Should all schools offer music programs?

            Almost everyone is somehow involved in music. Whether by listening to music, playing an instrument, or composing music yourself, you’re probably in some way a fan of music. With how wide-ranging music is with its many genres, it’s pretty easy to find something you like. But not everyone likes the idea of music education. Spotify may be the soundtrack of your life , but when it comes to taking music class, singing in chorus, playing in orchestra, taking music theory or learning about music history, it may just not be your thing. But there is evidence that suggests that whether or not you enjoy making and understanding music, having music education is beneficial in more ways than just musical literacy.

            Multiple studies have found that music education has developmental benefits for children (0-12 yrs). Students with a music education more commonly exhibited prosocial skills, better emotional intelligence, and a generally better academic performance. Music requires students to engage multiple skill sets simultaneously and can help with language development. Some studies found that students who were educated in music were more likely to have an overall higher IQ than students who did not receive a music education.

Music is often considered an art, and most music classes, along with visual art and theatre classes, all fall under the category of ‘fine arts’ in most schools. Even if you aren’t composing music, it can still feed your creative side and help develop your creative capacities, setting you up for lifelong success. In addition, students with music education are more likely to have higher academic performance than their non-music-educated counterparts. Aside from all that, one study found that music majors tended to have higher self-esteem than non-music majors. So maybe music helps with self-esteem too.  

            Am I arguing that everyone should learn an instrument, sing in chorus, and take multiple music classes? No. What I am arguing is that it is a proven fact that music learning facilitates learning in all areas, especially in younger kids. So should all schools offer music programs? Yes. Should high school students who aren’t into music attend music classes? Maybe. Should elementary-age kids attend music classes? Yes.

            I am a person who likes music. I sing in chorus, play the piano, and enjoy listening to music. I have grown up in a household where music is just as much a part of life as eating breakfast. To me, having a music education is non-negotiable. For others though, learning about music might just be a headache. But maybe, having a bit of a headache for a little bit might have more benefits than repercussions. To me, the benefits of having a music education eclipse the downsides of avoiding a little bit of discomfort. And who knows, maybe you’ll love it and go on to become an awesome music teacher or an amazing musician.

Roxxy,

Works Cited:

“The Benefits of Music Education.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, https://www.pbs.org/parents                 /thrive/the-benefits-of-music-education. 

Blasco-Magraner, José Salvador, et al. “Effects of the Educational Use of Music on 3- to 12-Year-Old Children's Emotional Development: A Systematic Review.” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, U.S. National Library of Medicine, 1 Apr. 2021, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8037606/.

How Music Education Helps Students Learn, Achieve, and Succeed. Arts Education Partnership, https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED541070.pdf.

Self Improvement - Atomic Habits

Self Improvement - Atomic Habits                                                                                         By:Robert Tu

Habit: a routine of practice performed regularly; an automatic response to a specific situation (defined in the book)

Atomic habits is a book I reread because the term self-improvement gets thrown out a lot. People think to jump into self-improvement, one has to drastically change their beliefs or lifestyle, but it is not. What I learned in Atomic habits is counterintuitive then what most people think about how a person can improve. The book helps form good habits and get rid of bad ones. The author also tells his story of how habits impacted his life after a life-threatening baseball injury, and teaching people about habits is his passion. 

The title of the book, for instance, is well thought out. Defined in the book, Atomic is 1. an extremely small amount of a thing; the single irreducible unit of a larger system, and 2. the source of immense energy or power. Combined with the definition of habit, it creates a double meaning where atomic is both minuscule and a source of immense power. The title emphasizes the point in the book where small steps will compound tremendous results. The task of making one's bed every day could determine if a person is more successful or not. 

There was a lot of thought about the material covered in the book. James Clear, the author, is one of the most influential people to talk about habits. He builds his book on the process of cue, craving, response, reward, and then the four laws of behavior change. The laws are to make habits obvious, attractive, easy, and satisfying. For example, a trick is to design an environment to minimalize cues of bad habits and trigger cues of good ones. if one always has a water bottle in sight, there is a sudden urge to drink more water and keep distractions out of site in need of focus. These actions will yield drastic results and shows how an environment affects the thought process. 

This idea was a small snippet of the material covered in the novel, as there is much more that I do not want to cover, but I do want to mention the examples. The examples are each enjoyable. One of my favorite and first examples to support that tiny changes spark remarkable results in the book is when the author uses the British cycling team, who has been mediocre in the last century. He says that the coach would do anything to marginally better the team. He says the coach hired a surgeon to teach the players the best way to wash hands to minimize the chance of getting sick. This example shows the extent of the precautions taken to maximize their performance. These changes paid off because, in the 2008 Olympics, they won %60 of the gold medals. Then in 2012, they broke nine Olympic records and seven world records. In their ten-year timespan from 2007 to 2017, they won 178 world championships, 66 Olympic or Paralympic gold medals, and the Tour de France five separate times. This run of the British cycling team gets regarded as the most successful period in cycling. This example proves what small measures can do because of the team's success. 

 I read this book around two years ago and still learn more about self-improvement on every page of Atomic Habits. The author says the book is like a tool a reader can keep coming back to for reference. Some small actions, such as the author providing chapter summaries and footnotes, make you feel like he is right there with you while reading. The voice of this book is unique because you can tell when an author, teacher, or anyone is super passionate about a topic like James Clear to habits.

  

Was Harry Potter Worth Reading?

Leo Yan

     Harry Potter is one of those classic book series that nearly everyone you'll meet has read. In fact, the first book, Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone, has a staggering 120 million copies sold, making it the third most sold book of all time. Most readers will know exactly or at least have an idea of what Harry Potter is about. A boy is sent to a magic school, escaping his abusive relatives and reveals secrets of the school to ultimately defeat a dark wizard. Pretty much everyone has heard of it and very little further explanation is needed. But was it worth reading? There are a lot of factors that can affect whether someone thinks a book or series is "worth reading" since there is no conclusive definition. It is considered as one of the "big dogs" of classic fantasy literature, but here's the problem.

    The idea of classic literature usually necessitates either contribution to a literature/genre or can represent a writing style. The Harry Potter series is in a genre that hosts many of the greatest works in literature as a whole. This list includes, but is not limited to, The Lord of the Rings, A Game of Thrones, Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, and The Name of the Wind. Compared to these literary works, the Harry Potter series all of a sudden becomes much smaller. Many even consider Harry Potter to be a ripoff of J. R. R. Tolkien's aforementioned The Lord of the Rings. When put into scale, the Harry Potter series just can't reach the standards of "proper" literature.

    While the series can't fully represent the fantasy genre, it still achieved an incredible feat. As previously mentioned, with 120 million copies sold and an age range of 8-12, the Harry Potter series managed to hook in an impossibly large amount of young readers into literature, thus contributing heavily to not just the fantasy genre, but literature as a whole. One of the main drawbacks of the greatest pieces of literature is that a younger audience just can't understand what's going on in the text because the stacked layers of nuance require more experience to break through. The Harry Potter series, however, is written for children. While being its biggest strength, it also remains its greatest drawback.

    For children's books, there's a limited amount of literary technique you can use. Many of the bigger literary works have a knack for vivid imagery. When the movie for The Lord of the Rings came out, it affirmed what the readers imagined. When the Harry Potter movies were released, it showed the readers what it was meant to look like. Another limitation that can't be put on Rowling is the lack of character depth. Every character in great fantasy pieces has their own motivations, allowing readers to hold a connection between them. On the other hand, most Harry Potter characters are undeveloped. You could replace most if not all side characters with new people and nothing would change. You could even change their personalities and still, the plot would generally remain in line. Dumbledore, Snape, and Voldemort seem to be the only Harry Potter characters with some amount of detail put into their backstories and motivations. The convenient random addition and omission of certain plot devices (such as the Time Turner) also drags the book along, where easy tasks are unnecessarily difficult while hard tasks are solved within half an hour. Conclusively, a lot of the criticism can't be put on the author simply because of the limitations of the style she chose to write in.

    To answer question simply, yes. The Harry Potter series, though it may never live up to the standards of its "colleagues," still made a massive impact on literature itself, especially because of the age range of its targeted audience. Many things could have been improved in the books, but that doesn't change the amount of people that were hooked into literature because of it. If Harry Potter was never written, I highly doubt many modern books would have been written either. Whether if it's an overrated book or not, the influence brought by Harry Potter remains undeniable.

Sabine's Jourey

            SPOILER ALERT! There may be a few spoilers in this blog post.

            Katharine Rothchild’s 2021 debut novel Wider Than The Sky follows Sabine Braxton, her identical twin sister Blythe, and their mother, Maryanne, as they settle into a new life in Thronewood, California after the death of Sabine and Blythe’s father, Mick. Told in the first person from Sabine’s perspective, Wider Then The Sky takes the reader on Sabine’s journey to reconciliation with who her father was to her, and what she didn’t know about him. As she navigates her relationships at school and home along with trying to solve the mystery of how her father died and the ensuing changes in her life, Rothschild presents a page-turning story of how love and forgiveness can change a life.

From the start of the book, Sabine’s life is turned upside down after her father’s unexpected death and an abrupt move to a new town. Throughout the book, Sabine attempts to learn more about the father she never knew, of who Sabine is quite curious. After some research, Sabine learns that her father died of HIV/AIDS, and that Charlie, the man who Sabine’s family had been living with in Thornewood since her father’s death, was her father’s partner. At her new school, Sabine promised her best friend that she wouldn’t date their other friend who they both had a crush on, which soon drives them apart when Sabine starts dating.

            Aside from being the most central character to the story, I think Sabine is also the most interesting character. Sabine is a unique character, but it is not the fact of her having stumbling blocks that makes her unique, but how she reacts to them. I think of Sabine as a kind and forgiving character, but as one who initially reacts somewhat negatively to being thrown into unexpected situations. Instead of throwing herself a pity party after her father’s death, she decides to solve the mystery of her father and tries to understand why she is in the situation she’s in. Though it’s not easy finding answers that don’t want to be found or trying to win back friends who were accidentally pushed away, Sabine musters all her courage and does it all. In the end, Sabine brings her family and friends back together.

Though I would have liked to know what was going through the minds of other characters throughout the book, Sabine’s perspective is enough for me. Hearing Sabine’s internal monologue helped me to understand her rationale behind her decisions, and made me feel like I really knew her. I like that Sabine is a character who goes around the stumbling blocks that may have been placed on her path, and finds a way to remove those that she placed there herself. Artfully creating a compelling story about love, life, and relationships, Rothschild puts forward a well-written, interesting narrative that brings Sabine into the hearts and minds of the readers.

Roxxy,

Does Homework help you learn?

Does Homework help you learn? By: Robert Tu

Did you know that the concept of homework was originally designed as a punishment for students? The inventor of homework, Roberto Nevillous, created homework to punish students for misbehaving in class or who did not show comprehension of the lessons he taught. Homework then evolved into a key part of education systems around the world which raises the question if homework was originally supposed to be a form of punishment then why should it not stay that way and is homework help you learn?

At first, it might seem obvious that frequently reviewing subjects by doing homework as it refreshes and exercises the mind, but the quality of the homework is what is important if we are to have homework at all. Studies have shown that math homework was the only subject in which homework was beneficial. I would like to argue that homework at Uni does not fall under this kind of study because, in my experience, the homework has not been so much as busy work but more engaging than some assignments I had from my old school. Now for the assignments though that is a whole other story, but I do not want to share my opinion on them because I do not want to get canceled. Homework though is not terrible at Uni because they fall more under working on bigger assignments or readings rather than a review of a topic in class which is ok. 

The average time a student spends in school is 8 am - 3 pm which is 7 hours and only 1 hour less than a full-time job. If your employer asked you to work in your free time and punish you for not doing it then that would be considered illegal. This is the problem with homework as it interferes with your free time. Free time is one of the most important things because it allows people to explore and do what they want. When you are old and look back on how during childhood your whole life was pretty much school, that is kind of sad. The education system has set, enforced subjects that you are forced to learn whereas you might not build on them in the future. Some might argue that when people are young they do not know what is best for them, but when given a diverse system of topics from say middle school society would thrive more. Some might say that it is not possible to find resources for more topics, but this changes with technological advancements. Forcing students to learn the same core classes from a young age and not building on them into more specific topics is a waste of time. 

All in all, homework has its pros and cons. It definitely can help when doing it even if it is only a tiny amount, but when 99% of students say that homework is a significant source of stress then there is a problem. I am currently writing this because I forgot about this assignment because I was doing Consumer ED on my other computer so I forgot I said that I was going to get this blog done today, but homework is an important part of academic growth and I hope I left you with a new opinion about it.

https://archive.nytimes.com/learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/14/does-your-homework-help-you-learn/ 

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/opinion/sunday/quality-homework-a-smart-idea.html

Is Immunotherapy Good for Combatting TSEs? Leo

Background

     The first question to ask when hearing the words "prion disease" (also known as transmissible spongiform encephalopathies) is exactly what it is. In an extremely simplified definition, "prions" are pathogenic agents that cause misfolded prion proteins that spread by connecting their shape to other proteins. What does this mean? Well, in the world of proteins, your shape defines your characteristics and abilities. Some proteins can connect to others while others cannot. When prions appear, they will begin changing protein shapes and eventually, your body will have a massive problem to deal with: proteins that no longer work for you, and in some cases, even against you. Normally, functional prion proteins positively regulate neural precursor proliferation during developmental and adult neurogenesis. They create neurons throughout your life, and if these are misfolded, well, nothing good happens. Now, what is important to understand is that these proteins have no mind. They have no goal for nutrition, so the way that TSEs kill you is simply by getting rid of your functionality. What makes this even scarier is that your immune system does not give a response to prions, which means if you get one, you essentially don't have a defense.

Description: as seen on the right, the misfolded protein

has an abundance of β-pleated sheets, a type of protein

motif that helps the structure of the protein. However,

the abundance of all these sheets gives the prion protein

a strange tendency to group up a lot of homologous proteins

which can cause damage to internal and external tissue.

Etymology

    So what does the name mean? Well let's take a deeper look into it: "Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathy." Obviously, "transmissible" denotes that prion disease is passed on from one creature to another. Now, what does "spongiform" mean? It is pretty simple too, where the word itself means "to have the consistency of a sponge." In context, however, "spongiform" alludes to the material in your brain. Gray matter, for example, has this consistency. Spongiform in this case can also be defined as any degenerative disease in the brain characterized by the development of porous spongelike lesions in brain tissue. And now the scariest word, "encephalopathy." Encephalopathy is actually simpler than it seems. It is a form of disease where the brain is affected by some agent or condition. These can include brain tumors, dementia, and more.

Cures and Treatments

    Now that you probably get the general gist of these scary pathogenic agents, how can you treat them? The short answer is: you can't. What make prions so lethal is the fact that there is no way to stop them from killing you. You can slow them down with treatments, but sooner or later, they will inflict death. There is no effective therapy either.

    So, then what? If we can't stop death, what can we do? Multiple breakthroughs in immunotherapy have allowed humans to slow down the fatality of non-curable diseases and a few other tough curable diseases like cancer. Like everything else, immunotherapy is a lot simpler than it sounds. Primarily, immunotherapy is used for diseases like cancer because it helps immune cells find enemies easier. However, scientists have spent lots of effort trying to fight off other encephalopathies like Alzheimer's Disease and Parkinson's Disease. Prions are, like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, neurodegenerative diseases, meaning similarities could be exploited and prions could have a harder time expanding their kill count.

Immunotherapy: Yes or No?

    Then begs the question, should this immunotherapy be used? This is a question with a personal answer, but for me, I think it is a good idea to use this weapon against prions. Immunotherapy can be used extremely specifically and has very little side effects, which is probably why it is also a viable solution to fighting cancer.

    The reason why this is not yet implemented too much is that it is too soon to see just how good it is. Recent trials have provided evidence for success, but the blood-brain barrier is a fragile place and any mistake can do a lot of things worse than just death (like nerve damage). Another difficulty that researchers will face is actually finding a way to target these pathogenic agents. As previously mentioned, there is no humoral immune response to prions, which means there still is no clear path to defeating prions. Immunotherapy, although it doesn't have a lot of side effects, can still cause the immune system to attack healthy cells, problems in the GI tract, difficulties in the muscles and skeleton, and a few other side effects that make people a little worried about these.

Conclusion

    Right now, it seems a little too early to decide on whether or not immunotherapy is good for treating diseases especially in the brain. Recent research has shown some positive results for it, but speculation and inductive reasoning has put this treatment on reserve. From what we have seen from other diseases like cancer, immunotherapy can be useful, but it can also hurt the body as well. We will most likely have to play the waiting game to see if immunotherapy is truly effective against neurodegenerative diseases.

Sources

https://www.cdc.gov/prions/index.html

https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0817/9/3/216

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/prion-therapeutic-approaches

https://www.cancer.net/navigating-cancer-care/how-cancer-treated/immunotherapy-and-vaccines/side-effects-immunotherapy

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1365-2796.2011.02387.x

https://www.nature.com/articles/nrneurol.2012.258

https://www.roswellpark.org/cancer-care/treatments/immunotherapy/about-immunotherapy/how-does-immunotherapy-work