Workshop #6

 

Zena Spratley

    • Greeting (8-8:15)
      • Music
        • Playlist of favorite songs (bring speaker)
      • Take attendance
        • Call out names
      • Pass out course evaluations
      • Discussion: How was your Thanksgiving break?
    • Backtracking (8:15-8:30)
      • Discussion: Since our last workshop, how has your perspective on identity changed in your day to day life?
      • Is there anything you didn’t get to say last week?
      • Check-in about registration
    • Panel
      • Guests! (roommates)

 

  • Martin Lane Cochran

 

          • Major in Global Studies
          • Minor in Interdisciplinary Science
          • Studied abroad in Paris
          • Internship experience

 

  • Sadie Rose Darwish

 

          • Studied abroad in Costa Rica
          • Major in Culture and Media
          • Currently on a leave of absence
          • Working in film

 

  • Julia Golden

 

        • BA/FA
          • Parsons – Photography
          • Lang – Creating her own business major
        • Living off campus
    • Introductions (8:30-8:50)
      • Each guest can say a little bit about themselves and why they chose Lang
    • Questions (8:50-9:20)
      • First I will ask some guiding questions
        • If you could something differently your first year what would it be?
        • Compare and contrast the dorms and living off campus
        • How do you involve yourself on campus and around the city?
        • How did you chose your major?
      • Then have a Q&A with First-Years
  • Final Remarks (9:20-9:40)
    • Remind the First-Years that I am here for them going forward even though the workshops are finished
    • Make sure they have my contact info and open schedule for more 1-on-1’s if needed
    • Discussion: What was your favorite workshop and why?
    • Collect course evaluations
    • Say farewell!!

Workshop #4

Zena Spratley

Workshop #4

Lesson Plan

 

  • Greeting (8-8:30)
    • Music
      • Playlist of favorite songs 
    • Take attendance
      • Call out names
    • How are things going?
    • Pair & Share
      • What major would you least likely find yourself in?
    • “Rate Your Professor” on the board
  • The Process of Registration (8:30-9)
    • Look at the First Year writing courses
    • Look at ULECs
    • Discuss majors/minors
    • Explore Degree Works
    • Making an appointment with Faculty Advisor!! (Mandatory**)
    • Understanding major requirements
    • Discuss:
      • How did you/would you approach making your class schedule? What are your priorities?
  • Making Our Own Schedules (9-9:30)
    • Make three schedules
      • The first is your most ideal schedule keeping in mind all of your priorities
      • The second is your “back-up” schedule, just in case all of your top classes are full by the time you register
      • The third is your “fantasy” schedule. What classes would you take in any school at TNS if you were allowed? What other major would you pursue?
  • Conclusion (9:30-9:40)
    • Discussion:
      • What are you end goals at The New School?
    • Wrap up any other questions about registration

Workshop #2 Lesson Plan

Zena Spratley

Workshop #2

Lesson Plan

 

    • Greeting (8-8:15)
      • Music
        • Playlist of favorite songs (bring speaker)
      • Take attendance
        • Call out names
      • Pass around sign-up sheet for one-on-ones
      • Pair & Share: What is one way you’ve practiced self-care in the last two weeks?
    • Backtracking (8:15-8:30)

 

  • Discussion: Is there anything you didn’t get the chance to say last week?

 

  • Lesson (8:30-9:15)
    • The New School History
      • Kahoot to quiz what they already know
    • The New School Basic Info
      • How is administration organized
        • Website
        • Who’s who?
    • Founding Document
        • Have students get their phones or computers to take the “Which New Schooler Are You?” quiz
        • Ask them to find a partner that got a different answer on the quiz than them
      • Give them sheet with 6 values from the document and ask them to rate The New School based on the values
      • Reveal that this is from the Proposal for The New School
        • What is New School’s grade based on the proposal?
  • University in Exile vs. Sanctuary Campus (9:15-9:40)
    • Explain what each of these things are and how they relate
    • Discussion: Should New School be a Sanctuary Campus?

Workshop #1 Lesson Plan

Zena Spratley

Workshop #1

Lesson Plan

 

  • Greeting (8-8:20)
    • Music
      • Playlist of favorite songs (bring speaker)
    • Fries
      • Wendy’s fries are vegan (supposedly)
    • Take attendance
      • Call out names
    • Pair & Share
      • First screen name online
      • Rose, Bud, Thorn
    • Shout-outs/plugs?
      • Mock Trial/Sign-up sheet
  • Community Agreement (8:20-8:40)
    • Re-establish fellow/workshop role
    • Create a community agreement
    • Ask two or three students to say everyones names
  • Lesson (8:40-9:35)
    • Three priorities: (1) Health/Self-Care, (2) Sexual Assault/Education, (3) Harm Reduction
    • Provide trigger warning  
    • Discussion about the importance of these topics
    • Ask students: What is one thing you wish your previous institutions had told you about any of these topics?
    • (1) Health/Self-Care
      • Resources at TNS
        • Flyers
        • Groups/Events at TNS
        • Counseling
        • Free fitness classes
        • Gender Affirming resources!
      • Resources outside of TNS
        • Cheap fitness classes
      • Self-Care tricks
      • Discussion about food: (bring it back to the fries!) ask what “clean eating” looks like
        • Eating for the environment vs. eating for your body vs. eating for your mind
    • (2) Sexual Assault/Education
      • What is sexual assault and consent?
        • Discussion about consent. What does it look like to engage in consent?
        • Planned parenthood video on consent
          • Consent can be sexy!
        • Resources at TNS
          • Ask students: What is your perception of sexual assault on college campuses and how the institution handles these cases?
        • Policies at TNS
          • What is anonymous reporting?
        • Resources outside of TNS

BREAK (9:05-9:15)

During break, put out sign up sheet for one-on-one meetings.

 

      • What is safe sex/sexual health?
        • Pair & Share: Pleasure or procreation discussion
          • Stigma around masturbation
        • Hand out contraceptives goodie bags and explain how to safely use them
          • Non-gendered condoms
          • Three goodie bags have face masks in them!
        • Other birth control options
        • Sexualitea – if they want a sex-positive space to get more information about sex
        • Resources at TNS
          • Plan B!
          • Non-Latex
        • Resources outside
          • Planned Parenthood
    • (3) Harm Reduction
      • What is harm reduction?
        • “Just Say Know”
        • Discussion: Is this a better education over abstinence training?
      • Ask students what they think the top three drugs are at TNS
        • Tobacco
        • Alcohol
        • Marijuana
      • Harm reduction techniques for alcohol
      • Harm reduction techniques for marijuana
      • Resources for more harm reduction training for opiods, etc.
      • Review TNS policies & consequences
        • Good Samaritan Protocol
          • At TNS and NYC/NYS
    • Discussion
      • Ask students:
        • Is there anything you’re surprised about?
        • Is there anything you’re still confused about?
        • Is there anything you disagree with?
        • Any other questions/concerns?
  • Conclude (9:35-9:40)
    • Finalize schedule for one-on-one
    • Give info about upcoming workshops
    • Decide on best means of communication
    • Provide my contact info and remind them I’m here for anything they need

 

Materials Needed:

 

  • Speaker
  • Fries (Wendy’s opens at 7am)
  • Sign-Up Sheet for Mock Trial
  • Contraceptives Goodie Bags
  • Three Face Masks
  • Sign-Up Sheet for One-on-One meetings

Funny or Not: Portfolio Exercise 3

         Christopher Hitchens writes a condescending article titled Why Women Aren’t Funny, full of contradictions, gross over-generalizations, and a general lack of understanding of the opposite sex. To begin with, Hitchens attempts to make the point that men’s survival relies on their ability to be funny, whereas women simply get by with their looks: “They already appeal to men, if you catch my drift” (Hitchens 2007). So in the beginning of his article he claims that humor boils done to sex. By the end, however, he concludes that humor is merely a coping mechanism – belonging exclusively to men – for a inevitably sad life.
        Hitchens then makes a grand attempt at appealing to his audiences’ logic by citing a study at Stanford University School of Medicine. The study states that women take longer to understand a joke, are more satisfied by the joke when they finally get it, and are quick to identify a bad joke. All this data from the study seems to prove that women are actually more thoughtful and receptive to humor than their male counterparts, but Hitchens is quick to interpret it in a way that fits his argument. He asks a rhetorical question, “Is it any wonder that they are backward in generating it?” (Hitchens 2007), before the reader has any chance to make up their own mind.
       Hitchens attempts to appeal to women by complimenting them on something other than their looks. He puts down his own sex by stating that men are stupid, and therefore more receptacle to comedy. Women could not possibly swoop to the level of being funny because they are too damn smart. Then, just a few paragraphs later, he introduces the theory that humor is actually a sign of intelligence, and since women are taught to suppress their smarts, they have to pretend they do not want to be funny. This undermines his interpretation of the Stanford study, which he claims prove that psychologically, women do not enjoy humor as much as men. So which is it Christopher? Do women hate humor or are they just pretending so that no one thinks they could have any trace of intelligence?
        The rest of his article is full of cringey, untrue remarks that only further his arguments from the truth, it is almost not worth giving Hitchens the dignity of analyzing his far-fetched assertions. Instead, taking a look at the way he writes gives light to his use of rhetoric. He wrote this to instigate an argument that is not worth having. His attempt at ethos is shown when he talks in a comedic tone, condescending women by saying, “Where women, bless their tender hearts, would prefer that life be fair, and even sweet, rather than the sordid mess it actually is” (Hitchens 2007). As if cynicism belongs to men, and men alone.

Funny or Not: Portfolio Exercise 2

In her article, The Predator and the Jokester, Lauren Berlant makes parallels between those who make jokes, and sexual predators. She explains that both the jokester and the predator take control of a moment and give the victim something they did not ask for. Berlant, while explaining that the two are similar, acknowledges that they are not the same thing. She elucidates that the victim of a jokester is subject to a joke, which may be uncomfortable, but it is still not the same as a victim of sexual predator being subject to violence. Both, however, seek out power to give the victim something that they did not ask for.

When highlighting the differences between the predator and the jokester – specifically stand-up comedians, Berlant claims, “No one asks to be the predator’s audience: That is why we call their acts violence” (Berlant 2017). This is an extremely important thing to point out in her article, so that her purpose in writing the article is clear. One may interpret the article as equating sexual violence with being subject to a bad joke, when really, she is simply focusing on the parallels between both situations.

Funny or Not: Portfolio Exercise 1

Thomas Hobbes’ work in, Human Nature, in: The English Works of Thomas Hobbes support the superiority theory of laughter by explaining that men laugh at the expense of other men.

In Critique of Judgment, Immanuel Kant references both the relief and incongruity theory of laughter when he asserts that laughter can be the effect of a tense situation descending into nothing, resulting in relief, and a deception in expectation.

Schopenhauer verifies the incongruity theory in his work, The World as Will and Idea, by asserting that laughter is simply a result of a change in perception between an object, and the idea of that object.

Herbert Spencer rejects that idea that every man subscribes to one theory of laughter in his work, The Physiology of Laughter, and that rather life is made up of a variation of all three theories, often overlapping.

In his work, The World as Will and Idea, Arthur Schopenhauer addresses the incongruity theory of laughter – calling it out by its name. He explains that the paradox that occurs when expectations are shifted is what produces laughter from human beings, specifying that theses instances of paradox can be expressed in words or in actions. Schopenhauer then emphasizes that the more ridiculous the contrast of the paradox is, the more laughter will be produced. This, by definition, represents the incongruity theory of laughter, as Schopenhauer agrees that a shift in perception can be absolutely hysterical.

Thinking Free Speech – 12/14 ELP Post

One of the essay presentations that I found particularly interesting was Naomi’s essay on the relationship between protest and censorship. This leads to questions of how effective protests can be and in what context. It took me back to middle school, when I was living on Wall Street during the “Occupy Wall Street” protests. Now, I’ll admit to be much less socially aware back then, and I was confused about the origin of the protests. With that being said, I don’t believe my assertion that the protest became very messy is a testament to my youth or ignorance. I remember not being able to fall asleep because at 3am, right outside my window, there were incomprehensible chants from a massive group of people. There was also a moment while I was walking to school where a man grabbed my arm and screamed in my face, “I KNOW MY RIGHTS!” What rights? What on Earth was he talking about and why was he directing it to me, a little white girl? The protest became a mix of causes, homeless people hoping to find money or food, and just downright angry people screaming about their pain. While I know and understand the urge to scream and shout at the hands of injustice, Occupy Wall Street was incredibly disruptive, and did not have a single message. At no point did I ever hear a unified chant. It’s almost as if they had silenced themselves. Having been to and organized many protests, I am very supportive of using protest to get a message across. Occupy Wall Street, however, made me question the effective of protests, and think critically about the elements a protest needs to be successful. I find important that protest fosters discussion, and with the Yoo protests and Occupy Wall Street, I don’t know if that was the case.

Thinking Free Speech – 10/22 ELP Post

A common theme I’ve found within many of the readings, case studies, and topics we discuss in class is ignorance. I think that those who have swastikas in America are ignorant. I think that that man on CNN who said women should carry guns to protect themselves against catcalling is ignorant. I think that students who interrupt classes are ignorant. However, ignorance is all a matter of opinion, right? Just like political correctness. I think both terms imply that there is one correct way of thinking, and there truly isn’t. It’s very easy to think that our political ideologies are absolutely right. For example, I believe that some of my opinions advocate for basic human rights and justice amongst all people, and how isn’t that completely correct? I try to always maintain an open mind which is why I try to avoid words like ignorance or political correctness because the use of them implies that there is one way of thought we all need to subscribe to. This is why I believe free speech such a difficult thing to conceptualize and determine an opinion about. Nevertheless, I have found it extremely valuable to read and learn about it, and I believe if everyone put forth that amount of effort, the world would be a lot less… ignorant. 😉

Thinking Free Speech – 9/24 ELP Post

I recently got into an argument with someone who persisted that there is no oppression towards people of color in America. My instinct was to question this statement because he is white. I thought, how can you have that opinion when you have no idea what it’s like to be a black man in America? I wanted so badly to use this as a means to invalidate his opinions, but I knew that would not be effective. I did not know how to explain oppression of people of color to him without then suppressing his opinions, thus limiting his free speech. In “Letter From Birmingham Jail”, however, Martin Luther King expresses this perfectly. He says, “Perhaps it is easy for those who have never felt the stinging darts of segregation to say, “Wait.” But when you have seen vicious mobs lynch your mothers and fathers at will and drown your sisters and brothers at whim; when you have seen hate filled policemen curse, kick and even kill your black brothers and sisters…” (King 3). This chilling quote remains true even fifty years after it was written. It is so important for white people to read things such as this, pieces of writing from other perspectives, because that is what gives opinions validity: personal experience and the understanding of other people’s personal experiences.