Are you a change maker or a money maker?

Let’s pretend that its Graduation day at Binghamton University.  It’s finally time to cross the stage and enter into the real world.  Two people come up to you and offer you two jobs working for non-profits (this will probably never happen, but let’s go with it).  The first job is your absolute dream job but it only pays you $30,000 salary.  The second job is something that doesn’t really interest you and you know that you will hate it, but it pays $60,000 salary. Being that we are all broke college students that have to pay back loans when we graduate, most of us would definitely consider being miserable and taking the job that pays more.  The question here is what will make you happy? Money or your passion? We live in a society where money is basically everything so its understandable to make sacrifices for money, but if you chose job number two then Nancy Wackstein would say that you made the wrong choice.  She would also ask you what job would teach you more. If you are working at a job that you hate then you probably aren’t going to want to learn more about something that you hate. I would have to agree with her.  Obviously this is an extreme example, but how much change will you make in the world if you lack passion?

Let’s say that when you graduated you picked job number two.  You have been working there for 4 years now and can’t stand it.  You made some money and now you want to make a true difference in the world.  You are offered two jobs again.  The first job is working for another non-profit organization in a specific area that you like.  The second job is working for your local government.  Which job would help you make more of a positive difference and why? 

Service Is Not A Number

28 hours. 800 students. $583,015.

Those are some numbers you will definitely hear when talking about the South High Marathon Dance, a huge event put on each year by my high school in South Glens Falls, New York. High school students dance in our gym for 28 hours straight to raise money for people and organizations in our area. It’s a massive event that brings the whole community together to help out recipients ranging my softball coach, who suffered from ALS, to a student who needed a kidney transplant, to our local food bank. It is a student run event, but the entire town gets involved – parents and teachers work food and raffle tables, all of the food, decorations, and DJ services are donated from local businesses, and the security and emergency services are volunteers from our own EMS and Fire Department. Throughout the 28 hours, thousands of community members come to watch, particularly for the closing ceremony. The announcement of the total amount raised is the final moment of the dance. The number is immediately plastered across every Facebook status, newspaper, and local news station. The amount is record breaking. Each year, the previous year’s total is blown out of the water. We hold the national record for the most money raised by a single high school charity event. The number of dollars raised is truly incredible and something to be proud of, but if you ask anyone in my community what the best part of the Marathon Dance, you won’t even hear a number come out of their mouth.

Marathon Dance isn’t about the money. It’s about how students, a high school, a community come together to give their hearts to people who need it. Before the final total is announced at the end of the dance, the dancers finally get to sit on the floor as the recipients speak before them (and the thousand community members watching from the bleachers). The recipients are profusely grateful for the money that is being donated, but that is never what they are most moved by. What brings the recipients, the dancers, and the community members to tears every year without fail is when the recipients talk about how they were given tremendous support and love from the community. They tell us about how strengthened and loved they feel during a point in their life when they are vulnerable and struggling. Of course the recipients are thankful for the money, but even more so for the people whose undying dedication, generosity, and love made such an amazing thing like the South High Marathon Dance happen.

The 2014 Marathon Dance raised $583,015 for 39 recipients. You could do some math and figure out that that amount of money could buy malaria nets, vaccinations, or meals for significantly more people. Does the number of people affected truly represent the “goodness” or success of service? Effective altruism is a philosophy about finding the most effective ways to the greatest impact on the world. It is a very important concept to understand – donors should be critical and knowledgeable about where money is going and what projects are the most cost effective. It is easy to validate service based on a number, but projects should never be devalued because they are more interpersonal or give to fewer people. Service isn’t just about numbers and making a difference is more than hours volunteered or dollars donated. Sometimes the greatest impact is what comes out of a community coming together to give themselves (and yes, sometimes give money) to a mission they truly care about. Looking back on my four years as a dancer, I don’t remember the totals from each dance, but I do remember the undeniable impact we made and the lives we changed.

For anyone who would like to learn about the South High Marathon Dance:

www.shmd.org

CHOW: The Extent of Individual Intentions in a Collective

As many students, staff and residents know, this past weekend Binghamton University hosted the 32nd annual CHOW Walk. Community Hunger Outreach Warehouse has been a resource for needy and hungry families since 1976 by providing over 130,000 pounds of food each month. One of its biggest events of the year is the CHOW Walk which allows the community and Binghamton students to make a positive impact on their very own neighbors.  Volunteering on the walk was amazing as I was able to witness hordes of people, townies and students alike, taking loops around the Brain in frigid temperatures. CHOW boasts of past walks to have had over eight hundred walkers, most of whom are members of the local community. What I saw on Sunday were not policy makers writing legislation to increase the accessibility of food or zealous protesters pushing for a cause; instead I saw families and friends having fun strolling through campus and enjoying a meal afterwards. Many of the walkers were just moms and dads who took a couple of hours out of the day to take their kids out for a walk. Each person may have had different reasons for attending the walk, whether deemed "good" or "bad" but together as a community they were still able to show an unanimous support for the program. I'm sure that the walk was an opportunity for many slacktivists to do their good deed just as sure as I am that it was an opportunity for many activists to really help the community. But in the end, to what extent does the intentions of these two types of participants really matter? I believe that if at the end of the day, the community has been made even a little bit better, then motives and intentions of each participant should not really affect the significance of the change.

The recent focus on the Ice Bucket Challenge also calls to attention the role of intentions in furthering a good cause. There is probably way more people that did it for the likes then those who would admit. However, the fervor brought on by all these videos really helped raise awareness and funds to ALS. Would the impact be as big if people did not do it for the likes? We don't know but we do know the ice bucket going viral really pushed ALS into the spotlight. Ultimately, the goal isn't to totally discredit the value of individual motives in civic engagement but to question its constitution in the future of the community as a whole.

Is Teach For America a False Promise or Do The Benefits Outweigh The Stereotypes?

            After sitting in on the past few class discussions, I couldn’t help but notice the overwhelmingly skeptical views towards services such as AmeriCorps and Teach for America. Upon reading the provided articles and attending their corresponding discussions on the subject, I myself wasn’t completely confident with how I felt about these organizations. Why did we feel this way? What aspects induced our distrust? Can this be fixed?

            As we know, Teach for America is an AmeriCorps program that provides an opportunity for elite college graduates to spend a few years teaching in low-income community schools in hopes of providing quality education for poverty stricken students. Although this organization seems harmless with overall positive intentions, many people including ourselves have raised concern and have questioned possible loop holes within the system. Some of the most recognized critiques include that “Teach for America fails to prepare its teachers for the classroom,” “Teach for America teachers almost always leave too soon,” and that “Teach for America volunteers focus prominently on internal growth.” Regarding the teacher preparation, it is rather unsettling to know that these new college graduates are only trained for about five weeks over the summer and then immediately placed into some of the most deprived classrooms. Is a little over a month of training really sufficient to not only do the job but do the job correctly? In addition once these teachers are “adequately” trained and begin to serve their time some are known to leave early and are less likely to return. This raises the question as to whether or not this reform organization is in fact sustainable. Also many of the provided articles specifically those that include volunteers describing their experiences focus immensely on what they got out of their time rather than how the students were affected. As some of us mentioned in class this stance could have been subtler had the articles provided more about the student’s perspective.

            Even though Teach for America is one of the most controversial school reform organizations in effect today, it is a very intentional and values-driven organization. It takes into account that these areas need immediate help and thus attempt to get the best candidates that would be suitable for the job and train them quickly in order to get them into the schools as soon as possible. With respect to sustainability, the organization has no way of knowing if the teachers they are hiring are in fact going to stay. It seems as if they have already taken efforts towards this issue by putting a time lapse on how long the terms are. In addition granting these teachers the right to leave helps eliminate those who are unmotivated and allow for a determined enthusiastic staff to take over. So what do you think about these organizations? Are these critiques valid and if not do the benefits outweigh the stereotypes?

Empathy and Civic Engagement

          Civic Engagement is such broad term. If you asked a group of people about how you would define it everyone would give different definitions. If you asked how they choose participate in civic engagement, they would probably give different answers as well. I think that how a person would answer these questions is greatly affected by his/her upbringing and surroundings growing up. As children, we are so vulnerable to outside influences. Ideals taught by our parents become what we believe in for the future when we are adults.
          Being raised by parents who emigrated here from Vietnam, I learned from my parents to be grateful for everything a stranger does for you. Coming to a completely different country must have been such a devastating change filled with many hardships which was why they were so grateful for volunteers who helped them to assimilate. Because of this, I choose to participate in civic engagement by helping immigrants who are facing the same problems my parents faced years ago.
          These childhood experiences ultimately creates empathy which plays a large part in why people choose to help with different causes. The emotional connection with the work that you do for other people is so important to volunteering. Without this emotional connection you most likely will not have the motivation to commit everything to your task. I believe that in order to feel like you've actually done good, you have to be able to really understand another person's situation, to put yourself in another person's shoes.
          This is probably why people choose to donate to different charities or why they choose to commit their time for a certain causes. Although I think that all service does not need to have this level of intimacy, it is just more beneficial for both parties involved. Volunteering, for me, should bridge gaps and connect people who would otherwise never associate with each other. Through volunteering, you find small similarities and experiences that create empathy. When you perform service for a cause that you don't feel a personal connection, you lose a very important chance for emotional and personal growth for yourself and for the person you are helping.

My role in slacktivism

       Previously, civic engagement never played a integral role in my life. In actuality, until being granted the opportunity this semester to participate in this class, I remained ignorant on the very definition of civic engagement. While I have always participated in various volunteering opportunities, never could I fully grasp the concept that the aid I was providing to others could be considered civic engagement. Although throughout our class discussions, the discovery that civic engagement can be viewed from multiple perspectives was made apparent to me. Unfortunately I have come to the realization that perhaps I seemingly embody more of a sense of slacktivism, rather than one of true civic engagement. Perhaps there are more people like me, who hope to stray from the confines of simple slacktivism, and begin forming the mold to become a true activist. In order to fully comprehend the role slacktivism plays on activism, I'll attempt to analyze it's effects on not only the masses, but also myself.
There is a stark contrast between true activism and slacktivism. While slacktivism can be considered a form of some-what involvement, it lacks some of the principles of true activism. Slacktivism is a coined-named, which can be defined as supporting a cause without direct involvement. That is not to say that slacktivism cannot be utilized as an important tool for raising awareness. Slacktivism and social media can go hand-in-hand, in part due to the accessibility of social media, and it's ability to spread awareness rapidly and globally. Have you ever considered what you are contributing to by "liking" and "reblogging/retweeting" items on social media? Has one ever wondered how by completing a simple action such as clicking a mouse, one can contribute to a great cause? It may seem as if it is a meaningless action to many, but those people are blind to the contributions slacktivism can provide in this way.
Kony 2012 was a video which had the foundation to truly made a great change in the world. Although the organizations credibility was diminished with the accussations and controversy surrounding the filmmaker, the organizations efforts can be analyzed in order determine the importance slacktivism played in it's success. When first presented with the video, I was overcome with a sense of shock. This issue was one that was unknown to me before, and before going foward with any research on this organization, I gave them my approval. This occurred right away due to me viewing this organization seemed to me as if it was fighting a just cause, a point of view most people would agree with. Now that I reflect back I find it rather strange how easily I was able to throw my support for organizations I barely knew. In the same instance that I finished viewing the video, I quickly shared and reblogged the video to all my peers.
One distinct memory I have of the emergence of the Kony video, would be the overwhelming sense of activism I felt toward the cause. After the conclusion of the video, it was as if I felt as strongly as the filmmakers did about this particular cause. The strange situation occurred when I was consumed with a sense of activism, how I only supported the cause through slacktivism. I didn't donate to the cause, yet I still felt apart of it through simply sharing it's information with others. The debate occurs when this sense of "activism" comes into question. It's not as if I was trekking through Africa in an attempt to halt Joseph Kony myself, or as if I was even donating some of my own income to the cause. I simply felt the spirit of activism through the simple action of spreading awareness. Before our class discussion on slactivism, I just attributed that feeling to my own previous ignorance, but through this discussion I have come to the realization that perhaps my good intentions may have contributed after all. My actions, while not being a form of direct activism, had the intentions to transition from slacktivism to activism. In my own eyes, I view slacktivism as having the ability of being a confine, but also the intial step into activism. My actions did aid in raising awareness for the cause, even if by unconventional means.

"Raising awareness is a lazy objective. Awareness is a given, action is what you want to promote." -Christina LaFon

An inherent problem of society with slacitivism is the very lack of direct participation. Slacktivism, while not consisting of direct involvement, seeks to encourage "slacktivist" to engage in this direct participation. It seemingly takes the role of that first step people take on the road to true activism. The conflict of slacktivism being "not enough" or not a true form of "activism" still astounds me. Although slacktivism may not provide organizations with direct participation, it still provides a means of engagement. When true activist attack or view slacktivist as "lazy", I am astounded. I see this as if you are making fun of someone for volunteering in a soup kitchen because you've volunteered in an activity of higher esteem. Volunteering and activism come in various forms, to call one of those forms "lazy" is to attack the very ideals of civic engagement. Civic Engagement can be defined as active citizens participating in the life of a community, in order to further improve conditions for others, and help mold that community's future. Civic Engagement is the coming together of people who have a common goal, and all pursue to achieve that goal through various means. Instead of attacking those who participate in slacktivism by calling them lazy, perhaps we can encourage them in their efforts. Through this, there is the chance that they could transition from simply clicking a mouse, to participating in marches and volunteering
Here is an article I found to be quite profound and interesting, which delves into the various components of the utilization of slacktivism through social media sources such as Facebook. The article illuminates "the trap" people fall into when they allow their activism to be restricted by the confines of slacktivism.

http://www.fastcoexist.com/3032824/6-reasons-why-were-slacktivists-the-psychology-of-liking-causes-on-facebook

How I feel about civic engagement.

There’s a broad understanding of what civic engagement entails. According to Adler and Goggin, “Civic engagement describes how an active citizen participates in the life of a community in order to improve conditions for others or to help shape their community’s future.” This definition only provides a general criterion rather than a comprehensive list of what an active citizen is able to do. Because of this, many people are not as inclined to civically engage as others are; not that they are lazy and choose not to be involved but that they are ignorant of all they ways they are able to contribute and make a difference according to their situation.

I like to think that the world is ideal, that if there was a way for all of us to contribute to society we will move forward and take a first step towards making a change. Although it may be silly to say, I believe everyone has a heart but not everyone has the open mindedness to use their heart to reach out in support for a cause if they don’t have to. One example that Peter Singer posed in his TED talk "The why and how of altruism", he tells us the story of a two year old girl run over by a van and was ignored by three people as she bled to her death. He asked the audience if they would help her, almost everyone raised their hands. When he compared that situation to a website about malaria and said that many kids are dying from malaria and people were not donating. He essentially chided the audience and told them that there were many ways to donate, and no one had the open-mindedness to look up charities that would have saved lives. When you show people a video of an impoverished town being torn apart, they will cringe at the musty situations of these towns and almost none will criticize the town’s inability to sustain themselves. In this instance, people would be more likely to extend a hand than to question the efforts of the government (which is also another way of helping the town). We people don't thoroughly research and that makes us ignorant of all the possibilities.  

Many people don’t know how to engage themselves in the community because they believe that there is a certain guideline to being active and being active so that their efforts are worthwhile. When David Campbell posed the question, “What is civic engagement?” there was never really a unanimous answer.  This is because Civic Engagement transpires through the different knowledge and experiences gained as a people become more involved with the society.  Civic engagement is what you make of it, in the long run, someone will always be watching and someone will always appreciate a helping hand. Although there are better alternatives to civically engage, there are no right or wrong civic engagements; there are no bad improvements or bad contributions.

It’s a very simplistic idea. Actions speak louder than words. I think that we all need to be less critical about the work that is being done to improve and more critical of the work that isn’t being done. We have to think more of the other chances provided to us; less of the changes we have already made but more of the little changes we can make in the future.