A
s an organic chemistry
lab
exam
is
fast
approaching, the topic
of studying comes up among a
group of me and my classmates.
How best should we prepare
for the exam? We know we
shouldn’t simply memorize the
material but the temptation to
just make up some flash cards
and cram information into
our brains for a short period
of time is too great. However,
what started as a seemingly
normal collegiate conversation
took a turn for the worse as the
topic entered a dark place. No,
not cheating, but purposefully
“helping” other classmates by
giving them the wrong answers
to questions. Yes, in discussing
how best to study, the idea
came into fruition to actually
lie to fellow students in order
to boost one’s own chances of
doing well.
As a student who aspires
to go into the medical field,
my mentality toward classes
such as orgo or biochemistry
— those that often foster such
a competitive mindset — is do
or die. Either I get a good grade
and my success is secured, or
I do not do well and I need to
resort to my list of backup plans.
The competitive nature of the
courses we take has fostered
this mindset in me as well as in
many friends following similar
intended career pathways.
Courses in which the top 25
percent of students can get an
A — even if their actual class
grade would be the equivalent
to a C — and the lowest 25
percent
are
unfortunate
enough to receive a D, pit
students against one another.
These courses promote a kind
of competition detrimental to
not only a student’s success
and
academic
environment,
but also the larger professional
working world. Students who
learn in an environment in
which an individual’s success is
held to a higher standard than
accruing greater knowledge
and sharing ideas that could
benefit everyone undoubtedly
carry those sentiments to their
professional careers and future
work environments. I don’t
know about others, but I was
hoping constant competition
among my peers would end
with
my
academic
career.
Perhaps this is just the result
of naive daydreaming about
becoming a doctor.
The reality is the pressures
that exist in the academic
community
for
pre-med
hopefuls are echoed in the
careers themselves. Physicians
are among the highest-rated
professions for suicide. What’s
more, female physicians are
two and a half to four times
more likely to commit suicide
than the general population.
And more broadly, those in
the medical field are also
more likely to develop drug
addictions
and
become
depressed. While not all of
these issues of mental health
can be attributed solely to
choosing to become a doctor,
there is a clear link with
immense amounts of stress
and maintaining a professional
career in the health industry.
Rather than suggest my peers
find a new career pathway if
they can’t handle the pressures
of the medical field, feeding
into
the
competition
that
already infests their intended
field, I propose a culture shift.
Why continue an ineffective
system that results in increased
suicide and drug addiction
rates among our life-saving
professionals? Why continue
an ineffective system that pits
students against one another
and fosters a hostile learning
environment? Let’s not! While
the kinds of classes we have
to take may never change, we
as students have the right to
choose the way we see our
education. Rather than seeing
our time here at the University
of Michigan as a way to crush
our competitors in order to
become the best and brightest,
we should view this as an
opportunity to learn as much as
we can from the people around
us and do the same for others.
Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4A — Monday, November 21, 2016
Competition among pre-meds is unhealthy
LAURA SCHINAGLE
Managing Editor
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.
SHOHAM GEVA
Editor in Chief
CLAIRE BRYAN
and REGAN DETWILER
Editorial Page Editors
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily’s Editorial Board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
Carolyn Ayaub
Claire Bryan
Regan Detwiler
Brett Graham
Caitlin Heenan
Jeremy Kaplan
Ben Keller
Minsoo Kim
Madeline Nowicki
Anna Polumbo-Levy
Jason Rowland
Ali Safawi
Kevin Sweitzer
Rebecca Tarnopol
Ashley Tjhung
Stephanie Trierweiler
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
CAITLIN HEENAN | OP-ED
Caitlin Heenan is a senior opinion
editor at the Daily.
L
ike millions of people
these past two weeks,
I have been trying to
understand the outcome of
the
presidential
election.
I
have
gathered
so
far
that
Donald
Trump’s rise is far
from
monocausal.
Rather, the election
results
originated
from
several
sources
including,
but
certainly
not
limited
to,
white
supremacy, sexism,
education disparity, the rural-
urban divide and a lack of
engagement with the working
class on the part of Democrats.
Conversations deducing how
Trump rose to the top of U.S.
politics have become rather
complex.
National
dialogue
and protests have constituted
some of the reaction to the
election. Dialogue and protests
are a necessary next step to
figuring out where the body
politic goes from here. Much
of the dialogue has focused on
how Trump was elected and
how liberals can move forward,
and some of it has been taking
place on the University of
Michigan’s campus, along with
several protests. Though I am
a proponent of dialogue and
protests, these reactions must
focus on fixing the system
that got us here instead of
promoting denial of the current
state of our national politics.
So far, the protests against
Trump have expressed rage
against his presidential win —
they demonstrate the views of
a subset of the United States
that will never agree with his
values. The protests display a
United States that believes in
denouncing
the
intolerance
and demonization that Donald
Trump used to rise to power.
Though I think protests are
beneficial strategies for any
movement, it’s worth noting
that protests will only go so
far. For the most part, it seems
as though protests only unite
those who share similar beliefs.
That is why the dialogue that
is occurring is a necessary
addition
to
the
anti-Trump
protests. Primarily, this dialogue
needs to include engagement
within the Democratic Party,
to restructure and re-engage
the people who decided they
disagree with its values. That
sort of discussion identifies
how the left can ensure that
people like Trump never rise to
power again.
I believe there is a group of
people that thinks the goals
of anti-Trump protests are
whining cry-babies trying to
change the outcome of the
election, aimed at showing
enough
opposition
to Trump to make
the Electoral College
vote against him. I
don’t even come close
to agreeing with that
framing. It may be
easy to find a subset
of
protesters
who
are trying to change
the election results,
but I have yet to see
a
majority
stance
from an anti-Trump movement
or politician attempting to
portray the goals of protests as
changing the outcome of the
election. I believe the general
and explicit purpose of these
protests is to unite against
the
hateful
values
Trump
propagates. However, even if
the main goal of anti-Trump
protests and dialogue isn’t
to push against the election
results, that intention persists
in many ways in the reaction to
Trump’s win.
Even if the major goal of
anti-Trump protests is not
to change the election, it has
existed in some rhetoric on the
left. For example, one petition
was widely spread throughout
liberal social circles, calling
for the Electoral College to
change its votes and elect
Hillary Clinton. This argument
is based on the idea that since
Hillary won the popular vote,
the Electoral College should
unilaterally
elect
her
and
deny Donald Trump his seat
in the Oval Office. Even if
electors could change their
votes, which they probably
won’t, the argument misses
a very important point: Even
if
the
popular
vote
went
to Clinton, it only did by a
relatively small margin. We
shouldn’t be celebrating that;
we should be afraid of it. We
should be questioning why so
many people didn’t denounce
Trump’s
sexism,
racism,
homophobia and xenophobia by
voting against him. This is the
primary problem with denialism.
Denialism fails to figure
out how we got here. It fails to
question how we deconstruct
white supremacy. It fails to
question how liberals engage
with the working class. It
fails to question the role that
Hillary Clinton’s gender played
in her loss. It fails to figure out
why 41.8 percent of eligible
voters decided not to vote.
These people decided they
didn’t share Donald Trump’s
values, yet also decided they
didn’t care enough about these
values to stop him.
A major slogan employed by
protesters has been “not my
president.” The point of such
a slogan seems obvious: Many
people in this country using
it don’t agree with the beliefs
of their new president-elect.
The major problem with such
rhetoric is that it erases a very
obvious and important fact —
Trump is your president. The
left needs to remind itself of that
every day for the next four years.
We need to remind ourselves of
it every time we lose sight of the
liberal ideals of tolerance, equity
and safety for all. We need to
remind ourselves of that fact, as
liberals try to restructure the
Democratic Party to fight against
racism, sexism, neoliberalism
and liberal elitism.
Once again, I am not critiquing
anti-Trump protests or dialogue.
Instead, I am pushing for a more
deliberate,
thoughtful
agenda
that
focuses
on
re-engaging
voters. Protests and dialogue
need to focus on understanding
how the United States and
Trump got here. They also need
to engage with those who were
not sufficiently motivated to vote
against his presidency.
So stop chanting that he is
not
your
president.
Scream
about how you will never accept
Trump’s hatred. Scream love for
the communities currently living
in fear. Scream that you resent
it, but that he is your president.
Every time you say the words
“President Donald Trump,” be
reminded of this failure. Let it
be a call to action about how you
will help the communities that
are going to be battered under a
Trump presidency. Be reminded
of what you are going to do to
stop alt-right, white nationalist
politics from continuing to rise
in the United States.
Protests are good, but denial isn’t
MAX LUBELL | COLUMN
MAX
LUBELL
ANNIE TURPIN | CONTACT ANNIE AT ASTURPIN@UMICH.EDU
Max Lubell can be reached at
mlubell@umich.edu.
CAITLIN HEENAN
Relaxing to fuel your future
ASHLEY ZHANG | OP-ED
M
y
older
sister,
a
University of Michigan
alum of the class of
2011, always told me that Michigan
was a very “work hard,
play hard” school, but
it’s a phrase that cannot
be
fully
understood
until
you
stay
on
campus for a weekend
and see for yourself
the
stark
disparity
between a Saturday
and
Sunday
night.
The former is filled
with debauchery and
cheer, the darkened
streets swarming with people
fighting the bitter cold on their
way to the next party. One day
later, the streets are silent and
still, and it’s near impossible to
find an open seat in the library.
The overnight transformation
is jarring, but it’s a reputation
that Michigan students have
always been proud of. However,
the merits of the “work hard, play
hard” lifestyle are questionable.
I hadn’t even realized how
much I’d bought into it until I
was heading back to my sleepy,
suburban hometown of Troy,
Mich., for Fall Break after a
mere month and a half of college.
It was like slipping into summer.
After all, last time I’d been
home, it had been summer, free
of worries, midterms and stress.
Being back in that environment
made it far too easy to fall back
into the ways of lazy, hazy days:
wake up at noon, scroll through
Netflix, pick a movie because
“TV shows are too much of
a time commitment,” snack
intermittently,
stop
halfway
through out of boredom, pick
another one, rinse and repeat.
The next day, I became a
mall person, the same kind
Cristina Yang marveled at like
aliens in season seven of “Grey’s
Anatomy.” Yes, I just moseyed
and ate mall foods and bought
mall things without having to
worry about catching the last
office hours before I had no
more chances. And it was divine.
Until Fall Break came to
an end, and my to-do list was
longer than it had been before.
As I buckled down in the library
to catch up, I felt terribly guilty
about wasting away the days of
break while my friends stayed
on campus and both studied
and partied late into the night.
You
see,
home is where
productivity goes to die. On a
college campus full of students,
there
is
a
general
vibe
of
studiousness and academia. There
are countless libraries,
academic
buildings
and
study
spaces
guaranteed to have
students hard at work.
In that environment,
surrounded
by
so
many people studying,
it’s hard not to join the
bandwagon. In a study
by the City University
of
New
York,
commuter
students
were interviewed, and it was found
that many valued campus libraries
as quiet, distraction-free places
to study in comparison to the
distractions in transit or at home.
Though its source may be a
mix of peer pressure and fear of
societal judgment, productivity
on college campuses cannot be
called a bad thing. However,
I’ve seen that same mix of peer
pressure and fear of societal
judgment
encourage
toxic
behaviors in the same stroke.
Snapchats of coffee at all hours
of the day, complaints of staying
in the library until 2, 3, 4 a.m. that
hinge on bragging and offers of
stimulants like Adderall are all
common on a college campus,
where everyone is trying to
get ahead, sleep is “overrated”
and success, sleep and sobriety
are presumed to be mutually
exclusive. Somehow, lack of sleep
has become a badge of honor
these days, and it’s turning high
schoolers and college students
into exhausted zombies who
think a mere three or four hours
of sleep is the norm.
A common exchange heard on
campus goes as follows:
Person A: “I’m so tired. I stayed
up ’til 3 a.m. writing a paper.”
Person B: “I’m worse than you.
I didn’t sleep ’til 4 a.m. studying
for an exam.”
Person C: “You guys slept?
Lucky. I pulled an all-nighter to
finish this project.”
Somehow,
it’s
become
a
competition to see who can
survive with the least sleep, and
I’ve even been guilty myself of
bragging about supplementing
lack of sleep with unhealthy
amounts of caffeine. However, the
side effects of sleeplessness are
more serious than the bleariness
and exhaustion of the next day.
Scientists at Oxford, Cambridge,
Harvard, Manchester and Surrey
universities have found that lack
of sleep can increase the risk of
severe health problems, including
cancer, heart disease, type 2
diabetes and obesity.
Moreover, sleep deprivation
may aggravate depression or
even cause an anxiety disorder,
illnesses
for
which
college
students — swimming in stress
and away from home — are
already at risk. While night owls
may believe that they are getting
ahead by gulping coffee late
into the night, they are actually
slowly jeopardizing their health
and, by extension, their future.
Meanwhile, students who do get
in their full eight hours of sleep
are made to believe that they
are weak or falling behind their
peers. This sleep deprivation
competition benefits no one.
Perhaps sleepless weeks would
not be so harmful if students
took their days off to relax and
recharge,
but
unfortunately,
most college students’ idea of
“relaxation”
is
partying
and
drowning
their
stresses.
It’s
certainly not healthy for students
to suffer through sleepless weeks
with the promise of an alcohol-
fueled weekend pushing them to
study into the early hours of the
morning. By Sunday night, all
the forgotten homework creeps
up again, and students cram into
libraries until dawn to make up
for the wild weekend. And the
toxic cycle of sleep deprivation
and intoxication repeats.
So how, then, does one find the
perfect balance between work
and play? Take breaks when
they’re needed and don’t feel
guilty about it. Whether you’re
returning home for Thanksgiving
break or staying on campus, eat
up, rest easy and forget about
the stresses of school for a while.
While schoolwork is important
and the air of academia on campus
is a wonderful environment to
study in, it’s also important to
take a break from time to time.
Whether that break is becoming
a “mall person,” sleeping in until
noon or just going home, just
remember that taking a breather
isn’t equivalent to weakness or
falling behind. Rather, it’s fuel for
the future.
Ashley Zhang can be reached at
azhang@umich.edu.
ASHLEY
ZHANG
Though I
think protests
are beneficial
strategies for any
movement, it is
worth noting that
protests will only
go so far.