Blog #5

1. Compared to writing traditional essays as you have in other classes, were the expectations of the blog assignment easier, harder or just different? In other words, was it clear to you what the format of a blog was and how to produce one?

I think that the expectations for the blog assignments for this class were just different from other essays that I had to write in other classes. They weren’t harder or easier, just different. It was very clear how the format was supposed to be but when it came time to put in all together, I had to think a little bit harder on how I wanted to structure my essay. I think I definitely liked writing in this format more so than any other traditional writing style. I think it gets you to use your brain a little more and try to structure things differently.

2. Did the blog assignments, and the requirement to create a blog, relate to the class topics and course objectives? Why or why not?

I think that the blog assignments that we had to do for class did relate to the topics. I don’t think they were directly related but in each essay we had certain criteria that we had to meet. I think that the certain criteria that we had to have in our blog assignments were the main focus of the course objectives and assignments. Following the grading rubric we had to use the knowledge that we learned from class to obtain all the points that were available for the assignment. We had to provide premises, which before this class I really had no idea what they were.

3. Did the non-text elements of the blog program contribute to your learning in this class? Did they get in the way? Or did they have no affect at all?

I think the non-text elements did contribute to learning in this class because I think any element that you can use when you are writing, helps in some sort of way. I don’t feel that they were in the way at all, however I do think they make you think differently than you are used too. With that being said, I think this class really makes you critically think about things.

Should Wikipedia be trusted?!

When I was going to grade school and even in high school, I was taught how to go to a library and look up information via Encyclopedias. When technology decided to take off and become essential to every day living, I never thought that it was include references. Wikipedia is just that, and online encyclopedia. It is defined as “is a free, web-based, collaborative, multilingual encyclopedia project supported by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia). Even though I just cited it as a reference, I believe that students should not cite it for most papers.

If a person has the ability to go to a library and get an encyclopedia to use for a reference, they should use it. It would be the most reliable source because there are many authors and editors that go over the material. There are also credible people that are involved in the process to get an encyclopedia processed and ready for use. According to Encyclopedia Britannica’s website “Today they are the men and women of Britannica's Editorial Board of Advisors—the Nobel laureates and Pulitzer Prize winners, the leading scholars, writers, artists, public servants, and activists who are at the top of their fields.” (http://corporate.britannica.com/board/index.html). In the past, they have had such big names such as Albert Einstein and Sigmund Freud, which are huge names in the science industry.

Many people will argue that Wikipedia is so easy and it’s free. In my opinion, you get what you pay for. Encyclopedia Britannica is available online, but at a cost. This website doesn’t allow random people to add things to their encyclopedias and they are published and reviewed by people who have sufficient knowledge in their field or study

Some of the information that is provided through Wikipedia is probably valid and a person could use it. They need to be careful of the information that is used and probably use a backup method to make sure it is accurate information. If you are using another source to validate it, then why even use it? Now, in my first paragraph I used Wikipedia as a reference, should I be faulted for it? Probably not, because most people know that Wikipedia is free, web-based, and definitely collaborative. While researching Wikipedia through Google, it brought up an article from the New York Times that quotes the same thing I did from Wikipedia. (http://www.nytimes.com/info/wikipedia/).

Any person can go into Wikipedia and add information to it without having any validity. In one assignment we had to watch a youtube video in which Stephen Colbert was adding some useless knowledge to an article that was obviously not true. When he was done adding it, he said that it was already posted on the site with no one even looking at it to edit it. I believe that if someone wanted to put that pigs fly on there, people would believe it because it’s on Wikipedia.

Blog #2

There are so many issues in the world that do not come to a simple single conclusion and there are many reasons that they can not come to a single conclusion. Most of the time the reason for this is because the topic is so complex that it really needs a complex solution. There is one huge debate that is going on currently that I believe will not come to a single conclusion or a conclusion at all: The Health Care reform.

In an article that I was reading from CNN, they stated that both the Republican and Democratic parties keep arguing about what outcomes they want from this Bill they are trying to pass. (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/01/obama.health.care/index.html?iref=allsearch). They can’t seem to come to any agreement when it comes to this situation because they can’t successfully reason cogently. They need to start realizing that people are at stake when it comes to this situation, especially those who are receiving Medicare or those who are paying for their own insurance.

There is the Republican side that states if we change things now we are going to be paying higher taxes and not really see a benefit from this reform. In this video it states that most people think they are going to be receiving free health care insurance through the government, but do not realize that people will have a huge increase in their taxes. (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2010/03/06/gop.weekly.address.03.06.rnc?iref=allsearch). I believe that people should be in control of their own medical issues and if they want medical insurance. I also believe that if someone wants to pay for their own health insurance they should be allowed to do so. We recently read an article about how the Federal Government is trying take everything over, and this would be a perfect example if it actually happened.

The Republicans do not look at the amount of people who are uninsured vs. the amount of people who are insured. There has been a significant decline in the amount of people are insured because the cost of health care has gone up tremendously. This is where the Democrats have their reasoning for trying to pass the Bill. In recent economic times it is very common for people to be living paycheck by paycheck, which means they have no income to pay for their own health insurance. If the government comes up with a plan to help out the American people obtain health insurance then everyone will be insured. Every person should have the right to go seek medical attention if they need it and shouldn’t have to pay through the roof for it.

I believe that it is important for people to seek medical attention when it is needed and I think it is a good point that our government is trying to step in for those people who cannot afford it. However, I think that people who can afford it and are happy with their plans and their tax levels shouldn’t have to pay the higher taxes to get insurance that isn’t as well as their current insurance. I pay for my health insurance and have no problems with it. In this article it states they want to try to pass a 1 trillion dollar bill for the health care reform, should I have to contribute my tax dollars to pay for an insurance that is worse than my current one? (http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/04/obama.health.care/index.html?iref=allsearch)

Blog Assigment 1: Is technology making us smarter or dumb?

It’s amazing how much technology has grown in the last couple of decades. There is an important question that we must ask ourselves, is technology making us smarter or is it having the complete opposite effect. This is such an important question that we must ask ourselves as well as the generations to come.

With technology comes the understanding that we have to learn how to use technology in order to utilize it correctly. With that being said I believe that with technology, we are becoming smarter because we are learning more methods while still learning the skills that are needed for everyday life with our occupation. I currently work in a pharmacy and along with medical advances; pharmacy has definitely taken advantage of technology. In the pharmacy that I currently work at, we have an automatic dispensing machine that labels, counts out the pills, and makes sure the correct pills are dispensed. Although, the pharmacy that I work for doesn’t have the same machine in the article, I believe that it has significantly reduced the number of medication errors that have been dispensed. (http://www.stlukes-sf.sutterhealth.org/news/enews/0206_pharmtech.html). In this article, it states that there is an 80% reduction in medication errors because of this dispensing machine and with all the medical errors that happen that is a huge decrease.

With that being said, there is also too much emphasis to use technology to replace the work force. Behind technology there has to be a human who programs it and with that comes errors. I don’t necessarily think that technology is making us dumb; however I do think that it makes us lazy and not utilize our brains as we once did. When I work in the pharmacy I understand there is so much a pharmacist has to learn. However, when a person has a question about a prescription I often notice the pharmacist reaching for the computer or their personal palm pocket computer to try to get the answer for the client. What happens when the computers are down and the pharmacist can’t retrieve the information? Back in the day before computers, the pharmacists either would have the knowledge in their heads or they would reach for a text book.

I believe that technology is making us smarter but at the same time is also making us lazy. When it comes to pharmacy you have to look at the rate of error with the automated dispensing machine vs. having more human personnel. Humans make mistakes more so than machines do. If a machine is being utilized and is saving the lives of people, wouldn’t you think that technology is making us smarter? I would say so!

New to This!

Hey all! I'm really new to this so hopefully I get it down soon! Hope to hear from you all!