Drug Addiction Among Young People Essay Example for Free

Drug Addiction Among Young People Essay Many young people today get addicted to drugs – they become dependant on various types of mind-altering or stimulating medicines or illegal ones. Addiction often comes hand-in-hand with narcotic effects, whether they are strong or light. It is only a question of time when you get addicted. You gradually become destroyed on all the levels of your health. And this is sad. It turns out to be sadder when you come to know that typical age range of drug addicts is from 15 to 30 years. People of this age represent the main working group in a country, they are both core and roots of a society. The addiction is also wide-spread geographically – you can find people having problems with drugs everywhere, not only in low-life countries, but in well-developed ones too. First of all, young people are especially vulnerable to different sorts of illegal things. Usually it all starts in schools. Children from problematic backgrounds often go into alcohol and then into drugs. First comes the psychological addiction and then physical – you want and you need. They destroy you and then destroy you harder as you get more tolerant to substances. The biggest group of addicts are students as they get off their families and there is no one over them to control. Plus, the spirit of freedom often blinds them and then they cannot get rid of their addiction. The life of addicts becomes spoiled in all spheres – social, as they need to communicate with other addicts, they lose their contacts with families and friends; economical – as they spend all their money on drugs (which are usually very expensive), addicts start to earn their money illegally (running rackets, prostitution, etc.) – all these problems are incidental if to compare them to health problems – drugs are primary dangerous to people health. Opiates like heroin are the most murderous drugs – they waste away your physical resources and supress your hearts work. Heroin is even more dangerous as the form of injections is the most appropriate for achieving  the narcotic effect. Here comes the AIDS. This disease is often called epidemy of our century as there is no treatment and effects are hard to resist and it is lethal.

Examining The Concept Of Crime And Its Dimensions Criminology Essay

Examining The Concept Of Crime And Its Dimensions Criminology Essay Tappan (1947:) defined crime asan intentional act or omission in violation of criminal law, committed without defense or justification, and penalized by the state and vehemently advocated the notion that the legal definition of crime is representative of what society consensually defines crime as. However, as both Greer and Hagan (2001) and Morrison (2009) emphasised, whilst what is deemed a crime will be based on the shared societal perceptions in many instances, ultimately acts are legislated as criminal by those in authority and therefore disagreement between what is legally deemed a crime and what is perceived as a crime by members of the society to which the law applies will inevitably exist. Furthermore, Henry and Lanier (1998) also highlighted that if the concept of crime is based purely on the legal definition then actions such as racism, sexism, and other denials of human rights as well as other deviant and anti-social behaviour may fail to be recognised, since these have of ten been excluded from what constitutes crime in the definition proposed by law. As such, Hagan (1977) posited that crime should be regarded as a subcategory of all harmful acts, regardless of whether they are proscribed by law, thus emphasising that the legal definition of crime alone is too narrow. Similarly, some theorists (Burgress 1950; Durkheim 1933; Roshier 1989) have attempted to expand the legal definition further still to include a universal sense of morality and argue that actions should be defined as crime when moral outrage ensues from a breach of social norms. This perspective thus considers the reactions of society, although as Blackburn (1993) emphasised, not all criminal acts violate moral codes, such as supposed victimless crimes including the gambling, drug abuse and prostitution. Hence this definition may still not encompass the crime phenomenon fully. Whilst a good starting point in terms of defining crime, evidently, the legal definition alone is too narrow since it lacks recognition for the social nature of crime, social harm and morality and is ultimately determined by those in power rather than a general consensus. As Lindgren (2005) emphasised, social constructionists, alternatively, argue that what is defined as crime in law is historically, temporally and culturally relative and as Sumner (2003) argued, we, as a society, have an impact on what is defined as crime, firstly by the social conditions that enable or encourage the behaviour that causes harm and secondly by our reactions to that behaviour and our collective disapproval and condemnation of such behaviours, which ultimately lead them to becoming defined as criminal, but which are subject to change over time as our societal attitudes change. The notion that the definition of crime is subject to change with changing societal attitudes, was supported by Feldman (1993) who suggested that whilst the core of criminal law is consistent across societies, the borders move. So whilst, as Lemert (1972) found in a cross cultural comparison, murder, rape and theft are universally condemned crimes whatever the prevailing legal system and time context, the definition of many other acts as criminal depends heavily of which societies are examined and when. For example, in 1533 English law identified homosexuality as punishable by hanging, and until the Sexual Offences Act 1967 was passed, homosexuality remained illegal within the UK. The prohibition of alcohol between 1920 and 1933 in America is another example of crime being context and time dependent. Notably in both cases, homosexuality and the consumption of alcohol are still illegal in various other cultures. This definition of crime therefore accounts for the social nature of crime, and explains how societal attitudes influence what becomes legally defined as crime, how definitions of crime are time and context dependent, and is able to recognise that not all actions are legally classified as criminal but nevertheless constitute behaviour worthy of the definition according to societal beliefs. In an initial attempt to integrate the aforementioned components of crime into one conceptual model, Hagan (1977) postulated that deviance and crime are akin and fall under rule breaking which constitutes anything from minor deviance from accepted standards of behaviour such as public drunkenness to highly offensive acts involving serious harm such as terrorism or murder. He emphasised that crime is a deviation from a social norm proscribed by criminal law, thus recognising the social constructionists idea of relativity of crime via norm violation, the legal tradition of law violation, as well as societal consensus and social harm. Hagan (1977) demonstrated his attempt to integrate the various definitions of crime within a framework named the Pyramid of Crime which is illustrated below, and reflected the definitions within three measures of seriousness each ranging from low/weak to high/strong, namely societal consensus regarding the crime, the severity of the legal response, includi ng fines, imprisonment, the death penalty and so on, and the level of harm inflicted, arguing that some crimes such as drug use, gambling and prostitution are victimless crimes, thus producing less social than individual harm. Source: Henry and Lanier (1998) In response to Hagans (1977) pyramid of crime, Henry and Lanier (1998) decided to redesign the visual presentation of the pyramid into a prism, to expand on some elements of the crime phenomenon, namely dimensions of social agreement, probable social response, individual and social harm and the extent of victimisation into a more integrated approach. The complex visual representation of the definition of crime highlights the complexity of defining crime. Their model is illustrated below, with the upper pyramid representing the highly visible crimes, typically those of the structurally powerless, which are committed in public including assault, murder, stranger rape, and arson, and the lower, inverted pyramid representing relatively invisible crimes, including a variety of crimes of the powerful, such as offences by government officials, corporations, organisations, crime that people commit through their occupations such as fraud and embezzlement, and even some offences such as domest ic violence, sexism and hate crimes. These crimes are typically perpetrated in private settings such as the workplace, homes and involve violations of trusted relationships. The manner in which the prism is formed has several implications for the way crime is examined. Firstly, the position of crimes in the prism varies over time. As vocal dominant groups and mass-mediated culture focus on different issues so the public awareness of what counts as crime is formed and reformed. In such a formation acts are recognised as more or less visible, more or less serious and more or less harmful, for example the position of domestic violence and sexual harassment have changed, both recently have begun to move from the lower to the upper half of the prism. Second, the upper half of the prism contains predominantly conventional crimes whereas the lower half contains white collar crimes. It is arguable that those committing most of the conventional/street crimes are relatively powerless in society whereas those committing most of the white collar crimes hold structural positions of power. Due to this, white collar crimes are located at the bottom of the prism as they are very harmful, but often obscured as they harm their victims indirectly and diffusely. Often the victims are not aware of who the offender or even if they have been victimised. By developing Hagans (1977) analysis, Henry and Lanier (1998) have produced an integrated approach to defining crime, which consider the major constitutive dimensions of what counts as crime. The prism is able to capture the contingent and changing nature of crime, locating its constitutive features into a framework that allows criminologists to see their combined and interactive effects, but is by no means definitive. The prism allows one to see how specific crimes are related to one another and to wider social forces that intersect with those crimes at certain moments in time, rendering some acts rather than others serious crimes.

Carol Ann Duffy and Sharon Olds | Marginalised Voices In Poetry

Carol Ann Duffy and Sharon Olds | Marginalised Voices In Poetry Marginalisation can be understood as being outside or on the edge of the rest of society. A person can be considered marginalised because of factors such as race, social class or gender, which make them separate from the rest of their social surrounding. At the time when Carol Ann Duffy and Sharon Olds wrote their first poetry, female poets where marginalised under patriarchy; a social system which believed males to be the superior race. Through their works both poets give a voice for marginalised members of society by using poetry to speak the truth about everyday issues such as love, sexuality and family, from a female perspective. Although marginalised because of their gender, both Carol Ann Duffy and Sharon Olds use of strong subjects have been able to make an impact for the female voice within their poetry. Sharon Olds is highly religious due to her upbringing as a Calvinist; her poetry echoes a lot of this belief in the sense that her works speak a truth and hold a strong theme of morality. Moreover Olds uses her own honesty and morality to often question issues which are ongoing in society, be it a question directed towards the politics of the time or a question about family and love. Because of her honestly Olds poems can often appear controversial or paint a slightly disturbing image. Sex Without Love[1] for instance is a poem which questions sex outside of marriage and love, it begins with a direct question how do they do it, the ones who make love without love?, she then goes onto answer the question herself. Rather than use complex imagery and symbolism to allow the reader to make their own interpretation, Olds uses irony to make her view on the subject clear and detailed. On the other hand, Carol Ann Duffys poems pose the exact opposite approach; through her poems she is also sp eaking a truth using irony, however, she often does this by using surreal imagery and complicating her words to create a usual cynical view towards the subject. Like Olds, Duffy also addresses the issue of love within her works. Duffys Valentine[2] renders a highly cynical view towards love, and the thought conventional gestures of showing affection. Unlike Olds who instantly outlines the poems meaning as a starting point, Duffy begins Valentine by using traditional images of a valentine before revealing her own suggestions on the subject. Duffy uses an extended metaphor in asserting that an onion is more like the true nature of love and therefore it can ultimately be destroyed or destructive on many different levels, just like an onion has many different layers which can be peeled. Both poets reveal a different idea about love, while Sharon Olds is implicating that love is sacred and true; Duffy seems to be suggesting that love isnt as beautiful as it would appear on the surface. Females were often marginalised within literature and therefore their work was not given the recognition it truly deserved, often resulting in females writing poetry but not being considered poets because of their gender. This is because of the once social, economic and cultural marginalisation under patriarchy which ruled a male dominated social and cultural system. Geoffrey Summerfield once stated I regret the omission of women poets from this book. This is simply due to the fact that Britain in the last fifteen years has not produced a woman poet of real stature [3], although spoken before their time as writers, poets such as Duffy and Olds have made an impact from their writing that would arguably change this opinion. Sharon olds Sex Without Love is an attack on people that have sex outside of marriage, her religious background shines through in her choice of word and metaphor in this poem. While she chooses to use words that would usually be seen as beautiful, the choice of word play holds a negative tone throughout making it obvious that she does not approve. The metaphor Beautiful as dancers, gliding over each other like ice skaters, over ice would on surface appear that she is accepting, however, the deeper meaning unveils that she is actually implying that like the ice, sex without love is cold and therefore it is simply a performance, just as ice skating is a performance. Unlike Sex Without Love which holds the message that only true love will make you happy or whole, it would appear that Duffys Valentine is in fact a message that is perhaps warning the reader from love. Duffy ends with the lines Lethal, its scent will cling to your fingers, cling to your knife., this cynical metaphor leaves us with the idea that the true nature of love will ultimately destroy us. Although the messages of these two poems contradict each other completely, the marginalised voice in poetry is still established and heard. Both poets represent marginalised voices in poetry as being underestimated and overlooked, by creating powerful poems that touch subjects that affect all people in society, they have been able to establish a place for the female poet ultimately making them no longer marginalised. The strong and somewhat controversial use of the theme of love in these two poems clearly establishes a voice for marginalised groups, therefore allowing them to be recognised. While both Duffy and Olds fall into the same marginalised category because of their gender they do not hold the same morals and values within their poems, this difference between the two reveals to the maybe ignorant eye, that people of the same marginalised category are in fact individuals within themselves. Therefore Duffy and Olds represent marginalised voices as having the same individualities as the people in the centre of society. In the same way that Olds expresses her religious views within her poetry, Duffys works can be perceived as feminist, however similarly they both raise issues such as social class and relationships in the course of their works. Duffys Warming Her Pearls[4] is a poem centrally about a relationship between a servant and her employer, a maid and her mistress. This poem deals with the issue of social class more than it does with gender, the lower social class can also be deemed as marginalised within society this poem recognises this problem and provides a negative attitude towards social, economic and political status and gives a voice to these outsiders. Warming Her Pearls begins Next to my own skin, her pearls. My mistress bids me to wear them, warm them, the pearls may be seen as a symbolic rope that bides the maid to her mistress moreover the fact that she literally gives the warmth of her body to the pearls immediately questions the relationship between the two classes, outlining the ridiculous extremes that the power of higher classes can actually reach. The relationship between the two characters can be viewed as bidden, because the maid is of lower class therefore she must provide a service for the pri vileged. On the other hand Sharon Olds True Love[5] is centrally a poem about the relationship between a man and a woman that appear to be married as the poem progresses. True Love opens In the middle of the night, when we get up after making love, we look at each other in complete friendship the initial reading of this line leaves the reader somewhat confused by the use of the word friendship, are these two people in love or is their relationship purely friendship? Furthermore that later image of them being Bound to each other like mountaineers. leaves us with the idea that the reason they are still together is because they are married. This assumption comes from Olds religious background, wherefore her belief would hold the idea that marriage is sacred and for life. Therefore perhaps this couple are no longer in love, however they are bound together because of the vows they once took. Both poems address the issues of relationships, however clearly they identify different issues wh ich have binned their characters together. As Duffys poem unravels it reveals a sinister attitude from the maid towards her mistress, she believes that her persistent scent on the pearls are preventing her mistress from ever finding love. This could also be an attack on the social hierarchy in the sense that the maid is not allowed to communicate with her mistress to tell her the problem, so instead she burns All night with the satisfaction of this possible secret revenge she is gaining against her mistress. On the other hand, Olds True Love does ultimately unveil itself as describing exactly what it is titled as. The poem ends I cannot see beyond it., leaving us with the idea that the characters are indeed in love and that it is everything that should be wanted from a relationship. Sharon Olds poem seems to begin somewhat ambiguously with its room for interpretation. None the less its ending reveals what is believed to be the truth about love, making it personal to perhaps her own experiences and definitely representing her own morals on what she believes to be right. These two very different poems represent marginalised voices in poetry as being opinionated, self aware and controversial, it is clear that these marginalised figures of society do indeed have a strong place in society and should therefore be heard. Sharon Olds and Carol Ann Duffy hold similarities and differences within their works, they both appear to me as being fearless and unconventional making them have a strong effect on society. Their highly controversial poems raising issues such as social class, relationships and love have undoubtedly made room for the female poet to be accepted and recognised, not only in poetry but in society as a whole. Along with representing a voice for females their works also question other existing marginalisation within our culture, attacking the politics and beliefs of the culture with live in allows scope for these outsiders to be recognised and ultimately heard. While Olds makes her poetry personal by directly inputting her religious beliefs and morality, Duffy makes her works personal by her complication of words and playful inventiveness to pass of messages that perhaps a conventional writer would not attempt. It is figures such as Olds and Duffy that are needed in our society to provide a truth on such controversial issues. Their open honesty on issues within our culture allows a truth to be heard from these marginalised voices, and it is clear that they have had a large impact within writing and on the society in which we live.

Educational Goals and Philosophy :: Teaching Teachers Education Careers Essays

Educational Goals and Philosophy Every student is unique. Each one has a different personality, cultural and socioeconomic background, and individual way of learning. Some children may learn by listening, and others by seeing. As a teacher, I must determine how to teach to reach every student. Knowledge is gained through experience. Students relate life experiences to things that they learn. Children must be given the opportunity to explore. They get more satisfaction by doing for themselves than having things done for them. This satisfaction is the driving force for many students. I hope to encourage eagerness in my students. The overall purpose for education is to provide students with information to broaden their knowledge. In today’s society education is essential. Without an education, a good job is unobtainable. I intend to provide my students with the best possible education that I can provide. I want each student to acquire the insight to achieve any goal they set for themselves. I want my students to be able to have the understanding and knowledge to do well in school. I intend for them to leave my classroom with an immense enthusiasm for learning. I hope to make learning fun for my students. Allowing my students to do cooperative and hands on learning could be some possible ways to achieve this. Above all want to build high self-esteem in each child. I feel that this is an important aspect of teaching. If a child feels highly about themselves, they are more likely to do well in school and in life. I feel that I must reach the whole child. Children are special, and deserve all that I can give to them. I tend to agree with John Dewey in his progressive education movement. I think that learning should be based on my students’ interests. Dewey also felt that students needed to be involved in activities that have significance to them. I am in favor of this because a child will learn what is important to them.

Billy Budd Essay -- essays research papers

This story depicts how a certain innocent person was condemned and was sentenced to death for a crime he did but with an innocent motive. The story goes on around a certain person's life in a ship where he was said to be one of the crew. Billy as a character depicted in the story is a person whose innocence can not be changed into hatred for other people. Though his surrounding is full of people with evil motives, he is still into trusting them with full innocence. Evilness beyond comprehension Such evilness is beyond the main character's understanding, and his being weak causes him to lose his sense of defending himself. With this state of the character's condition, some people around him tend to abuse his weakness, such as the character which is depicted as an evil person in the story who?s Claggart. Claggart as an evil influence in the story caused Billy to use a brutal way to express Billy?s madness because he is speechless, Billy was then susceptible in making an attack due to the evil atmosphere on the ship. By Billy?s innocence, he was dragged to the wilderness of violence. It is beyond his comprehension that it is indeed the evil?s intention to ruin the goodness in his heart. Indeed the evilness had him off guard that had caused him to be condemned. The writer depicted his main character?s innocence as something to be really loved and liked by other people but also a personality which is something to be pitied about. Billy depicting Jesus Christ In simple but complex ways, the main character was said to be somehow depicting Jesus Christ?s sacrifice for the betterment of everyone. He was, as Jesus was condemned to death though they are both innocent. It is showed in the story that the main character?s in... ...could cause a certain person weakness and vulnerability that could be the main cause for him/her to be deprived by others by his own life. Thesis This story only tends to show the readers how difficult it is to live in this world full of evil forces thus a person like Billy is innocent about such thing. It depicts how a human would only suffer of his innocence in this kind of world. And that innocence is vulnerable to evilness and deprivation to life as the character was deprived of his life due to his innocence and lack of comprehension about evilness. Also that the law which is supposed to give justice, it is the one that deprives people by not considering a certain accused persons statement or side. The kind of law in the story is the one that manipulates a person to view the case in a right manner according to the true essence of justice (Melville, 1924).

Oedipus Complex in Hamlet

Oedipus Complex in Hamlet In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, Hamlet’s personality can be explained by the Oedipus Complex. Throughout the play there are many times where he proves that he has Oedipus Complex. Oedipus Complex was not around at the time that that Hamlet was written. It just shows that Shakespeare saw the same personality complex’ as Freud. Freud first named the Oedipus Complex Theory in his book , An Interpretation of Dreams, in 1899. Freud states â€Å"The child takes both of its parents, and more particularly one of them, as the object of its erotic wishes. Freud explains that it is normal to have sexual desires for the parent of the opposite sex. These are normal in children and usually dissipate after the age of five. When these sexual desires do not go away and they continue into adulthood this is when someone would be considered to have an Oedipus Complex. When there is a sexual desire for the mother, as Hamlet did, a rivalry is formed between the fat her and the son. Hamlet’s father is in a form of a ghost, that only he can communicate with. He was murdered while Hamlet was away at school. When he returns he finds his mother, Gertrude, remarried to his father’s brother Claudius.This infuriates Hamlet, and brings out his repressed Oedipus Complex. This drives Hamlet crazy. He is consumed and outraged by this incestuous marriage. Now I use the word incestuous because in those days it was considered incest to marry your husband’s brother. What needs to be explained is exactly what Hamlet it is upset over. It is to be assumed that he is outraged because Claudius has replaced his own father’s place next to his mother. This is not the case. Hamlet is upset because Claudius has taken his place next to his mother. Hamlet’s deepest wish is to be king and his mother, Gertrude, queen.Thus proving the Oedipus Complex theory further. Children will have feeling of hate toward the parent of the same sex this theory states. Hamlet has many hateful tendencies towards both of his fathers, Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark, and Claudius. We know from reading the play that Hamlet’s father was not affectionate or spend any quality time with him. He spent a lot of time at war. Although he had anger towards him, he could never show it. He repressed it. For Claudius on the other hand, Hamlet’s feelings of hatred are expressed much more openly. Hamlet internally fights with his feelings towards Claudius.His father has come to him as a ghost, telling him that Claudius is responsible for his murder. Hamlet must avenge his father, but struggles to do so. Subconsciously, Hamlet identifies with Claudius. Hamlet envies Claudius for killing his father and taking his position next to Gertrude. This is everything Hamlet has subconsciously wanted to do. So in essence he cannot kill Claudius because, in part, he would be killing himself. Hamlet is consumed with thoughts of his mother having sexual relations with Claudius. A very significant part of the play is Act III Scene IV.This is where Hamlet and his mother meet in her closet. The closet is very meaningful because this signifies hiding. The bedroom is significant because this is where private situations occur. Maybe Shakespeare played out this important scene in the bedroom to show the sexual feelings Hamlet has for his mother. In this scene Hamlet confronts his mother about her relationship with Claudius. He does not come off as a son asking concerning questions towards his mother. He acts jealous while he asks her how she can stand to be touched by him. These are not normally son to mother questions.He is explicit in what he says and concentrates of her sexual acts between her and Claudius. You could explain it more as an obsession. At the end of this scene it is obvious that Hamlet is jealous of the attention Gertrude is giving Claudius. Hamlet, as a child, would have found pleasure in these feelings towards his moth er, but now it is a feeling of disgust. This further proves the Oedipus Complex Theory. Hamlet is so consumed with his mother’s relationship with Claudius. He in turns shows similar feelings towards Ophelia. He toys with her emotions as he feels Gertrude toys with his.Throughout the play Hamlet is struggling with his repressed feelings towards his mother, his hatred for his fathers, and avenging his father. The same reason he could never act out on his hatred for his father is the same reason he must avenge him. It is his moral code. He struggles with avenging his father though because he is so focused on the incestuous relationship between his mother and Claudius. He can’t truly avenge his father until Gertrude dies. At that time the Oedipus Complex is released and he is able to carry out his duties and kill Claudius.

My essay, “The Long Road to Opportunity”

My essay, â€Å"The Long Road to Opportunity,† is designed to convey details about my childhood in Mexico to the reader. By using real anecdotes from my past, I attempt to show the reader my hunger for knowledge and the obstacles I had to overcome to achieve my goals.  I believe the strongest points in the essay are my thesis, which sets the reader up for the general theme of the essay to follow, and my examples of my father’s deeply held beliefs.Citing examples of specific things he said or did illustrates why it was difficult for me to act against his wishes. I also believe my essay has a good, natural flow. It begins with a broad look at the main idea, and then works through the story in chronological order, culminating in the present. I feel that the information on Mexican culture also works well.  One weakness of the essay would be that it is difficult to tell a detailed story in such a short space. Ideas and stories must be condensed in order to cover all of t he main points I wish to address. With more space, I could develop each anecdote more completely, and do a better job of showing rather than telling.â€Å"The Long Road to Opportunity†When I was five years old I knew I would one day go to school and become an engineer. The road to where I am today has been long and difficult. I was born and raised in a small rural town where the most important activity in life was the harvest of the fields. Agriculture played an important and central role in everyone’s lives; everything else was seen as secondary and a waste of time. An interest in going to school was seen as an excuse to avoid responsibilities on the family farm. My father held these beliefs sacred, and as such proved to be a formidable opponent in my quest for education.I grew up the youngest of my eight siblings in a town called Dolores Hidalgo in Guanajuato, Mexico. My father farmed over 600 acres of land, divided into two parts; one part was used to raise cattle a nd the other part to grow corn and beans. My father believed that after God and family, the most important thing was the land. He believed a person’s character was manifested in his harvest. If one loved and respected nature, She would return that love and respect with an excellent harvest.Growing up on the farm, I enjoyed working in the fields and tending to the cattle. However, my first love was school. My father didn’t understand the passion I had for learning. When I was 4 years old, my father sent me to school with my sister Maria, who was six years old and scheduled to start first grade. My dad did not want my sister to walk to school by herself. When I got there, the teacher, Mr. Mendez, allowed me to sit in the classroom alongside my sister. After four weeks of classes, Mr. Mendez asked my father to visit the school. I was so scared Mr. Mendez was going to tell my dad that I could not go to school with Maria. When my father arrived at the school, Mr. Mendez adv ised him that I was the best student in his class and that he was going to speak to the principal about formally accepting me into school.My dad, who appeared to be in shock, was not happy with the news. He told the teacher the only reason I was sent to school was to escort my sister. He further stated that school would take away from my chores around the farm. I begged my dad to allow me to go. Furthermore, I promised to get up early and tend to the cattle before school and to continue with the farm work upon returning home in the afternoon. To my surprise, my father finally gave in. I was the happiest boy on earth – I would have access to more books. However, it never got easier. Every year for the first six years was a constant battle with my dad.My father believed the only persons that should attend school were the ones willing to serve God as a priest or nun. People living on farms should dedicate themselves to taking care of the land, he said. He claimed that previous g enerations of our people had all been farmers and had lived well without the need for proper education. Rural schools have been an important part of Guanajuato since the beginning of the rural school program. In these schools, teachers put an emphasis on the concept of nationalism to ensure that all students have a strong sense of what it means to be Mexican. In the classrooms, teachers become valuable resources for students, making them think more deeply about their identities and examine their culture.In class, Mr. Mendez would tell stories about the post-revolution decline in education throughout the country, caused by the conflicts and insecurity of the time. The influence on rural education was very important because it was the center of cultural life in the 1920s and 1930s. Rural education could be seen as a legitimate byproduct of the Mexican Revolution, allowing social justice programs to spread throughout all corners of the country. Rural schools began with the premise that through education, people would learn to