of all, kids don’t learn the value of money or appreciate the sacrifices parents make to buy certain toys. The toy industry is big business and toys are expensive. Is it really wise to turn children into the victims of capitalism and the free market economy so early in life? Wouldn’t it be wiser to teach them values such as sharing, compassion, empathy and the like? Buying too many toys just to appease a guilty conscience might land parents with a spoilt brat with no concern for anyone but himself who makes continuous demands on parents. Once parents have started down that path, there is no going back.

To cut a long story short, toys certainly have an important place in people’s lives but the whole business of buying toys can be carried too far. Parents should focus on what is really good for the child and not on their feelings of guilt. They should remember the function toys are supposed to serve and spend accordingly. They would do better spending quality time with their children and making it count than buying another doll or truck.