The Digital Divide: Transition to a New World

Running head: Digital Divide

The Digital Divide: Transition to a New World

Zayra E. Marrero Burgos

University of Puerto Rico at Cayey

The Digital Divide: Transition to a New World

Since a few weeks ago, I’ve been noticing something strange. Book bags are getting larger and, in some cases, multiplying. I would’ve thought that professors were asking for more books, until one day I saw seven laptops in the same hall. Then, I realized that everyone is getting a laptop and, apparently, I’m the only one who hasn’t got one. If you don’t believe me, go to the cafeteria or the computer building and you will the see them by the dozens. You can enter into the cafeteria, trying to find an empty table so you can sit and eat, but no… far from it. The cafeteria, at certain times in the day, like lunchtime, looks like a bad sequel to CADI (explain what cadi is for the audience who doesn’t have a reference).

This is the case of my university, that is maybe the case of many universities. But, while in the university, we maybe living a period of “laptopization” (the process in which many persons acquire a laptop at the same time), in other parts of the country and the world, people are living in technological obscurity, submerged in a breach that receives the name of “Digital Divide” or “Digital Gap”. These people cannot acquire nor have access to a computer and/ or technology because of their limited resources or lack of education on how to use it.

According to Wikipedia.com, Digital Divide (D.D) is defined as “the gap between those with regular, effective access to digital technologies and those without…” (wikipedia.com, 2006). This divide is evident in certain social classes, race, and economical status. In other words, the people in upper-middle social classes have, almost exclusively, the access to technology and its benefits. It also comprehends the effective access and utilization of the Internet and on the quality of digital content that is available for the region.

This gap comprehends a lot more than inequality of technological opportunities. The reality is that millions of people are being affected by this problem. This brings harmful consequences and marginalization to people who are part of this gap. Disadvantages are not only limited to the lack of access to the Internet, but also to the efficient use and lack of education in how to use it. Some of the disadvantages are lower performance computers, lower quality or high-priced connections, difficulty in obtaining access to the Internet and technological advances in developed economies (http://www.digitaldivide.org/dd/digitaldivide.html, 2006).

Another issue inside this Digital Divide is also the Global Digital Divide, defined as “great disparities in opportunity to access the Internet and the information and educational/business opportunities tied to this access … between developed and developing countries. Unlike the traditional notion of the "digital divide" between social classes, the "global digital divide" is essentially a geographical division.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_digital_divide, 2006). This divide refers to the economic disparity between most developed nations of the world ( Canada, United States, Japan, and Western Europe) and the ones that are in development (Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia). This divide is mostly a geographical one.

Some facts about the D.D situation points out that nearly 444 million people do not have ICT (Information and Communications Technologies) versus the 423 millions that do have it. From this second number, 214.5 million people call home one of the G-8 countries (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States). The other half is segregated in different partS of the world (http://www.itu.int/wsis/tunis/newsroom/stats/title of the article in absence of author, 2006)

Africa is one of the most affected continents. The internet usage in the United States, right now is 8 times higher than the whole African continent. The amount of people connected in France is higher than the continent. One recent statistic shows that 1 of each 100 persons in Africa has access to a computer and internet connection. Asia’s another continent that is being affected by this divide. With the 56.30% of the inhabitants of the world, she represents only the 8.40% of users in the world. Oceania and Australia represent the .50% of the population and represent 1.80% of the world users.

The issue of Digital Divide is one of the most critical subjects right now in Latin America and one of the principal barriers to overcome in order to achieve a real development and a significant change in these countries. With its almost 550 million inhabitants, this part of the world harbors about 10.30% of the world users. The access to the World Wide Web in Latin America is equivalent to the access in Seoul, Korea (http://www.etic.bo/Capitulo1/Brecha.htm, 2006).

The compromise in closing the D.D in these countries should be serious. Individuals who are on the side of the divide without technology are not because they choose to be, it’s just that they don’t have the means to gain access to it or learn about it. Good technology right now it’s not affordable. Not even schools with the funding that they may have are able to get good computers, let alone decent Internet access. If technology is not there, then how are you to educate people about non-existent technology in their communities? This can, and in the future will, hinder individuals from certain underprivileged groups from success. It can also make the situation worse by aggravating poverty and increasing the already large gaps in education and access to opportunities between the privileged and underprivileged groups.

This problem may impact the economical stability or development of a nation. The countries that have the least amount of economical power are usually those who possess the least amount of technological knowledge and hardware. People that do not have the facilities to learn or have access to these services are in disadvantage in a bear future when studying at the university or at the workplace to those who have grown with it, therefore, jeopardizing opportunities of economical growth and social mobility.

We can’t forget that the digital divide not only includes technological aspects: it combines social economical aspects, as well as cultural and infrastructure aspects. Technology is power. It greatly contributes to fight illiteracy and helps to master other languages. It’s a window to the world, strongly linked with cultural and social aspects. This is why developing affordable and accessible technology is important in these countries. It’s one of the greatest allies that a government can have against poverty, illiteracy, and even terrorism (for those Bush fans out there).

People like Nicholas Negroponte, co-founder and director of the MIT lab and founder of the “One Laptop Per Child” Organization, are trying to provide solutions to this problem. OLPC is a non-profit organization that targets the issue of the divide by creating an affordable modern laptop so children can have access to effective technology and help improve these kids education. The OLPC operates upon three basics premises:

“ 1. Learning and high-quality education for all is essential to provide a fair, equitable, economically and socially viable society;

2. Access to mobile laptops on a sufficient scale provide real benefits for learning and dramatic improvement of education on a national scale;

3. So long as computers remain unnecessarily expensive such potential gains remain a privilege for a select few.” (http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Learning_Vision, 2006)

This should be the main focus of governments in the world. Closing the Digital Divide will improve millions of lives around the world and would make considerable changes in the world’s economy. This battle should not be fought by a country alone, it should be a battle were many countries unite and find realistic solutions that would bring an end to this situation. OLPC is the first step to a much needed transition to a world were technological barriers should not exist, therefore giving people the same opportunities of growth and self-realization. Nowadays, access to technology should be a right, not a privilege.

REFERENCES:

A Decade after the Digital divide. (ND) Retrieved on October 21, 2006

from: http://www.digitaldivide.org/

DIGITAL DIVIDE: What it is and why it matters?. Retrieved on October 20, 2006 from: http://www.digitaldivide.org/dd/digitaldivide.html

The Digital Divide at a glance. Retrieved on October 21, 2006 from: http://www.itu.int/wsis/tunis/newsroom/stats/

OLPC Learning Vision. Retrieved on September 20, 2006 from: http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Learning_Vision

La Sociedad de la Comunicación, Información y Conocimiento. Retrieved on September 20,2006 from: http://www.etic.bo/Capitulo1/Brecha.htm

Wikipedia Definition of Digital Divide. Retrieved on September 20,2006 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_divide

“Cada pueblo lleva en su lengua el alma de su raza”: Language and Identity in Puerto Rico

Running head: Language

“Cada pueblo lleva en su lengua el alma de su raza”: Language and Identity in Puerto Rico

Zayra E. Marrero Burgos

University of Puerto Rico at Cayey

“Cada pueblo lleva en su lengua el alma de su raza”[1]: Language and Identity in Puerto Rico

July 25, 1898: Puerto Rico is invaded and colonized… again. Even though we were indirectly at war with the invader, the occupation was not met with any arms, violence, nor resistance. Instead, it was met with a huge reception. Puerto Rico begins a state of political uncertainty that after 108 years has not yet been resolved. Ever since its discovery 513 years ago, Puerto Rico has been a colony, making her the last and oldest one in the modern world. This ambiguous state has shaped our traditions, language, customs, and mostly our identity.

The invading nation attempted to impose their “official language”, with the belief that in this way they were imposing the mind-frame and customs of the dominating group. It’s in that moment that Spanish language became like a safety shield, in that it preserved the unity of the island in the face of tyranny. This imposition not only caused resentment, but mostly aversion to the American language policies to be enforced in the island, making Puerto Ricans hold on to their language, that became their identity marker. English language was used as means of subordination, a conquest and power tool, while Spanish language, on the contrary, represented identity, sense of belonging; and at the same time represented what was inferior and hillbilly.

If we are to understand this aversion to English language and the relationship between language and identity, we must explore what happened in the years following the invasion.

The initial acceptance of the English language in the government and the schools was because people thought that the military government was a transitional form of governance that would eventually lead to Puerto Rico’s annexation and greater local autonomy that would restore Spanish as the language of government. The first Commissioner of Education, Dr. Martin Brumbaugh, faced the challenge of educating a population that had an 80% rate of illiteracy and only 8% of the school aged children attended school (Montilla, 1971). Also, the military government report indicated that the Puerto Ricans did not speak pure Spanish but rather a “patois… with no literature and little value as intellectual medium” fostering the belief that it would be just as easy to educate the people in English as it would be educate them in Spanish (Montilla 1971). The U.S occupying government devalued the Puerto Rican dialect of Spanish as means of justifying English language policy in the schools. Thus, from 1905 through 1917, English was the medium of instruction in all grades and Spanish was to be taught as a separate subject, as if it were a second language. Aida Negron de Montilla’s (1971) investigation of seven politically appointed Commissioners of Education during the first decades of the 20^th Century shows that this language policy was based not on pedagogical principles but rather represented a push from Washington D.C and U.S political appointees to promote Americanization and the English language as part of an agenda to assimilate Puerto Ricans, despite the high cost of providing inferior educational opportunities to students.

The schools played a crucial part in the Americanization of the Island. Several changes were done including: substitution (and preference) of local textbooks for foreign books, which reflected the lifestyle of the North American and the employment of American professors to teach in English at the schools, where the kids barely knew Spanish. These teachers were to diffuse an assimilation feeling and suppress any feeling of independence. The English language was installed as a requisite in order to teach. (Montilla 1990)

One of the first actions of overt resistance displayed by Puerto Ricans occurred as early as 1909, rural elementary school children refused to attend classes unless they were taught in Spanish. In response, these kids were expelled from school. This brought the institution of military drills for children to have a more disciplined attitude towards their Americanized education.

The real resistance began in the 1930’s with Pedro Albizu Campos’s nationalist speeches, where he repeatedly spoke out against the presence of English as the language of instruction in public schools saying that English “desorienta y embrutece a nuestra juventud, en grave perjuicio de nuestra personalidad cultural” (disorients and makes brutish of our youth, gravely harming our cultural personality) (Acosta 2000) Albizu’s numerous references to the imposition of English in Puerto Rico classified the English language as a threat to cultural and national identity and firmly placed Spanish as an integral element of the founding myth that defined Puerto Rican nationhood. Albizu feared cultural imperialism as represented by replacing Spanish with English in the schools was detrimental not only to the learning process, but to the local concept of national identity. The fear of having children identify with the American culture instead of their mother culture was latent.

The intellectuals of the decade also criticized the language policy that the States was imposing in the country. They attacked the English language instruction in schools and called for Spanish language instruction for the intellectual and educational development of students and the maintenance of a unique Puerto Rican culture. The image that they often recall is the image of “stuttering individuals”, implying that not only culture would be impacted, but also the cognitive process of children. (García-Kuenzli 1969)

War on language debate was declared in the 1940’s, when a series of events triggered the public resistance to English language. In February 1943, the Chávez Committee, chaired by New Mexico senator Dennis Chávez, conducted hearings in Puerto Rico to investigate social and economic conditions on the Island. The original focus of this committee somehow turned to the teaching of English in public schools. The member of the committee favored English instruction at any cost in sharp contrast with the testimony by Puerto Rican educators that almost uniformly advocated establishing Spanish as the medium of education as the most effective means of teaching English. The Commissioner of Education at the time, Jose Gallardo, testified before the committee arguing that the Puerto Rican public school system faced numerous obstacles in English language instruction. He also explained the difficulties that the Department of Instruction was having in getting children to attend school and finishing, at least, elemental grades. (“Gallardo discute ante el Comité Chávez el problema educativo”. February 18, 1943. El mundo)

This testimony caused the committee to threat the Island saying that we should not expect economic help from the United States if Puerto Ricans did not demonstrate their loyalty to the United States by making an effort to learn English and creating the opportunity for children to learn English through participation in the public school system. (“Giró sobre el inglés vista del Comité Chávez”. February 20, 1943. El mundo)

Teachers went and testified before the committee arguing the same things that Gallardo and many others. But, their claims went further. They said that public school education suffered at the expense of teaching English because of the enormous amount of time and resources expended, when the most critical issue was how to make easier for kids to go to school. They did not oppose to the English language, but rather meeting student’s educational needs, that involved learning their mother language well in order to teach the other.

The reaction of the committee was largely negative; they concluded that Puerto Rican educators had failed to teach English in their 45 years as a U.S. possession and that Puerto Rico would never become a state if its people did not learn English and acquire American cultural ideals as a proof of their loyalty to the United States. They were disappointed with the local sentiment that called for Spanish language instruction; despite it was backed by widely accepted educational theory. (“Giró sobre el inglés vista del Comité Chávez”. February 20, 1943. El mundo)

Puerto Ricans were outraged by the committee disregard for testimony by local educators that consistently favored Spanish language instruction in the public schools. The president of the University of Puerto Rico, Jaime Benítez, wrote a letter that was published in El mundo that same February. He emphasized that the language was not a political issue, but it would become one if Spanish medium instruction were prohibited in the classroom. Benítez acknowledged the political implications of U.S mandated language policy. His statement suggests that if Puerto Ricans had local autonomy over the language issue, it would strictly be an issue of pedagogy, but if the Unites States continued to deny local agency in language policy, Puerto Ricans would wage fierce political battle. Later, it would be argued that the Unites States had monolingual Spanish speaking soldiers in the Southwest, demonstrating that English was unnecessary for proving loyalty to the armed forces because it was possible to defend the nation without speaking English.(“Rector Benítez dice no es asunto político el idioma”. 22 de febrero de 1943. El Mundo)

Also the students of the time drew up declaration that sharply criticized the Chávez committee that the committee’s remarks constituted incomprehension, ignorance, and an anachronistic imperialist spirit, and that constitute an unsolicited offense to our people. (“Consejo de estudiantes discute asunto del idioma”. 1 de marzo de 1943. El mundo)

In 1945, the legislature passed Law Number 51, a.k.a “Proyecto del Idioma”) that designated Spanish as the language of instruction in public schools. This law was vetoed by Gov. Rexford Tugwell, interim Governor Manuel Perez, and President Harry Truman. Students from the University of Puerto Rico began organizing an Island wide protest to Truman’s veto of the language bill and express their support of designating Spanish the language of instruction across all educational levels, arguing that the worst damage that the U.S. government had done in Puerto Rico had been the destruction of Spanish. Denouncing Tugwell’s and Truman’s vetoes and asserting that Puerto Ricans has the right to receive an education in their vernacular and not in a foreign language. Arguments against English in the schools often referred to it as a foreign language as opposed to a second language. This reflects both pedagogical reasoning that language policy needed to recognize that English was not the vernacular on the Island and textbooks and methodology needed to reflect the reality of the situation. Defining English as a foreign language also served to politically and culturally separate Puerto Rico from the United States. (“Graduados UPR condenan veto a bill de idioma” November 9, 1946. El mundo)

The Americanization campaign was not successful. Puerto

Ricans were resisting the English Language; the Americans that

were brought to the Island to govern the Island did not want to

learn Spanish. Kids were not going to school, and if they went,

they were on the verge of failure. The conditions in Puerto Rico

were deplorable. During these years, Puerto Rico had grown into a

little more than a plantation. The people desperately held onto

their language and sense of identity.

The English language oppression cemented the identification of Spanish as part of Puerto Rican identity. Identity based on language is dynamic due to ever-changing language policy, shifting attitudes and loyalties, and historical situations that dictate social control or domination. Language, right now, is a defining element of national identity that makes us Puerto Ricans in a cultural sense, while being citizens of the United States in a political sense. Language contributes to the distinction between us (Puerto Ricans) and them (Americans) which in turn shapes our national identity. Puerto Ricans have a complex relationship with the English language because of its perceived threat to our identity and also to the status of the Spanish language.

We cannot ignore the influence of English on the Puerto Rican

population at present day which reaches the Island via numerous

sources such as: business, education, cable television, print

media, music, movies, the internet, etc. The persistent presence

of English affects the entire population, from monolingual

housewives that must deal with English labeling when grocery

shopping to college students faced with the challenge of taking

classes that are taught in Spanish with textbooks in English.

Today, English is used as a useful tool for success in education,

politics, and business and its presence as a secondary language is

generally accepted and deemed to be desirable. The English

language seems to have achieved a greater level of acceptance

during this period of passive U.S. influence than it achieved

during the years of mandatory language instruction in the public

schools in the first half of the twentieth century.

The average Puerto Rican is used to live in a society that’s submerged in a dual language culture. To live between languages is an everyday thing. Even though the “Americanization” of Puerto Rico is not a political goal since the 1940’s, the process is still felt on the Island; maybe not through language, but through music, T.V, film, literature, among others. In contrast with the 30’s and 40’s, today most Puerto Ricans embrace the American language for diverse reasons.

One of the strongest reasons, in my opinion, is survival. We have been accustomed to the political, cultural, social, and mostly economic patronage of the metropolis. A lot of people, in one way or the other, do not think nor imagine a future without the protection of the United States. They assimilate language, way of life, and even mannerisms that, for them, may result in not only economical benefits, but in social standing, maybe showing loyalty that the Americans have always asked from us. Most of the time, this type of person, renounces his/ her language and nationality, and calls him/herself “American”, maybe alluding to a citizenship that, for them, define who they are.

Others accept this reality and live conscious of the cultural influence of the U.S in our Island. These people know and embrace the challenge that is to keep and defend an official language (that changes every four years or less), and most of all they know the hardships of protecting and rescuing the so-called Puerto Rican identity from the imminent assimilation that haunts us. “We are living in a key moment in our history”, Javier Colón Morera says in his article “Una noche para nuestra bandera”, “in which Puerto Ricans manifest in a firm and spontaneous way our admiration and respect for the national symbols”. As if suddenly we found out who we are.

REFERENCES:

Books:

Acosta, I. (2000) La palabra como delito: Los discursos por los que condenaron a Pedro Albizu Campos”. San Juan: Editorial Cultural

García-Kuenzli, P. (1969).El proceso de americanización en Puerto Rico, un problema ético. San Juan: Editorial Análisis

García Passalacqua, J.M. (2001).Afirmación nacional: verdadera historia de los Puertorriqueños. San Juan: Editorial Cultural.

Lopez Baralt, J. (1999). The policy of the United States towards its territories with special reference to Puerto Rico. San Juan: Editorial de la Universidad de Puerto Rico.

Negron de Montilla, A. (1971). Americanization in Puerto Rico and the Public School System 1900-1930. Río Piedras: Editorial Edil.

Negron de Montilla, A. (1990). La americanización de Puerto Rico y el sistema de instrucción publica 1900-1930. Rio Piedras: Editorial de la Universidad de Puerto Rico.

Pabón, C. (2002) Nación Post-Mortem: ensayos sobre los tiempos de insoportable ambigüedad. San Juan: Callejón.

Trias Monje, J. (1999). Puerto Rico: Las penas de la colonia más antigua del mundo. San Juan: Editorial de la Universidad de Puerto Rico

Newspapers:

“Gallardo discute ante el Comité Chávez el problema educativo”. (1943, February 18). El mundo.

“Giró sobre el inglés vista del Comité Chávez”. (1943, February 20) El mundo, pp.2

“Rector Benítez dice no es asunto político el idioma”. (1943, February 22). El Mundo, pp. 1

“Consejo de estudiantes discute asunto del idioma”. (1943, March 1). El mundo, pp.4

“ Graduados UPR condenan vetoa hill de idioma” (1946, November 9). El mundo. pp.5

---

[1] Antonio S. Pedreira (1934)

To speak or not to speak?

Through years and years, rules were set to define gender behavior that last to this day. Rules that we have to abide by to supposedly have a better life. Some of these rules are pretty stupid and ridiculous. Our parents always tried to teach them to us, but fortunately times change and a lot, not all, of those rules are obsolete, especially the one that women can’t have a mind of their own. The generation of our grandparents was quite conservative in that way. Women were brought up to serve husbands, have kids, and do house chores. The women that spoke more than what was asked they were thought as a bore, mainly because wanted their women silent. They didn’t have much of a say in a lot of things. Men said that women to the house with a broomstick at hand, which is kind of sexist phrase for them to say. The men said, thought, and decided for them thinking that we couldn’t make a wise decision.

When women started to realize that they were like puppets with strings controlled by their husbands, they began reading and educating themselves to begin to ask for more rights and, most of all, to let them speak their minds and stop the controlling game that men had with us. I see my grandma and I see how subdued women were and some still are because, in order to speak your mind, you have to know what you’re going to talk about, therefore you have to know your little of everything. I was not so long ago at my grandma’s house and she was making breakfast to my grandpa and me, and after my grandpa ate he said: “Clean this mess and while I go rest”. I was pretty surprised by what he said and I said to him that he was being sexist that instead of going to sleep, again, he’d get up and help grandma clean and take of my cousins, and he answered me “If the foundation of the house breaks, the house comes down”. I was really mad with this. That’s why she always tried to raise me that speaking what was in my heart wasn’t bad and that I shouldn’t be intimidated by any man because I could do anything that I set my mind to, just like any man alive. She always pushed me to wish higher, and to this day she’s helping with what she can with college, because I’m the first-born granddaughter and therefore the first one in college.

To this day, I’m not intimidated and can take any man on and defend myself very well and get out of the situation winning. Many women have gone were no women had gone before. Thanks to those women, that through protest and speeches, won rights and men-controlled fields, we are able to be what we are, outspoken and all. Being the person and the woman that I am right now, I really couldn’t live like my grandma did. I just hope that women keep proving wrong these “gender rules” that were made for women, because some of them just limit our right of free speech and thought.

KV 5: A Gift From Ancient Egypt

In 1825, James Burton, an Englishman, visited the Valley of the Kings, a valley were more than 62 tombs were carved to serve as final resting places for pharaohs, for exploration and mapping. He noted a carving in an entrance of a tomb reading “Rameses II”, one of the most proliferous pharaohs in history fathering about a hundred children. He began working on the tomb and gave it the designation of “M”. He dug a channel through three debris-filed chambers but he saw neither objects nor wall decorations and abandoned the work.

In 1902, Howard Carter, the discoverer of Tutankhamen’s tomb, also uncovered the entrance to the tomb but re filled it thinking that it was a small tomb of no importance. He used it as dumping ground for his excavations and by 1920, “M” or KV5, as later was named, was a dim and distant memory, nothing to be seen.

In 1987, Dr. Kent Weeks, an Egyptologist from Washington state and head of the “Theban Mapping Project”, project that was devoted to map the Valley of the Kings, intrigued by the map made by James Burton, made about a 160 years earlier, began to look for the tomb. This map showed that the tomb had about 11 chambers that went in all directions, like the tentacles of an octopus, unlike any other toms that he had seen in the valley. So he began the search and work for this tomb.

Today, KV5 (that stands for “Kings Valley number 5”) is one of the most important and exciting discoveries of the twentieth century. The 11 chambers of Burton’s plan, came to be a 110 chambers and corridors, that can increase to 150 easily in the next few years. It’s one of, if not, the largest and uniquely planned tombs in all of Egypt. This tomb is proved to be a family mausoleum. Interred in the tomb are 6 sons (at least found) of Rameses II, two of them are Amunherkhepashef, Rameses’ firstborn, and Rameses, Jr. the second born. Given that there’s more of two dozens representations of sons carved in its walls, there’s a big possibility of more sons (or daughters) interred in the tomb.

Dated back to the 18^th dynasty, this tomb is one of the most dangerous places to venture in. It’s deteriorating process due in part to its age and the incessant and unforgiving pass of time, also has many other factors like flash floods and tourists. The Valley of the Kings receives annually 1 or 2 millimeters of rain, if that, but every 60 or so years, this big rainstorm sweeps the area. By the time the waters hit the area, they’re traveling 30-40 miles per hour bringing boulders the size of refrigerators, and guess where all that debris gets dumped? Yeah, you guessed right…in the tombs, filling them top to bottom with flood debris that has a cement-like consistency. The floods wash away hieroglyphics, breaks everything, and also covers everything making everything harder for the archaeologist. Also the tourists are taking its toll on the tombs. For almost 40 years, tour busses kept coming and going in a street that was the roof of one of the chambers of KV5. This roof collapsed, making it impossible to enter the chamber without stabilizing it first.

This is why the Egyptian government along with an elite group of archaeologist, egyptologysts, and architects are planning a safety plan for the Valley of the Kings and for all of Thebes to try to protect and preserve what’s left of the Egyptian civilization. This plan consists of controlling the growing population in the adjacent villages, passing laws to avoid cars near the area, working to reconstruct and strengthen the structures that are in the Theban necropolis, and also to protect these structures from floods to keep them safe from any more damage.

Egyptians, being the most zealous persons in the world about their history and landmarks, are trying to make one of the biggest efforts in history to try and keep these structures safe from air, if possible. They think that every people should have the right to dream and fantasize about this place, like I did (and still do) since I was 13 years old. This discovery was, for me, one of the greatest moments ever. Due to the fact that I was an aspiring Egyptologist, I would’ve loved to continue the work of Dr. Weeks in 10-15 years. Now we have more clues to what might have been living in Ancient Egypt and about their culture, traditions, religion, and society in general. Kings Valley number 5 opened our eyes by saying that our knowledge of Ancient Egypt is far from complete (and right, for that matter) and that the search of unlocking its secrets may never end.

** sory for the format of the last blog, it's just that this thing is giving me trouble....****

What is wrong with us?

Somehow the subject of the university has been brought up once again. This time, some students took over the theatre of the University. So, I’m following the trend that has been most popular these past few weeks, writing and deciphering what is wrong. I what motivated me to write is that I yet to see one coherent and objective, let alone intelligent, opinion about this whole situation. All the things that I’ve heard and seen are from employees, professors, and people who think they know about the university.
Recent events have put into scrutiny the real role, purpose, and function of the university. Today is the theatre in the Rio Piedras’ campus. Yesterday was that the students closed the university, the day before that was that the students did whatever, and so on. Nobody, in my opinion, has sat and thought of a logical explanation for these events. They all appeal to the situations that the university is going through, which do not help find that logical explanation, if there is any.
I have dedicated three years of my university to the student government body; two of those were as a student representative at the “Junta Universitaria”, entity whose authority is only inferior to the “Junta de Síndicos”. I also coordinated the student government in the UPR system. I can tell you that there’s a logical explanation that has been there for years.
Let me begin with the representation. It is no unknown fact that we are in an obvious disadvantage when it comes to representation in the different forums in the university. In your usual academic senate you will find at least 10-15 faculty senators for almost a hundred faculty members. Then, you will find 7-8 student senators for a population that can go up to 20 thousand students. Of course, our ideas, proposals, and arguments will be drowned by the other senators.
Second situation, the administration thinks that our status as students makes us inferior to them when it comes to rational, critical thinking and decision making. Just as they, we want what’s better for the university; not so much for us, but for the ones that will come after us. If we want to participate in a committee, most of the time we just have to get there and sit. Otherwise, no student participation is ensured.
Then this question comes to mind: on whose territory is the university on? Students or professors? I heard a nice opinion about students from a senator. In a recent session he said: “Who do they think they are? They think and act like they own the university”. We do not act nor think we are the owners of the university, because we are the owners of the university. It has come to a point where professors are afraid of taking a stand and it’s up to the students to point what is wrong. Yes, the university is for preserving the knowledge of a culture, but if you don’t have students willing to learn it, it’ll become extinct.
According to my experience, I find some professors very selfish and individualistic. Some go to certain forums just to represent themselves, not the people that elected them. And they get paid for this stuff. Students are in the government just for personal satisfaction, we do this because we want to see change and improvement in the university.
This brings me to the lack of compromise. The chair of the Middle States Association, association that’s responsible for accrediting institutions of higher education, noticed this situation. She said that professors should buy a can of paint and take a day to paint the student building with students, that after all “they are the reason of the university”. I wish you could see the faces of some there… I was the only student that saw them.
Also students do not want to get involved in the student government. Lately, I’ve been noticing a change. Student’s organizations are more involved in different areas of the government. They know that there’s a lot to be done. While many think that we are “aves de paso”, that we’re here 4 or 5 yes and then gone; we are doing something to make those 4 or 5 years worth.
I can point out many more problems, but there’s one that stands out more: that is lack of communication and understanding. Either party, students nor administration, wants to be flexible. While this situation keeps on happening, we will have the same incidents of last week, or worse.
Hint Hint to the ones on the top of the food chain: students are capable of helping, we are capable of providing fresh ideas to resolve many of the problems that the university are having, we can put our knowledge to the service of the institution that molded us, and we can help to promote change. As part of the academic community we deserve equal representation in all forums and committees in the university. If there’s 20 professors for a 150 faculty in an Academic Senate, then, why not 15-17 students for 3600? The university needs a change of vision. Times are changing, so are we. University is not only the professors, but also students and employees that make up one big learning community. We need each other in order to exist and survive.

Music. Life. Grandpa.


I must’ve been 18 or 19 years old at the time and we were on our way to see my dad’s dad. I never saw my grandpa too much. My dad did not grow up with him around and neither did we. I knew he existed when I was 5 or 6 years old. But his presence has always been felt around my house. When we got there, he was lying down in a bed, unconscious, but something curious was taking place. One of my uncles was singing to him, and he was singing back! A day later, he had passed away at the age of 75.
He died doing what he loved most: singing and feeling music around. That passion was passed on to his seven children, including my dad. My “abuelo” always had a guitar on (I seriously think that he was born with it…), ready to sing whatever. A drink would be the usual requisite for singing. Little did he know that those drinks would take him to the grave.
He was a true musician. He lived the moto “women, booze, and rock and roll”. My grandma would tell me that he could be out of the house for days at a time, without a care, just going from party to party. He loved to party. I remember one of the many visits that we had to pay him at the hospital, he was in intensive care and all the way thinking of a party in a friend’s house. He’d say: “Estoy loco por salir del hospital, aqui no te alimentan ni te dan na’… hoy habia fiesta en casa de compay, sabes? Y me tocaba tocar,…” I would be perplexed at his remarks. Not to mention, that the nurses feared him.
This necessity of playing and singing (but not drinking…) got passed to us. I’ve been singing for 18 years and dancing for 16 years. My sister plays the guitar and sings; my bro sings… everyone in my dad’s family does something with music. My grandpa funeral was full of music and happiness, just as he would’ve liked. By the way, he did not like funerals, you would usually find him singing and drinking to the memory of the deceased person in a bar near the funeral home.
His presence has been always with me through music. Since before I was born until this moment. He had taught me that music is life and she’s always going to be there with you. My dad made a promise on his dad’s grave: he would pass the same passion and love for music to every member of his family. So he has done. I always thank my grandpa for his music, for helping me find my music, therefore giving me another reason to live.

"How to..... be a teacher" (yeah, right...)

*** Hi, I'm Back!!! ....=) *****

This August, while many college students were eager to get back to classes, I was also eager to get back to college, but an opportunity showed up as an English teacher at the school were I graduated. I had to teach the language to seventh, eighth , and nineth graders. One of those classes was a writing skills class. I had a homeroom and the English Club. Yes, it sounds nice, but...
I realized what it really is to be a teacher. Literally, all the support you get is the room key, your books, and some lousy materials that are not enough to start the semester. For example: a box of chalks (one box's duration is a week or less), one scissors (that gets lost withing the week... and they do not give you another one), one pen ( please...), and so on. And don't dare to ask for chalks or other things in the office, they'll tell you that you have enough for the semester.
Then, the kids. Apparently, my homeroom has big discipline problems in the school. Fights, home problems, learning difficulties, among other things were the day's special. Even though, I tried to my best extent to deal with these situations, I still could not stop the 25 F's that I had to pass in one of my groups. Not to mention the discipline situations inside the classroom.
After all this, I came to a conclusion... being a teacher is like being a parent: there's no real preparation to be one; there's not an instruction booklet that can tell you how to be one. College is not preparing teachers... teachers nowadays have to be psychologists and have the ability to negotiate with students. I think that the classes in college are about application, but little content to use. I really feel that the curriculum should be revised and add psychology and other classes that can complement and preapare the teacher for what it is out there....

I Believe...

I believe in the sun
that shines bright
I believe in you eyes
that darkens its light
I believe in the air
that I constantly breathe
I believe in your kisses
that give the strenghth that I need
I believe in the wind
that blows my hair
I believe in your face that's everywhere I stare
I believe in God
that gives me life
I believe in your love
that makes me fly
Most of all, I believe in you
because you're the reason I'm alive...

Why I Write....

I write as a therapy... It has helped me to understand better what surrounds me,but mostly it has helped me to understand myself. This I owe to my grandpapa. I should've had eight or nine years at the time. I had this anger burst and he gave me a pen and a paper. I didn't understand the lesson and he told me to write. Write whatever you feel, whatever you're thinking because the paper can hold everything, and it won't say a word. Since then, it has been not a habit, but an addiction. Writing is sort of my best frind and worst enemy. I can't live without writing. Poetry, essays, you name it. It helps me to get things out of my mind and system. When it's out, you can make better sense to what's going on and you feel a whole lot better.
But I also do fear it. I treat it with respect. When you write, things that you don't know that existed come to life just by means of the written word. You realize things that you wouldn't imagine thinking. I mean, it's a dangerous path for me. I've never followed it to the end, I always stop when it gets too hurtful. Someday, I will see where it leads me.

On using Internet...

As I said before, for me internet is kind of an intruder. I do not agree that internet can replace a classroom, professor, classmates, a good lecture, etc. For learning to take place, you need that interaction, debate, feedback; not only from the professor, but from your classmates also. It helps critical thinking, tolarance, and expands your thoughts and ideas about certain things and issues.
Internet cannot give you these things. Yes, you can argue that technology has advanced and there are discussion boards, forums, and what not. It may seem that it's like the real deal, but it's not. Humans respond to physical and visual interaction. We need to see the person, their reaction, tone of his/her voice, the gestures, etc. We are affected by these things, and we need to be affected in order to know how are we going to proceed in the debate or conversation. Another thing is writing. You don't get to know the reaction right away, sometimes you have to wait; and if it's a live thing, everybody's writing at the same time and you lose focus.
Don't get me wrong, internet is a useful tool, but when it comes to research (and that point could be argued too). I just don't see it as a teaching/learning enviroment. I think that a class by internet supports individualism, do not incite critical thinking, and it's a "cold" way to learn.

Using Blog....

It's the first time that I use so actively Internet for a class, let alone publish something in it. I was first introduced to this kinda thing by a biology professor in the university, and I have to admit that the idea of creating a blog crossed my mind, for about 5 seconds. I'm quite resistant to the fact that internet is taking over education. It's a great tool but you can't replace somethings, like the professor or a book. It's just that I like the old fashion way, books and good lectures are my style of teaching/ learning... I know I sound prehistoric, but it's my opinion. However, I have to admit that I see a little bit different the net right now. It has made things certainly a little bit "easier" and bearable this semester. It's a different learning experience, i hope to learn more about it... =D