Paul+Jaramillo

toc

=**Cultures and Their Punishment Techniques** =

Is physical punishment a valid discipline technique? In Gish Jen's //Who's Irish?//, The Chinese grandmother believes in corporal punishment; however the mother, Natalie, does not. The two year old granddaughter, Sophie, is a "wild" child and the grandmother thinks by spanking her, Sophie will learn to behave appropriately. Natalie, the mother of Sophie and the grandmother's daughter, is more American than the grandmother and thinks physical punishment is not necessary. This begs the question of why Chinese culture (promotes/accepts) corporal punishment as a great way to punish Chinese children for improved behavior, and why American culture opposes it. The Chinese culture has been around for millennia and have strict ways of life. Parenting these Chinese children involves strict disciplinary techniques and this may be the reason why Chinese education levels are more advanced than compared to most of the world. Just like the grandmother in //Who's Irish?//, Chinese parents use corporal punishment to discipline their children. There tends to be a strong relationship of children with high academic achievements that do receive corporal punishment, while the low academic achievers receive little or no corporal punishment. The study done by Ruth K. Chao, with the University of California, states, "While [non-corporal punishment] styles of parenting have been found to be associated with poor school achievement in European-American students, many Asian students, including the Chinese, have been performing quite well in school, even above European-American students" (Chao 1). This suggests that if parents want their children to excel in school, corporal punishment is a tactical discipline technique, mainly for the Chinese, but perhaps for even other countries as well. According to the study, corporal punishment is useful mainly to get children to do well in school. This may be true, but corporal punishment may only lead to great academics, what about overall behavior?

Although Americans may not have spectacular academics, Americans have been known for bravery; therefore, self-expression and the use of physical discipline has different effects than it would on Chinese children. This reflects Sophie's actions as well. Just like the Chinese, Americans have their own disciplinary techniques, but since the United States is so widely diverse in culture, discipline techniques vary as well. Eighty-eight studies done by Elizabeth Thompson Gershoff, PhD at Columbia University, suggests that corporal punishment tends to lead children to problems later in life, such as mental health and aggression (1). After Gershoff''s studies, all eleven child behaviors and experiences, found that after an American child has undergone excessive corporal punishment, ten of the behaviors had negative effects such as child aggression and anti-social issues. Gershoff has supportive evidence that children who are exposed to corporal punishment, have negative effects; but one has to remember the children being tested in this research, live in America. In end, corporal punishment works well for Chinese children, but corporal punishment does not work with on American children. This maybe because of how the cultures are different in respects that Chinese children or more conservative to their parents, and like in Sophie's case, American children are brave and more expressive, therefore, have a hard time taking orders from their parents.

Both these compelling researchers have evidence to show the outcomes of corporal punishment and the results it has on children from different countries. Is it a necessary form of action to implement appropriate behavior on children? The grandmother in //Who's Irish?//, thinks it is necessary and should be used appropriately, on the other hand, the mother thinks corporal punishment is not necessary. After a hectic day with Sophie, the grandmother hit Sophie multiple times; Sophie did not like it and hid inside of a hole to stay away from the grandmother. The parents also did not like the punishment the grandmother used because Sophie had bruises all over her body, plus a swollen eye. According to the debate, the grandmother was out-weighed three to one that corporal punishment should not be used. One can understand why Natalie does not like corporal punishment because, one, she is more American than her grandmother, and two, her grandmother probably used it on her when she was a little girl, just like Sophie. Readers must also understand that the grandmother is Chinese and for her culture, such punishment is normal to maintain appropriate behavior. For Americans, including Sophie, this can lead to long-term problems later in their lives, such as aggression and mental health

Why does the Chinese culture promote corporal punishment, and the American culture does not? Well, for the Chinese, corporal punishment is more accepting and it tends to lead to great academics, but for America, it's peoples are more brave and believe in themselves strongly, so dealing with discipline as intensely as the Chinese, does not come so easy. Essentially there is no real answer to if corporal punishment is right or wrong; but for some cultures it is, and for others, it is not.

**Works Cited** Chou, Ruth K. "Beyond Parental Control and Authoritarian Parenting Style." Society for Research in Child Development, Aug. 1994. Web. 9 Nov. 11. Gershoff, Elizabeth T. "Is Corporal Punishment and Effective Means of Descipline." American Psychological Association, 26 June 2002. Web. Jen, Gish. "Who's Irish?" "The New York Times Company" 1999

**Students, Grades, Reflection?**
 Students go to school to learn, however, do their grades show how smart or talented they are? There are so many different types of students and so many different types of subjects to learn. Some are actually interested in the class material and some are not. Some may prove that they know the subjects and some may not. Thus, students grades do not reflect how talented they are because of students interests and willingness to prove if they know the subject(s) or not.

 Students have to go to school to learn subjects to help them in society, but some of those subjects are simply just not in any interest to those students whatsoever. This could potentially be a reason why students do not have good grades. Cisneros states that "They might have other gifts that we can't see." They reason some students do not have the grades that society approves of, is because they are simply not interested in the subjects being taught in school. Society should not be allowed to say if a student is talented or not. They cannot show what gifts they have simply because they cannot express them with the material being taught at school. Some students may feel that is if those subjects are in non-importance to them and their future, therefore, they just do not want to put in the effort for something they do not care about.

 The correlation between students interests and willingness to prove that students know the material goes hand and hand. Say you were very interested in literature, would you go to a mathematics and science fair? You might go, but odds are that you are not very interested in those other two subjects so you also might show that mathematics and science have no true value and/or joy-ness to you. Well some students may feel the same way. They are nearly forced to go to school, but some just do not enjoy it because of depicted material being taught. Some students may be very interested in music and sports or maybe even art. Are these three focused at school? not really. However, some students may excel in these classes because that is what they have passion for and therefore they show it through their grades. These are those hidden talents that Cisneros is talking about. Cary states that "when she taught poetry in school, Cisneros says that the best poems were written not by the Gifted and Talented students, but the ones with the worst grades" (Clack). Not everyone is good at everything, so just because students are not good at school, meaning the subjects being taught or focused on, they should not be penalized by giving them negatory grades for something they are not interested in.

 Artists, Engineers, English Professors, they all have something in common, life careers. People choose a path that they are interested in and choose a life career because they can express to others that they enjoy that field of study or by simple emotion. Careers are just like topics in school. Students will not choose a career if they do not like because they most likely would not do well at it. Talent is not reflected by students grades because of student interests and expression of caring about school subjects.

**Public Place; National Parks**
<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">National Parks are great places for people to enjoy the outdoors. National Parks are owned mostly by the Government, but certain areas are non-government owned, which makes that small percentage of the rural areas private. All National Parks are generalized and can vary tremendously, especially in the United States. All being so wonderful, it is hard to single out a certain type or an individual park. The U.S. has a fantastic and beautiful mountain range, freezing and burning deserts, endless great plains, enormous forests, eerie swamps and deadly glaciers. Sadly, a rain forest is the only type of climate that America does not contain. How people enjoy themselves in these places arises the issue. Most people realize the standard ways of utilizing these wonderful parks, but some try and take advantage/abuse such freedom.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">These National Parks are used by all kinds of people for many different things. Researchers and scientists conduct experiments and gather information to further our global knowledge about Earth and its animals, as well as insects. There are also hikers and bikers that engage in such brutal terrains. Lastly, there are individuals and families that enjoy our lakes. They typically haul their trailer, a boat or maybe a couple of jet-skies for a weekend get-a-way with people they enjoy being around. These people understand the correct use of these parks in such a way of recreational and conventional manners. Then there are people that take this advantage of 'freedom' in a negative way. Unfortunately, poachers kill off animals to near extinction just to make a non-honest living. Also, drug producers utilize perfect growing areas such as forests to grow marijuana or other illegal drugs. Parks are for people to enjoy, but that enjoyment has limitations.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">National Parks are never really argued over about what the limitations Americans are privileged to. But the debate about why people do such activities in National Parks produces the issue. Pro snowboarders like to utilized the Alaskan Mountains to their advantage. They simply build jumps out of existing snow, and take thousand mile descents from tops of mountains to the bottom for their amusement. Although they are not doing anything hurtful to the environment, are they actually allowed to use these mountains? Some marijuana growers have been seen by helicopter growing massive amounts of marijuana to obtain a huge currency profit. They use natural waterways and natural sunlight to grow their illegal crops. Despite the illegal crops, are these agriculturists allowed to grow crops in these national parks? One activity being completely harmless for adventure, and one utilizing nature to an individual's advantage causes the issue.

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">People wanted to enjoy their land outside of cities and the United States Government noticed. National Park Laws, known as the "National Park Service Act was created and signed in Congress and also by the U.S. President" (National Park Service of U.S. Department of Interior). The National Park Service Act states that: <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">**"The National Park System must be consistent with its purposes for the common benefit of the people," and "The Service is required to promote and regulate the use of the national parks, monuments and reservations in a manner that conforms to their fundamental purpose, which is to conserve their scenery, natural and historic objects, and the wildlife, and to provide for their enjoyment in a way that leaves them unimpaired for the enjoyment of future generations" (National Park Service Act).** <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">This means those peoples engaged in activities within these National Parks must benefit the common person in ways that the scenery must not be damaged in such a way that it effects the park. According to this, snowboarders are allowed to use the great mountains of Alaska because they are not damaging the area in any way whatsoever. According to the same source, you must "purchase field and special purpose equipment required by employees; contract for the sale or lease of services, resources or water within an area of the System." In other words, if one wants to use National Park areas to their profit, they must get an agreement from the Secretary of Interior of the United States to do so. Well, with that stated, agriculturalists are not allowed to grow any crops, especially the illegal crop, marijuana, which then of course, would make it illegal. Some actions are allowed in this National Parks, but thankfully to the National Park Service Act, some are excluded.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%; text-align: left;">National Parks are for all U.S. citizens to enjoy, but with such freedom, there are limitations and regulations to follow. Depending on the occasion, some activities can be allowed and some can be or will be denied. National Parks are just one public place that can be debated over whether some enjoyments are allowed or not.

<span style="display: block; font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%; text-align: left;">**Works Cited** <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">National Park Service Act, August 25, 1916, http://wildlifelaw.unm.edu/fedbook/npsact.html

<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman',Times,serif; font-size: 110%;">National Park Service of U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service, December 15, 2003, http://www.nature.nps.gov/lawsregulations/