Now this post is a lot lighter, more me, and extremely relevant to an Atenean. As you can see by the Lux in Domino Ateneo logo over there, this blog is supposed to be 'about' my college life as an Atenean and though the events I have written about down there are technically under the category of 'life as an Atenean' I think the reader deserves a little somethin'-somethin' about Ateneo.
Another thing this post is is overdue. Yes, you've got it right! This IS the Grade My Professors Post! I came up with that title only now, I am contemplating changing the name of the others. I also came up with the idea of the initial grading (the one done in the first week or after a couple of meetings) to be called the Pre-Test, and the final grading (after the semester ends) to be called the Post-Test in honor of The One and only Sir Rogelio Alegrid.
Following the pattern of the previous 2 GMP posts (the Pre-Test for the 2nd semester doesn't exist), it will be as follows:
Official Subject Title
Name of Professor
Background on the subject and professor.
Grade
Recommendation/Suggestions
So here it goes! I hope someday this will help someone make a decision. But if this is your first time reading it, you should know that I tend to defend professors or teachers even though some people call them terrible or terror, with the exception of the infamous Ms. Sarmiento of course. But even with her I probably had more pity that someone like, say, Basilio or Nishi haha. [NA: this is high school stuff, pelase don't confuse Ms. Sarmiento with Ma'am Sarmiento]
Anyway, we're straying...
Bi 5: Biotechnology for Everyone, Lecture
(Dr.?) Charisse Pasaje and Dr. Ronie Calugay
The first thing you need to know is that I chose Biotech over Environmental Science. ES is said to be one of the easiest, if not THE easiest, NatSci subjects ever. But I knew deep down that Biotech was for me, and not ES. Of course, I care a lot about the environment, but as it turns out, I found out more helpful things about the environment than I believe I would have if I had taken ES instead.
Biotech, at least our Biotech, began with the simple stuff, definition, history, significant scientists and their discoveries. And then you move on to cells and go deeper into DNA. The first 1/3 of our Biotech class was taught by Ma'am Pasaje. She was very new to teaching, and so it wasn't a very good learning experience for me. The learning experience was very important in my case because that was the reason I chose Biotech in the first place. I am what you would call a knowledge seeker haha! Learning new things excites me but only if these things can be observed in the real world (ahem Math).
The rest of the subject was handled extremely well by Dr. Ronie Calugay. He is very, very good at what he does. And the best thing about him is that he's fun, and he will make everything easy for you because he understands--I repeat, he UNDERSTANDS--that his subject, considering we were students of the School of Management, wasn't our main focus, but only a subject of appreciation. So he didn't go too in-depth with the science, but he gave us the important and relevant facts in a way that students could understand. He gives out articles he wrote for the Philippine Star (I think) about various biotechnological applications of bacteria. He writes humorously and concisely, two very good combinations especially when taking about such deep and complicated things as science.
The greatest thing about Biotech was the last part, applications, because it showed how everything we studied worked together. You will definitely learn about the Central Dogma of Molecular Biology, and it will give you a deeper understanding of how you are what you are. Also, it taught me a lot about proteins. From what I learned in high school (maybe I learned more but just wasn't paying attention to Bio class) proteins are some sort of building blocks for the body. I always imagined them to be the 'tough stuff' in muscles haha. But proteins apparently determine everything about you: the color of your hair, your eyes, etc. And what makes up proteins are, you guessed it, amino acids.
You'll find out all these things when you take Biotech. But the fun part is the application part where we learned about bacteria such as Agrobacterium tumefaciens, the bacteria that enters plants through its roots; Bacillus thuringiensis, the bacteria that is deadly to insects but not to humans, and is used for crops such as Bt corn, Bt eggplant, etc; Vibrio fischeri, the bacteria that GLOWS on a certain squid; and the most important Botryococcus braunii, which has the potential to produce OIL.
Biotech application comes in when you think of 'scaling up.' The precise definition of Biotechnology is 'the use of organisms or their products to enhance our lives' and so we are inclined to utilize these very ingenious bacteria to work in our favor.
For example, Bacillus thuringiensis is a pesticide, but it doesn't potentially harm us humans who consume crops. The problem is that Bt cannot enter the plant in any way, but Agrobacterium tumefaciens can! The agrobacterium enters the plant through the roots, its real purpose is to put tumors in it, but because of Biotechnology, scientists can locate the gene, the part of the DNA of Bacillus thuringiensis that allows it to kill insects, and TRANFER that gene to Agrobacterium tumefaciens and allow it mulitply and release it into the soil! The agrobacterium then enters the plant and gives it the ability to repel insects. Bt is not harmful to humans, so no worries!
I realize this was a rather long background on the subject for it has really become my favorite subject so far. I learned a hell of a lot. Now I have a deeper understanding of genetics, biotechnology, and its applications. And for that I give the grades thusly:
Grades: C+ for Ma'am Pasaje, A for Dr. Calugay
I totally recommend Dr. Calugay for anyone. You will not regret taking his class ever. The grades almost don't even matter because (1) his tests are really easy and are based mostly on understanding of the topics, and (2) you'll have so much fun you wouldn't care about grades or anything else. Ma'am Pasaje, on the other hand, I don't think she will continue teaching because she could have just been tasked by Sir Calugay to instruct us on the first 1/3 of the subject. She's nice, very, but unclear in her discussions and sometimes says the wrong thing. But she is approachable and her tests are relatively easy. Dr. Ronie's tests are REALLY easy, just make sure you understand the topic.
Bi 6: Biotechnology for Everyone, Lab
Sir Jeremy Torres
Although I wished we could have done more "cool" stuff like cutting up DNA under the microscope, screening for bacteria (what we did) was probably just as fun, and even more relevant especially for students like us whose main priority is not science anyway.
Like Sir Ronie, Sir Jeremy is very good at getting information across in a way students can understand. I guess that kind of thing improves after many years of teaching. This way, we were able to appreciate and understand what exactly we were doing in the lab. It wasn't just any other experiment, what we were doing was basically what numerous scientists do, only on a much lower level.
We gathered samples of bacteria--just from soil or tap water--and screened for bacteria. The process was the same for each experiment. The only difference was the medium we placed the bacteria on. An important concept in our Biotech lab was the idea of bacteria being able to degrade certain organic or inorganic (in our experiments, only organic) substances. So the pattern usually went like this: there was some harmful organism or substance (pests or pollutants), and you found an enzyme that is responsible for its 'being bad' and create a culture medium with that enzyme. The bacteria, when placed on the medium, will be observed a week later to check if blank spots had appeared. Those blank spots mean the bacteria successfully degraded the enzyme. Scientists can now do further experiments on the bacteria (isolating it more so that it will be one pure culture of bacteria) and eventually develop industrial products that could help the environment or the crops, or whichever was affected.
We also did yogurt. Yogurt is a vital part of the Bi 6 curriculum haha. It was one of the earlier experiments done about fermentation. You learn that in high school so it's not really that interesting. But I did find out that yogurt actually helps lactose intolerant people. Apparently lactase, the enzyme found in yogurt, helps in the digestion of lactose by breaking into simpler sugars.
Grade: A
Sir Jeremy gave me an A when I was expecting a C+. I believed I tanked the final exam, but I guess our experiments and my notebooks were good enough to get me an A. But the reason he gets an A is not because I got one too but because he is a really good teacher. He can answer your questions and tell you what went wrong with your experiment, and he also likes to joke around a little bit. Another good thing about lab is that you usually finish before the time ends (unlike Chem lab) so there's a lot of free time. On the other end as well: our class was scheduled to begin at 7:30 in the morning, but everyone (including Sir Jeremy) arrived at around 8 anyway. So we were really only in the lab for maybe 45 minutes.
Ma 21: Mathematical Analysis I
Ma'am Jumela Sarmiento
Ma 21 is all, and I mean ALL about Calculus. Which, of course, makes sense because Ma 18 a/b was Pre-Calculus. In retrospect, nothing about Ma 21 was or should have been hard. The lessons were understandable, relatively easy, and didn't require that much work. But those are the lessons. The only reason any ME student has a hard time with Math is the fact that the long tests given by the professors are insanely on another level.
This, I believe, is the reason why Math by ME's will eventually be forgotten by the time they reach 4th year, the exemption of course being the really smart Math geniuses out there. But for the layman, it's simply 'something we need to pass'. It will forever be that way for me, because as I mentioned earlier, my thirst for knowledge is solely for something that you can observe out in the real world, something I can use, I can talk about, something I can teach to others. Math just doesn't have that. I know they all say that Math is in everything we do, but if I don't see a reason to find the volume of an object without just using measuring tools that have already been invented to do that specific purpose, then I will never fully appreciate Math as a subject.
What I can appreciate it for, however, is as a learning tool. Our Math is designed to make a student think, and think hard. They will never just let you get the answer, you need to earn it. It's not a straight road, but one that starts at a single point, and branches out into many directions with only a few actually reaching the destination.
Grade: B+
They say T4 (my block, if you remember) had been blessed with Ma'am Sarmiento (Mama Jums). It was a great relief from our previous professor, Dr. Ian Garces. And yes, I agree she was. She didn't twist the questions or make us think as much as Dr. Garces did, but don't get me wrong, her tests were not easy either.
The best thing about Ma'am Sarmiento is that she gives a buttload of examples that really encompass everything that she might ask during the long tests. The worst thing about her is that she takes up a lot of time doing so. She asks for volunteers to answer ungraded homework, so she spends a lot of the time sitting down and letting the students explain. This is both good and bad, good because yeah the students learn, and bad because the answer might not always be correct but if she sees that the process is done correctly she would think that it was correct. She doesn't answer the homework, I think, that's why she wouldn't know. And it's also bad because it takes a lot of time, especially when no one is volunteering because no one got the answer. When no one gets the answer she mostly doesn't explain it anymore (whether intentionally or not, I dunno), but when the students ask she will answer it.
En 12: Communication in English II
Sir Roy Agustin
Ahhh, English. A beloved subject I will sorely miss. English 12 is all about research paper writing and argument building for about 4/5 of the semester (this actually depends on the prof, but this was how Sir Roy did it). The rest is reflection and seminar papers.
You will spend a hell of a lot of time with Sir Roy discussing things like writing bibliographies, knowing which sources are good and which are not, how to avoid plagiarism, how to quote, when to quote and when to paraphrase, etc. etc. But knowing Sir Roy, each of those discussions will take an entire class's worth of time because of his many wonderful 'lectures' about anything that pops into his head.
En 12 is important because research paper writing will be done until 4th year. So it's essential to know everything about it as early as now so that you won't forget. They give you a book, anyway, to use for consulting whenever you want to. This part is pretty self-explanatory, and I cannot do better to help you understand it so I'll be moving on.
The seminar paper comes immediately after the research paper because this is the paper that sort of reviews one of your classmate's research paper. I don't get the relevance of this, because while Sir Roy was discussing the seminar paper not much of us were listening. It was a hot and lazy day. None of us had any idea how to write it haha. Was it a review? Was it a counter-argument? In the end we just did our own thing.
The reflection paper actually took a long time. Sir Roy gave us plenty of fun exercises in class to try to understand ourselves better. They were incredibly fun and had us laughing in tears. Those were some of the best times we'd had in English.
Grade: A
We had Sir Roy for 2 semesters of English, which was a better deal than most got. He decided to stick with us because he had already established a rapport with us and didn't want to break it. As usual, our class took that as an "awwww you love us, sir!" moment.
In many ways, Sir Roy is not the perfect professor. His deadlines are never solid, that's actually a good thing but isn't when you're considering he is a professor, and when you're on the receiving end. He takes way too long talking about one thing that he ends up not being able to discuss the rest, again this is not really a bad thing because his talks are really interesting anyway.
Sir Roy IS an awesome professor. I've said it before: he's the very definition of a 'cool prof'.
Lit 14: Introduction to Poetry and Drama
Ma'am Irene Benitez
Lit 14, essentially, is not all that different from Lit 13. In fact, it may be easier than studying fiction. Aside from the elements, which are not that many and not all found in every poem, poetry does not require as much theoretical studying as fiction. The difficulty in studying and analyzing poetry is relative. One may be completely adept at finding images and coming up with shrew interpretations for a poet's work, while others may not see the purpose of poetry and therefore have no skill in deciphering the messages behind the text.
Wondering, then, why literature is one of the core subjects of my first year in Ateneo, I often did so already knowing the answer. Of course--as usual--what else did I expect? As it is with Math, the subject does not expect us to read and interpret poems on a daily basis. What we, the students, get out of this subject is
critical thinking; coming up with reasonable answers based on evidence (and often conjecture). Every lit prof (maybe) mentions at the beginning of the term or when discussing the final exam that yes, literature has many interpretations. But what they are grading is our ability to come up with answers based on, like I said, textual evidence found in poems, dramas, novels.
Finding the reason why a certain word was used to describe a certain something, something to that effect, is always at the risk of what they call 'over-reading.' Sometimes, you can find an answer that seems to be the perfect answer – a complex, brilliant, mastermind of a story –but then discover that your answer is a couple of levels before this brilliant one of yours. That was one of my major blocks with this class. Often, I shoot past the answer because, to me, it already seemed obvious. It was a given that this girl felt that way, or that the reason she said this was because of this. But what is obvious to me should still be written down, apparently. Or perhaps it is because we see so much of it on TV, in movies, in modern literature that we never really bother with it. Yes, we all know the story of the lovers who cannot be together, or the lovers who will SO end up together but are refusing to believe it, all because it's been done before. So when I saw that in the text, I thought it was rather irrelevant to have to discuss that in SO MUCH detail, finding proof in the characters' actions and speech.
Literature, despite my claim that I love to read, is not my thing. I think it could be, because I sometimes enjoy observing details and wondering why they were placed there. But deep down, I always get this sense of pretentiousness whenever I hear the word 'literature' because it's an art usually associated with the upper class. I enjoy the critical thinking part of the subject, but honestly, with all my subjects revolving around critical thinking, I'm not sure if I'd need it.
Grade: B+
A lot of my classmates dislike Ma'am Irene. It's probably because she's a little demanding, bossy, loud, and according to others, doesn't take your interpretations into consideration as much as she does her own. I actually thought that she was pretty good. She knew what she was doing; she knew how to teach a class. Her coursework was not at all difficult and, despite what many say, it's not "too much." It's hard to get a good grade from her because like I mentioned, she sticks to her own interpretations. BUT that is not the reason we don't get high grades. She looks for consistency in your work, which is okay because that is crucial when making interpretations. She's willing to help you and give you advice when you ask for it so there really should be no problem. The reason I didn't give her an A is probably the same reason she does not. There are inconsistencies. Sometimes I feel like I'm having a great lesson, one that is worth learning and relevant. Other times, I feel like I'm back in high school having a slightly hassling activity that has no meaning.
Fil 12: Sining ng... oh, please don't make me write it again. Just check the old one.
Ma'am Kristine Romero
Fil 12 is the equivalent of En 12. Or so I think. At least, the final project is a research paper. Our final project, however, was a compilation of essays (with topics that required extensive research) about anything Pinoy. My group came up with the idea of a Pinoy Primer (the actual title of our group's book, copying this would be plagiarism, sorry) and the two essays that I wrote about were of Philippine food and the culture of the OFWs. But that's not important.
I always feared the subject of Filipino. Having never been good at it, I always imagined myself desperately clinging to a C or a C+. The summer before school started, I was convinced Filipino was what would get me my first D. As you all know, or perhaps not, I am only allowed one D in my entire stay at the Ateneo. Unless the SMEG thing is still applicable but rumors have gone around that it is not, though I have not received official announcement from anyone. But to be fair, the SMEG in itself is not an official Ateneo term.
Anyway, Fil 12 (at least ours) began with a lesson in grammar and spelling. Oh, you know, the differences between "ng" and "nang," "subukan" and "subukin" etc. And then we moved on to MLA footnoting, which was fun and got a lot of us easy A's or B's on her quizzes/seatworks. After that we began reading essays from an actual book of essays called... hang on, I can't remember. Wow, this is not good. I've only been away from school for a month, how can I not remember? I keep thinking Buklod, but that was in high school... does it start with a T? I know the author is Alvin Yapan... hang on. It's one word, wait for it... it starts with a B? Burador, dammit. I had to check.
Anyway, the stories/essays on that book are actually really nice. To be honest, I always liked the stories in Filipino class (including high school ones) because they were relatable, short, and meaningful. They were also humorous. In fact, of all the stories we read last semester, my least favorite was the one written by a foreigner... hmmm, Dutch, if I'm not mistaken. The essays, along with the lessons on grammar, somehow teach you to be better at writing in Filipino. I really doubt this happened to me, but then again, I'm not my teacher. The only reason I have to think that I did improve in writing was the fact that I got a... drumroll please... B+! That is quite possibly the proudest moment of my Filipino career. A B+ at a college level Filipino subject. Of course, it could be due largely to the fact that seatworks and quizzes are easy enough, or that she curves grades, but still!
Grade: A
I gave Ma'am Romero an A not because she gave me a B+, but because she exhibits all the qualities of a good professor. First of all, she is fair. We've heard of terrible profs who give pop quizzes on a whim, or profs who give students a lot of work to do. She is fair, so there's only a quiz when she says there's a quiz. She gives unannounced ones, too, but they're usually after the discussion. Our Fil schedule was twice a week for an hour and a half, and even with that she only gave us one or two readings. All in all she's a good teacher: approachable, organized, meaningful lessons.
PE 108: Lawn Tennis
Ma'am Rodil
I chose tennis because I had recently begun a tennis phase, which started last summer during the French Open season. Actually, I had been a slight tennis fan since I was a kid, but I lacked enthusiasm from my friends. Meaning to say, I could be interested in tennis if someone was there to be interested in it with me. So what rekindled my interest was exactly that: my best friend Paolo getting interested in tennis.
I remember in 3rd grade when our PE teacher went around the class one by one taking note of each student's favorite sport. The only sport I had played (then) was golf and tennis. Both because of my dad. I chose tennis instead because that was what I believed I was better at. Paolo, for lack of any interest in sports (then), copied me and chose tennis as well. Amidst the popular choices of basketball, volleyball, and badminton, our teacher looked up in surprised and called us
sosyal, Filipino slang for being classy or wealthy--which, for the record, I am neither, but Paolo is haha. Up to now, I'm still not sure whether our PE teacher meant that in an insulting way or it was just a casual observation.
When I saw that lawn tennis had a lot of open slots during enlistment, I immediately grabbed at the 7AM one. I hoped it wouldn't be too hot, but at least it would never be as hot as the 9AM one. But what really excited me about this class was the fact that I had 3 of my high school classmates in the same class. This was great because we were already matched in pairs.
Lawn tennis begins with a fat load of ball control drills which in hindsight really ARE the foundations of tennis... somehow. After ball control, you and your partner do more drills involving hitting the ball towards each other (but from only about a few meters away) using combinations of forehand and backhand. After that, we moved on to the real court where we did pretty much the same thing. And finally, the lesson I had been waiting all my life for: the service.
I first started playing tennis when I was little kid, probably around 5-7 years old (I saw pictures, I was really small). Of course, my dad and eldest brother wouldn't do an actual serve against a child, so they just did a forehand, and so did I. The long gap between then and last year was bridged rather hastily with my getting into tennis by watching the pros on various sports channels and YouTube. So my primary goal of learning to serve the way professional tennis players do was doomed to fail. I hadn't really thought about doing the very basics of serving, merely getting the ball into the service box. I practiced doing it the powerful, hard-hitting, smashing way I saw on TV. Needless to say almost all (except one mwaha!) smashed right into the net.
After learning how to serve slowly but accurately (though it probably didn't show in my practical test results--having someone with a clipboard watch you serve is not fun), I felt completely ready to play an entire match of tennis. However, I have never picked up a racquet since my last PE class. Here's to hoping that I someday will.
Grade: A
The mere fact that I got better in tennis proves that Ms. Rodil is an excellent instructor. If only I could, I would train with her, or with anyone for that matter. Tennis is a sport I hoped to be good at, and Ms. Rodil helped a lot.
Well, those are all of my professors. Again, I would like to say that I do this in the hopes that someday, a bright-eyed, eager student would chance upon my blog via Google search, hoping to get insights and advice on their soon-to-be professors. I realize now that I may not have given as much tips as I should have, but then again, I am not your usual student. I have mentioned previously that I often take the side of the professor, and therefore I can only give you this piece of advice, which I find useful since so far most of my professors have treated me well:
Respect is the probably the most important value a student must have; heck
any person must have it. Being polite and respectful toward your teacher can never go wrong. Showing effort is also tied to this because respecting your professor involves actually
listening intently to their discussions. Professors (at least most of them) discuss facing the students, and looking at their faces one by one. I noticed that the more engaged you are in the discussion, your professor will glance at you more often than the rest. This is just my theory but I believe it is because in you (the engaged student), the professor feels more confident, and more willing to continue the discussion
especially to you, which is why it is like you're being given a personal lecture.
This is important because getting a good 'class participation' grade is all about perception. If you appear interested and engrossed in the lesson, even though you have no idea what the crap the professor is saying, he or she will still notice that you are paying attention. This often happens to me in Fil class. It is also a part of my theory that because the professor notices that you are paying attention and all that, mistakes in your work could be attributed to a lack of understanding. The next best step to do (for the student) would then be to ask, after receiving the paper, how to answer the problem. Which leads me to my next tip:
Ask questions. I confess I rarely ask questions. I am an extremely shy student and can only ask questions when (1) I am in the mood, or (2) when I have absolutely no other choice but to ask. I believe that asking questions fuels the same impression that the aforementioned respect gives to the professor: that you are hard-working. Hard-work is an essential trait for those who wish to succeed in life. The professors know that. And the idea of 'effort points' come to mind. It is also in my belief that professors do not grade the same way high school teachers do, following a strict criteria. The myth of the terror professor is that he or she can give you an F just because of a strong feeling of dislike towards a student. Therefore, perception is the key to overcoming this danger. If the professor likes you, or at least thinks you aren't a slob who doesn't give a damn about school or life or grades, then you are guaranteed a non-failing grade.
Of course, that goes without saying, you have to EARN your grade. You could be the kindest person in class but if you're failing, you're failing. If you're extra nice maybe, just maybe, your professor can work something out. But I have NEVER experienced anything like that before so I'm convinced that your chances are slim.
If you had read my post a few months back about people saying I had to study hard in college, and cramming wasn't gonna cut it, with a 'challenge accepted' meme, you will want proof of consistencies in my claim that I don't study because frankly, that is not good advice for any bright-eyes, eager student. As mentioned in that post, my ability to NOT study comes from my educational background and my lack of discipline.
My tip, therefore, on how to survive college without being a super genius and without having to study as hard is this: philosophy. Learn to love wisdom. Learn to love to learn. Studying, the reason I hate it is because it's cold and empty. It means studying to get good grades and graduate. I urge you to develop an enjoyment for learning new things, filling up your brain with random facts. Treat your lessons as you would treat story books, television shows, movies, or anime! Engross yourself in what you are learning, and don't focus on what could appear on the test. Live your lessons, incorporate it into your life.
I also realize that this could be difficult for a subject you really have no interest in. Like me and literature, but then again you don't really "study" for Lit... Oh, okay, me and Chemistry back in first sem. I thought I would like chemistry because I thought we'd be studying about the chemical composition of things and how we can make something cool out of something else. But I lost interest when we studied the angles between atoms, their positions, the forces between them. Like I said before, I am interested in the tangible lessons, the ones I can see in the real world. I couldn't connect with the atoms, so I wasn't all that interested in them. Unlike Biotechnology where my reason for taking the subject was to learn something new, and learn I did! Although Biotech did deal with microorganism that I cannot see either, the applications of these microorganisms had a
tangible effect on the environment. And with the knowledge that I learned from Biotech, I have an understanding of how scientists work to cure diseases, etc. In Chemistry, I learned that... compounds have shape.
There are also times when you
want to like a subject, or you really do, but it just doesn't sit well with you. Like Math for me. After reading Dr. Queena Lee-Chua's book,
Eureka, Math was a wonderful world of numbers and cleverness. The problem with it, however, was that I'm not good at Math, despite what my dad thinks. My brain doesn't work the way a mathematician's brain does. My thoughts are perpetually disorganized – as is my work, you can check my long test papers if you want. This is a huge disappointment for me, because of the realization that the brilliant things Math can do, I cannot access. It's a membership-only kind of club. This feeling is strong enough to extinguish my so-called love for learning. It's true. My love for learning Math has been extinguished. Prior to experiencing hardships in Math, I would have loved to read about those theories: chaos theory... game theory... but all is lost knowing I wouldn't understand a thing.
This tip, to love learning and engross yourself in the lesson, is probably more suitable for someone like me with a tangled mess of a mind, and a thirst for holistic knowledge. By the way, this is all just a theory. I have yet to encounter classes beyond the simple Math, English, Science classes I have had in my first year. We will find out together if this same theory works on Psych, Philo, Theo, and most especially, Accounting and my other Management Engineering subjects.
Here's to the future of learning, and graduating. Because, though I love to learn, my love to earn is far greater. But that story is for another day, another post. Good night!
