Research Log #3

Belkin, Lisa. “Shifting Importance of Parenting.” New York Times 15 March 2011.

Summary:

In this article it discusses how different generations responded to the question, if you had to choose between your child and your spouse who would you choose? They found that if you were a part of Generation X “being a good parent” was slightly more important (42 percent) than “having a successful marriage” (35 percent) but if you were in the millennial generation the gap was much larger. 52 percent said that being a good parent was more important compared to the 30 percent who felt their highest priority was their marriage. This article claims that views on marriage and parenting are shifting. The next part of discussion is how to explain the shift in values between one generation and the next. Pew researchers suggest that because growing up in a single parent home is becoming more common the idea of not getting married is becoming more normal.

Response:

Key concepts revolved around the question of why there has been such a shift in the way Generation X and the millennium generation perceive marriage and children. This is interesting to me because these are current generations that are still participating in the way of the world. Their input affects the generation after them and those inputs could have lead down to my generation as well. They also concluded that the way Generation X and the millennium generation view marriage is different. They know there are patterns between why the view is different and that is what intrigued me the most throughout the article. The millennium generation was more likely to say the child doesn’t need a mother and a father to live a happy childhood. This could stem from the fact that more children grow up in single parent homes. This would prove that your parents play a huge role in how you perceive things when reaching adulthood. Samhita Mukopadhyay explains on her website, Feministing, another reason for the shift “I would add that the shift in attitude in the last 14 years from Gen X’ers to millennials is due in part to the decline in the economy in the past 10 years.” This could also be a factor and usually this is the exact reason why it is so hard to pin point how much of an affect previous generations have on future generations. There is just simply too many factors to consider.

Next Steps:

I got this source from the New York Times which I knew has really good current articles. I choose this specific article because it related to my research topic. It was short and got to the point but also had a lot of really good information in it. I would like to find an article similar to this one that goes more in depth. I know the author of this article has a column called Motherlode so I think I’m going to research her other articles a little more. From here I could find more detailed and specific information. I have the historical facts down, the general facts down, and the current issue is presented. I feel like from here I can get more into the specifics of my research topic.

Research Log 2

“Generations: History of America’s Future.” C-span. Booknotes, Washington. 31 Dec. 1991. Television.

Summary:

I watched a recording of a television broadcasting that was based off of the book Generations: History of America’s Future. The authors spoke about the purpose of their book and what it was all about. The main theme of the book was to show how the past shapes the future and how certain personality traits follow a generation from youth to old age. They discussed 18 different generations and how American’s society pulse to rhythms in families and at large. They describe a four part cycle that includes idealist (moralistic), reactive (pragmatic), civic (selfless), or adaptive (compromiser). They explain that the four part cycle can explain the history of America and predict the future patterns of American culture. They talk about how the ages of the millenniums are wild and not further educated and because of this the previous generation (boomers) felt a sense of guilt for the outcome of the new generation (millenniums). They followed generations from puritans to today’s children, which ended in the year 2003 in their research. At the end of the book the future is discussed. From their research they explained that the future after the millenniums will have just as dramatic changes as the previous generations. Most people think that people who are 25 are going to act the way 25 year-olds have always acted. They point out that this is not true and has never happened in the past.

Response:

Key concepts that related specifically to my research topic where things like how the boomers felt guilt for the outcome of the millenniums, how American’s society pulse to rhythms in families and at large, and how certain personality traits follow a generation from youth to old age. My reaction to these points was happy because of the fact that this is what I had previously thought. They mentioned how the past shapes the future and I personally strongly believe in this. They depicted how every generation has certain qualities and can be identified into certain categories.

Next Steps:

Hearing what they have to say and what was written in their book is information that I think more people need to know about. All of these points interested me and answered some questions that I had. Knowing that the boomers had an effect on the future generation proves that our present generation can impact the future generations. If we can realize this and take advantage of that fact we could change the future. This is exactly what I want to find out more about. The broadcast that I had watched was a summary of what the book was about if I read the whole book I think a lot of my questions could be answered. At the end of the broadcast some feedback was read that interest me as well. Seeing what people thought about this book and how current generations feel about this is something I would like to look into. I choose this source because it has a lot of interesting information that was helpful to me.

Research Log #1

Schrag, Peter. “The Old History and the New California.” Rethinking History 11.1 (2007).  

Summary:

In Peter Schrag’s scholarly article “The Old History and the New California,” he goes on to explain how California has improved, changed, and maybe even became a disappointment for some. He points out that during the post-Second World War period California had become a model for efficient public service, an inspiring government, and an opportunity for the good life. Schrag states that in the 1960’s when California outgrew New York in population an outburst of television specials and magazines were capitalizing on the fact that California was now the ideal embodiment for optimism and glowing futures. However, it is pointed out that the not so perfect side of California was always there. Racism, political corruption, labor violence, crowding, poverty, pollution, regulation, complexity, ethnic riots and competition from abroad are unfortunately all part of the ideal California. While generations and generations flew by, California has worked ever since to restore perfection. Tax limitations, spending limits, tough criminal sentencing laws, denial of services to illegal immigrants, funding for stem-cell research, minimum wage increases, and medical marijuana laws are proof that California is still trying. Whether we are digging ourselves a deeper hole is the question. Schrag focuses on the discussion on immigration. He states that “much of the spike of the past two decades in the number of illegal aliens in the United States, estimated at 11 million in 2006, has been driven by the increased efforts to toughen border enforcement” (Schrag 35). This is a main claim used by Schrag and he goes more into detail about how we can learn from previous eras to perfect the future. He also reminds us that we could be turning in circles while trying to make everything too ‘perfect’.

Response:

Some of the key phrases throughout the article are California; Population; Economy; New Society; Old Institutions. One of the claims I found most interesting was the first sentence of the article that stated, “In the past forty years, a radically New California has grown under, around and often over the old one” (Schrag 31). Making the distinction that California has changed is obvious but not many take the time to look at how generations are repeating the same common themes. It shocked me as I read further into the article about how he believes we are striving for this perfect and ideal state and while doing so we could be potentially ruining what we already have.

Next Steps:

I think Schrag’s overall look at how things have changed and progressed is extremely interesting. He does focus more on immigration and population than I would like to but I think a lot of his main points are directed towards my research question. I choose this source mainly because it takes a very general outlook on how things have changed specifically in California. Now that I have researched this source I would like to get more in depth about how the certain generations actually affect the next. We know that history has affected the present but I want to understand exactly how and possibly focus more on education.