Infographic: Spending for Higher Education vs. Prisons

This week I found an infographic that juxtaposed the state of California's budget for supporting prisons versus supporting students seeking a higher education. It demonstrates the injudiciousness of spending nearly seven times as much money per inmate as per student. This infographic comes from Fast Co Design company, a news industry based largely in images rather than words. Most articles are grounded in an infographic or artistic experiment, accompanied by a short article, in this case written by senior editor Suzanne Labarre. This infographic was originally found at publicadministration.net, an online resource for people looking to study public administration and the implementation of government policy. The statistics are well-supported by a list of sources below, although one statistic is said to be taken (and adjusted for infiltration) from 1979, so it may not be as credible as the others. The current economic recession is making finding jobs increasingly harder, and many students are graduating college with large debts and few opportunities. It seems counter intuitive that America is still focusing on the incarceration of nearly 1 in 100 Americans, largely for nonviolent crimes. The purpose of most infographics is to simply convey a large amount of data in a much shorter time than large bodies of text, and for that data to be presented in an interesting and relevant way to capture the audience's attention. This infographic, however, does not simply relay the data, but also gives a brief analysis at the bottom by saying, "We must re-prioritize our values as a society. Fund colleges, not prisons." The purpose is therefore to get the audience, mainly American tax-payers or students, educated on the issue and motivated enough by the injustice to actively seek change.
Infographics are known for their thoughtful design, which usually include charts, keys and symbols, color coordination, and a logical difference in the sizing of various pieces of data. Here, we see that the infographic has 2 main sections, one that ranks California amongst the other states for its prison funding and higher educational funding. The lower section demonstrates the negative outcomes that result from imprisoning such a large percentage of the population, almost like a cause and effect structure. This infographic uses color coordination by putting prison-related data in a yellow color, and graduate-related information in a more pleasing blue, and left other images dark to indicate the bleakness of the facts presented. Perhaps most obviously, places titles in very large font, numbers and statistics in the next largest font, and explanations in small fonts, so that audiences are drawn in by the most interesting parts immediately.
I have always thought that state governments spend too much money on keeping criminals locked up, especially for non-violent crimes, and that this money could be used for more constructive purposes, such as programs for ex-convicts to start their new lives. In the overcrowded prisons of California, this is especially true.  However, the thought of releasing too many of these convicts is also a scary thought, and this infographic does little to solve that problem. It merely points out a flaw in the spending of our government, and urges the audience to change the situation, without specifying how.

The Kony 2012 Scam And Why You Should STOP Supporting ‘Invisible Children’

This Text of the Week is called "The KONY 2012 Scam and Why You Should STOP Supporting 'Invisible Children,'" and that's exactly what it was about. The article, which has no known author and therefore cannot be trusted entirely, points out the many flaws in logic that surround the KONY 2012 viral video that was so popular earlier this year, including the sketchiness of the military that Invisible Children (the organization behind the video) supports and how much (or little) of the money donated actually supports the cause. KONY 2012 is a 30 minute video that started a fad of people emailing links and posting pictures of Joesph Kony all over the Internet and streets of America, and this article sought to shed some light on many of its gross exaggerations, and to point out the ignorance of assuming that simply finding and killing Kony will solve the problem of the LRA and children soldiers. It's pretty clear that this article is directed at the same people the original video was created for—mainly young people familiar with Internet trends. This is made clear by the two "memes" at the top and bottom of the article, which point out how gullible YouTube viewers can be via sarcasm and the iconic font on the top and bottom of the images. KeepItTrill.com makes a solid argument by using statistics and logical reasoning such as, "By IC’s own admission, only 31% of all the funds they receive go toward actually helping anyone" (1). It also pulls on the heart strings of the Americans who had responded to the tales of rape and abuse in the LRA seen in the KONY 2012 video by stating that the Ugandan military, which INvisible Children Inc. supports, has been accused of rape and looting themselves. Organizationally, the article has two main parts: a "quick rundown" and an in-depth look. This allows readers to learn some fundamental facts that the video ignored, and hopefully get them interested into looking further into the article. If they are not interested beyond this point, hopefully the article has given them enough information to think twice before donating to Invisible Children Inc., thus accomplishing the purpose of the article. 
Before reading this article, I already knew about KONY 2012 and some of the criticisms about the organizations and how shady it really was. If I did not already know some of these things, this article would have informed me and made me think twice about which charities I give money to. It really opens the audience's eyes about the complexities of foreign affairs, and how most of the time, there's no true superman for every villain out there. 

Is Algebra Necessary?

Is Algebra Necessary? is a New York Times article published this summer, which makes the argument that advanced math courses should be optional in high school curriculum. Andrew Hacker argues that forcing kids to undergo calculus and trigonometry when they are clearly meant for language-based careers hinders the country's ability to discover young talent, encourages kids to drop out, and may not even help develop the skills needed for the current technology and science-based job market. Hacker has taught at Cornell, and currently is a professor of political science at Queens College. He has co-written a book (Higher Education? How Colleges Are Wasting Our Money and Failing Our Kids — and What We Can Do About It) and contributes to the New York Times frequently. In a country that has seen a drastic decline of the education of its young people, and an increasingly competitive worldwide market for high-level jobs, most politicians and educators are advocating the development and expansion of mathematics in high schools and colleges. But Hacker does a remarkable job at persuading the American public that not only is algebra useless to kids looking to pursue jobs in psychology and the like, but it can actually hurt these kids if failing math becomes the reason they drop out.  Hacker appeals to his readers mainly through the use of logos, such as when he writes, "To our nation’s shame, one in four ninth graders fail to finish high school. In South Carolina, 34 percent fell away in 2008-9, according to national data released last year; for Nevada, it was 45 percent. Most of the educators I’ve talked with cite algebra as the major academic reason" (SR1). He also uses "They Say/I Say" throughout the article.
When I first started reading this article, I was largely biased towards the necessity of advanced math in high schools and colleges, because I've grown up hearing about Americans needing to be more proficient in math and science to keep up with the kids in China, Canada, and other countries.  I have always been pretty strong in math, but I also have friends that are just clearly not meant for that path, and I've always felt sympathetic for their struggles with algebra. After reading the article, though, I think kids and their parents should be able to make informed decisions about whether or not math beyond a standard level (such as Geometry) is right for them. Since I was persuaded toward Hacker's strong opinion, I would say he has accomplished his purpose very effectively.