My opinion about interships. What are their pros and cons?

It is not a secret that students' internships during high school and early in college are becoming more and more popular nowadays. According to the National Association of Colleges and Employers, 50 percent of graduating college students in 2008 had held internships - an increase from 17 percent in 1992*. Moreover, 62.4 of hires coming from an employer's program are still with the company, compared to just 48.1 percent of hires who came with no internship experience whatsoever**. However, despite the fact that statistics shows us obvious advantages of internships, Anya Kamenetz and Jenifer Halperin both have good points that help readers to choose a  way (participate in internship or not) which will be the most appropriate for them. As for me, I think that internships are very useful and valuable experience for those who want to get in the future not only a well-paid job, but also skills of communication with people, and ability to work without getting money.

In my third blog I told about Krasnoyarsk Summer School (KSS). However, I didn't tell that in KSS I worked as a tutor during three weeks in July. My duties were very different. At this job I didn't get any money. But my work was very hard and included different kinds of duties. I had to read a course of lecture, work with my team of students, and do some organizational work. It is worth saying that when I decided to go to the KSS, I led to one goal - get useful and valuable experience in teaching and communication with people from different professions. It wasn't hard for me to realize that at the beginning of my career money wasn't important thing. Now I can say that I have reached my goals.

For this reason, I support arguments of Jenifer Halperin more than arguments of Anya Kamenetz. I agree with Jenifer that participation in unpaid internship shows employers that you are serious about the career and are willing to put in the hard work needed for the reward of a potential job. I also agree that internship is a great way to build resume and portfolio and to get useful experience. Some people can ask me, “What about get participation in internship with getting some money?" My answer is not. In this case people will work for money, but not for experience.

However, the idea of unpaid internships is good in case, according to Anya Kamenetz, "you are rich enough to work without pay to get your foot in the door".  Really, if you haven't any financial support, unpaid internships can be a bad idea. But it is worth saying that I don't see any reason for not participating in internships.

In conclusion, I'd like to say that my internship experience is still poor, so I'm going to continue getting participation in this one until I have fun of it and have financial support. Despite the fact that it has some disadvantages, I believe that it is a great investment to my future. I think that people can achieve success in any activity if their goal is not to get as much money as they can, but to get real pleasure from this activity.

* Are intership Fair to student? P.582.

**2012 Internship and Co-op Survey: Executive Summary

Yegor Gaidar Prize

Since I've got an assignment from David to write a weekly blog, especially on free topic, I have been starting to look at all around me with attention, looking for different things I can talk about in my blog post. It is worth noting that choice of topic isn't difficult for me because the process of studying at The New Economic School bring me new ideas and opportunities every day. Therefore, today's blog will be about my attending the awards ceremony of Yegor Gaidar Prize that I could attend because of invitation from NES.

Do you know who Yegor Gaidar was? He was a statesman who conducted the transition from a planned Russia economy to a market. It is worth saying that his activity is evaluted by experts and ordinary citizens very contradictory, but if you have a read of his book "The loss of Empire", you will convince that Y.Gaydar's reforms were necessary, timely, and very important for Russia. Moreover, I have to say that Y.Gaidar wasn't only a talented reformer, but also a strong, manly, and dedicated person.
Y.Gaidar died in 2009, but many people save a memory and admiring about him(I'm not an exception).
Yegor Gaidar Prize was established in 2010 for people who made the most important contribution to the development of Russia. There are three nominations: economic, history, and civil society. In each nomination a winner is selected by authoritative people who are dedicated to the profession for which the prize was awarded.

When I and my friend Ildar went to this party, we were too impressive: too many famous people such as politicians from The Parliament, artists, actors. scientists, economists who helped to Y.Gaidar to make his reform and other people who are very well-known in Russia. It was unbelievable experience for me because I've never seen such famous people in one place. 
Then the ceremony began. The prize in economics was won by V. Kapelyushnikov and V. Gimpelson. They research labour market and economics of labour in Russia for some decades. It is difficult to assess their contribution to the development of Russia.
The prize in history was won by V. Schnirelman who has been studying nationalism and problems of ethnic discrimination in Russia for almost 40 years. Just imagine! 
The prize for contribution to the Russian civil society was won by Lilia Shibanova who has been working to protect the rights of voters and monitoring in all elections as the head of the association "The Voice". We all know how many offenses were done on previous State Duma's elections and I'm very proud of having compatriot who tries to prevent these crimes!

One thing I'd like to say is that when winners of prize went to a scene, they were asked by anchorman this question, 'What do you like to wish to yonger generations?' There is no need to tell here what they said to us. I'll just say that after this party I realized how it is important to make a contribution to different spheres of our life, and also is that the future of Russia (in all definitions as you can imagine) depends on us - younger generations. If we try to become our homeland better with many accomplishments, then it become better, undoubtedly. And we will not fail! Are you join to me?

Comparison and contrast aspect of Russian culture and an aspect of American culture.

It is worth saying I was surprised to get this assignment in my English class because I had posted about USA and Russia presidential elections a week before, and had found some things that make a contrast between U.S. and Russia. Let's assume my previous post as a type of preparing for this one.

Despite the fact that I've never been in the U.S., I noticed some differences and similarities between Russia and U.S., reading newspapers, observing for presidential elections, talking with people who had ever lived in both countries. 
At first glance, the U.S. and Russia can look a lot alike. Really, they both have population more than 100 million people, constitution, an elected president, republican government. However, it's not a good way to conclude both countries are identical relying only some similarities. As a comparison shows, aspects of Russian and the U.S. cultures are different enough.

Firstly, I noticed that in American and Russia cultures is a way to use words "football" and "soccer". It can be surprise, but Americans and Russians understand these words equally. At the same time, in the U.S. there is a sport which called as "American football", but it is not the same as football in Russia.

Secondly, It was a secret for me that in U.S. it isn't patient to ask people about they preferences in politics. Obviously, it is also incorrect to ask about their choice of president on the elections. Russian people often tell about their politics preferences and don't protest to ask them about it.

Thirdly, I think that Russian people more often use an informal type of speech. Moreover, it is not a rarity to hear an obscene language from Russian people. I have been living in Moscow for three months and very often use a public transport to go to the university. Because of this, I often hear that people insult each other. At the same time, in the U.S. people more tolerant and patient. I don't know a reason of these different types of behavior, but I can suppose that the U.S. has a better judiciary than Russia which regulate abusive conduct more perfect.

A very important thing I have to say is the differences between Russian and the U.S. mentalities. I noticed that many of Russian people often complain about place where they live. For example, they are dissatisfied that their city is too crowded, policy is not an efficient, and legislation in Russia is worse than, for example, in the U.S. I am used to call this principle as "The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence". On the other hand, as my Russian friend, who has lived in the U.S. for some years, said, in the U.S. it is a big rarity to meet complaining people. They like the place where they live. I can make a mistake, of course, so it would be better to ask my teacher David about it.

In conclusion, I'd like to say that Russian and the U.S. culture have many differences. However, it isn't hard for me to communicate with Americans. Moreover, we find our communication very interesting and useful, so I can suppose that differences between cultures are capable to make people closer and be interested with each other.

A lecture about United States presidental election in 2012

Two months of studying have finished, so all NES students got a consultation week (it is also known as week without classes but the week with too much homework) and a little time to relax. However, I didn't want to relax and decided to spend my time efficiently. The most appropriate thing was a lecture about United States presidental election in 2012 which were being gone to talk by Konstantin Sonin, who is NES prorector. Two months at NES helped me to realize that I should always be interested in all what surrounds me. Moreover, I wanted to know about USA election more that I had known before, so I instanly decided to attend it.
The lecture was planned to be told at general office of a news portal "The Russian information agency. When I came here, I was too surprised to realize that lecture would be told at very comfortable auditorium with real TV presenter. (It is worth saying that when I was in Kansk I liked to watch lectures like this and wanted to be in an auditorium, not behind the screen)


I'd like to tell some information, which were new and interesting for me, that I knew at the lecture. Firstly, it doesnt't matter who is a presidential candidate: an acting president or not, because an active president's chances to win are the same as he wouldn't be a president. According to statistics, acting president wins elections as often as a candidate who isn't a president. It was a surprise for me because I always thought that acting president won in most cases (Hmm, may be because I live in Russia?).

Secondly, sometimes it doesn't matter who of candidates received a majority of votes. There is an electoral college where candidates struggle for votes of electors. Total votes are 538.  These votes divided in proportion to the population of USA . In case one candidate received a majority of votes, even a small margin, then he got all votes of this state. So the most important goal for candidate is getting majority of votes in the electoral college.

Finally, I knew one detail of election  that I hadn't noticed before. At the beginning of election company each candidate choose strong position of policy that they try to lead during the company. For example, in USA one candidate is republican and a second candidate is a democrat. Their policy's positions called "left" and "right". When the election company starts, the  republician begin advocating for a tax decrease,  less state intervention to national economy, and so on. At the same time, the second candidate defends the opposite position. Why do they do it? Among voters there are people with different ideologies. Some people think that government should control all aspects of society, some people don't think so. Some people thing that decreasing of taxes will help national economy, some people think that won't. At the same time, there are people with ideology between "left" and "right".Because of this, each candidate should firstly get support of electors with strong "right" position, and then the support of electors with position between "right" and "left". Otherwise the candidate risks to lose votes of electors with strong position. When I realised it, I noticed  that before elections were ten days, Mitt Romney began doing little changes in their policy so that to be near the position between "left" and "right". For instance, Romney said that his attitude towards Russia will be more flexible, but a week before he had said that he would be strong with Russia.
 
The lecture about United States presidental election in 2012 was very interesting for me because I knew some facts that I hadn't know before. I think, attending lectures like this is great experience, and I'm going to continue doing it. But now let's wait for the outcome of the elections and make our predictions!