While sitting in on parent-teacher conferences, I was hit with the pondering question, are the Talented and Gifted students being cheated out of an education? Have we lowered our expectations in America so much that we are trying to aim at the bottom half? Where is the middle? Who is the average? Should the apathetic students be included in the mix for hitting the middle of the classes?
TAG students may be getting behind the ball. Are they being ignored? In this article, a few examples of TAG programs being cut with budget cuts or no TAG programs at all. The article discusses where the situation that TAG students are in. It varies widely between active programs, cut programs, and I would venture to say not really a TAG program.
Can you imagine a special education program being cut? People would be appalled! Why are we not paying much attention to the TAG students. I think America has done a great job of providing an education for special education students. I think that is one thing that America has figured out. They do not want to leave students behind. However, are we leaving TAG students behind? In the article No Genius Left Behind, a Reno academy for the gifted is discussed. The school accepts only 100 kids and takes them above and beyond where they would get education anywhere else.
I posted my questions in the introduction. Where are we aiming at. I found after teaching high school math that I spent way to much time dealing with the apathetic bottom 5 than I did with the top five that wanted to go further. Maybe we should separate the classes by intelligence and work ethic. Most schools have 3 or more classes so why not separate the top, middle, and bottom.
This may not be the answer, but we do need to look at this to avoid wasting our TAG students. By letting them fall to the wayside, we are not only hurting them, but we are also hurting the future of America. We need to capitalize on these assets and make sure that these kids too get to reach their fullest potential.
What do you think?
Philip Russell
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Abstinence Education
The article in Fox News discussed a need for changing the way we teach sex education because of the rise in cases of STD's. The article went on to say that we the Bush's way of teaching sex education with abstinence simply is not enough. According to the article, Obama has shown interest in moving away from this type of education.
First of all, when was abstinence education even taught. It was not the only way of preventing pregnancy or STD's when I was at school, and it does not seem like the world has gotten any more conserative. So pushing this abstinence only thing on Bush is pushing it.
I am sure if Bush had his way it would be an abstinence only education in the schools and I agree. Bush had convictions and he stuck to them. He stopped abortion and terrorists with his presidency and he won't recieve due credit until years after his death much like every other president. But, that is for a different blog.
After reading the article with all the stats on STD's the author seemingly makes a good point. It's like giving one seat belt for a load of people in a car. However, how is teaching someone how to wear a condom, make sure that their partners have not have "too" many partners, and finally get tested on a regular basis. Are we for real? This is going to help? We need to wake up and listen to what we are suggesting to our students. How about in order to stop so much gun violence and to improve gun safety we let elementary students use them at school, but we will make sure that these guns come equipped with safeties and that the students know how to use them! That would be crazy.
Crazy as giving a kid a condom and saying make sure you test yourself, don't have sex to often, and don't have sex with other people if they have had sex often. Abstinence is 100% safe 100% of the time, but very hard for students and this is why.
"Sex Sells!" It is a common theme across the world. How can we teach this slogan and abstinence at the same time? It doesn't work. We need to monitor what is on our TV shows, advertisements, and movies. If adults want to see these, let them watch it on their own time. The honor system does not work, we need tighter restrictions on what is available to the public eye 100% of the time. I feel that movie makers should be held responsible for murders, not pastors for hate crimes!
Marriage and sex is a mystical thing and we should not take this away from it because we want what we want now. This article is trying to teach students the art of masturbation in order to take the mystic away from sex. Why? How about we take the dangling steak away from the dog and focus it's efforts on bird hunting or chasing cats. We need to teach students what is going to help them now and in the future. Abstinence will. No STD's, a higher percentage of marital satisfaction and longer marriages. I don't have the research to back it up, but you will find this to be a common norm.
The other thing that I did not like about this article is that 14-17 is not an age for youth to find their sexuality or sexual preference. Hormones are raging. We tell them all the time growing up to not respond in anger. Count to 10! Take a breather! Handle all situations calmly! Now we tell them; find your sexual presence when your hormones are all unbalanced. We know better than this. We need to practice what we preach.
In summary, abstinence is 100% all the time. We need to be honest with our students. Sex is a great thing, but needs to be with one person. (Yes, male with female and female with male) We need to protect their minds and make sure that they are not being tempted and mislead.
Does anyone have a link to state standards or national standards on sex ed?
What do you think?
Philip
First of all, when was abstinence education even taught. It was not the only way of preventing pregnancy or STD's when I was at school, and it does not seem like the world has gotten any more conserative. So pushing this abstinence only thing on Bush is pushing it.
I am sure if Bush had his way it would be an abstinence only education in the schools and I agree. Bush had convictions and he stuck to them. He stopped abortion and terrorists with his presidency and he won't recieve due credit until years after his death much like every other president. But, that is for a different blog.
After reading the article with all the stats on STD's the author seemingly makes a good point. It's like giving one seat belt for a load of people in a car. However, how is teaching someone how to wear a condom, make sure that their partners have not have "too" many partners, and finally get tested on a regular basis. Are we for real? This is going to help? We need to wake up and listen to what we are suggesting to our students. How about in order to stop so much gun violence and to improve gun safety we let elementary students use them at school, but we will make sure that these guns come equipped with safeties and that the students know how to use them! That would be crazy.
Crazy as giving a kid a condom and saying make sure you test yourself, don't have sex to often, and don't have sex with other people if they have had sex often. Abstinence is 100% safe 100% of the time, but very hard for students and this is why.
"Sex Sells!" It is a common theme across the world. How can we teach this slogan and abstinence at the same time? It doesn't work. We need to monitor what is on our TV shows, advertisements, and movies. If adults want to see these, let them watch it on their own time. The honor system does not work, we need tighter restrictions on what is available to the public eye 100% of the time. I feel that movie makers should be held responsible for murders, not pastors for hate crimes!
Marriage and sex is a mystical thing and we should not take this away from it because we want what we want now. This article is trying to teach students the art of masturbation in order to take the mystic away from sex. Why? How about we take the dangling steak away from the dog and focus it's efforts on bird hunting or chasing cats. We need to teach students what is going to help them now and in the future. Abstinence will. No STD's, a higher percentage of marital satisfaction and longer marriages. I don't have the research to back it up, but you will find this to be a common norm.
The other thing that I did not like about this article is that 14-17 is not an age for youth to find their sexuality or sexual preference. Hormones are raging. We tell them all the time growing up to not respond in anger. Count to 10! Take a breather! Handle all situations calmly! Now we tell them; find your sexual presence when your hormones are all unbalanced. We know better than this. We need to practice what we preach.
In summary, abstinence is 100% all the time. We need to be honest with our students. Sex is a great thing, but needs to be with one person. (Yes, male with female and female with male) We need to protect their minds and make sure that they are not being tempted and mislead.
Does anyone have a link to state standards or national standards on sex ed?
What do you think?
Philip
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
President vs. Ex-Terrorist
If Obama is met with controversy, wouldn’t you think that a convicted terrorist involved in 19 bombings and 10 bank robberies. The University of Massachusetts must not have. The professors decided to invite Raymond Luc Levasseur to speak at their school Nov. 5. Due to heavy controversy, the event was cancelled.
Not even criticism from the Gov. Deval Patrick could persuade the professors from pushing beyond the first cancellation to a reschedule of the speech. The professors claimed that due to academic freedom, they are entitled to allowing this man to speak. Academic freedom is basically the idea that professors can give their opinions on subjects and that students can be introduced to many ideas. Check it out. The administration did not step in and take action in order to preserve academic freedom.
Now, it was definitely a surprise to find out that people would protest Obama in a school, but it does not surprise me very much that a convicted felon would gain some flak. The arguments are that he has done his time and paid his price so he should be able to speak. They want to bring him in to talk at “Amherst Libraries’ fifth annual Colloquium on Social Change. Along with writers Todd Gitlin and Raymond Mungo, Levasseur was to represent the social unrest of the late 1960s.”
Other people feel that since he murdered a police officer and was involved with these bombings he has lost his privileges. They also fear that he will use his speech to recruit members to his once formed United Freedom Front that he was involved in before going to jail.
At what point do you lose or gain privileges to speak to our youth? Presidency? Early parole and honoring you parole for 3 months? Come on people, we need to build up some consistency and cohesion. If people are worried about Obama pushing his agenda, then I would say we need to be extremely concerned about a newly released felon pushing his agenda!
I do appreciate what academic freedom has allowed professors to do, but pushing past the non support of administration and past the total disagreement of a governor is a bit foolish. Academic freedom should only have so much freedom. If the administration is strongly against it, they should have the power to shut it down.
If the professors do go through with the speech, they need to strictly monitor what Mr. Levasseur has to say.
What do you think?
Philip
Not even criticism from the Gov. Deval Patrick could persuade the professors from pushing beyond the first cancellation to a reschedule of the speech. The professors claimed that due to academic freedom, they are entitled to allowing this man to speak. Academic freedom is basically the idea that professors can give their opinions on subjects and that students can be introduced to many ideas. Check it out. The administration did not step in and take action in order to preserve academic freedom.
Now, it was definitely a surprise to find out that people would protest Obama in a school, but it does not surprise me very much that a convicted felon would gain some flak. The arguments are that he has done his time and paid his price so he should be able to speak. They want to bring him in to talk at “Amherst Libraries’ fifth annual Colloquium on Social Change. Along with writers Todd Gitlin and Raymond Mungo, Levasseur was to represent the social unrest of the late 1960s.”
Other people feel that since he murdered a police officer and was involved with these bombings he has lost his privileges. They also fear that he will use his speech to recruit members to his once formed United Freedom Front that he was involved in before going to jail.
At what point do you lose or gain privileges to speak to our youth? Presidency? Early parole and honoring you parole for 3 months? Come on people, we need to build up some consistency and cohesion. If people are worried about Obama pushing his agenda, then I would say we need to be extremely concerned about a newly released felon pushing his agenda!
I do appreciate what academic freedom has allowed professors to do, but pushing past the non support of administration and past the total disagreement of a governor is a bit foolish. Academic freedom should only have so much freedom. If the administration is strongly against it, they should have the power to shut it down.
If the professors do go through with the speech, they need to strictly monitor what Mr. Levasseur has to say.
What do you think?
Philip
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Kindle vs. Hard Copy
Kindle vs. Hard Copy
The Kindle is an electronic book. Not just any book; it can hold up to 200 titles, access newspapers and magazines, and email. Sound amazing!? The Kindle is an electronic book put out by Amazon. It works much like an IPod downloading music.
By connecting to the network EVDO, a free wireless network, the owner of a Kindle can purchase reading material, access email, and preview books. The battery lasts up to 2 days and can be charged in 2 hours. Unlike a laptop, the screen is not hard to see in the sun light, in fact, it reads much like a text book.
Why is this important, because this may be the wave of the new library? In Ashburnham, Mass. at Cushing Academy, they have got rid of 10,000 books in their library and are planning on getting rid of the other 10,000 books. They decided to go this route because of the lack of use of both the library and the books. They tracked that less than 30 books were being checked out on some days, which is 0.15% of their books. Their answer, get rid of the books and bring in the Kindle.
The heat that was received over this switch was an expensive espresso machine (12K), cost of the Kindle, technology becoming obsolete, and the sentimental value of the books. The 12 thousand dollar machine was a huge debate, but it did bring in new customers and they will be able to sell their drinks. The cost of the Kindle at $259 was justified that the books are at most $9.99 from Amazon and as cheap as $5 compared to $30 for a hard copy book. The other fear is that the technology will become obsolete in 10 years where as hard copy books have not changed much in 100 years. Finally, people just hang onto books. They get sentimental and think that it is against the rules to throw things out.
I think that this move is bold and on the cutting edge. I just heard about the Kindle 3 weeks ago. I know; I had to come out from under my rock. We also landed on the Moon! They are a neat little technology. Why hinder technology if it is cost effective, efficient, gets the job done and kids love it.
I do support their idea of keeping some of the texts around in order to use the hard copy versions. I think that the Kindles will increase student usage of the library and will be easier to use for research with the 360,000 titles that Amazon has to offer. Without innovation and stepping out into the unknown, the Portobello mushroom would have never been discovered. Yes, some people have gotten sick, but progress was made. I think that we need to step out as educators and try out new technology.
What do you think?
Philip
The Kindle is an electronic book. Not just any book; it can hold up to 200 titles, access newspapers and magazines, and email. Sound amazing!? The Kindle is an electronic book put out by Amazon. It works much like an IPod downloading music.
By connecting to the network EVDO, a free wireless network, the owner of a Kindle can purchase reading material, access email, and preview books. The battery lasts up to 2 days and can be charged in 2 hours. Unlike a laptop, the screen is not hard to see in the sun light, in fact, it reads much like a text book.
Why is this important, because this may be the wave of the new library? In Ashburnham, Mass. at Cushing Academy, they have got rid of 10,000 books in their library and are planning on getting rid of the other 10,000 books. They decided to go this route because of the lack of use of both the library and the books. They tracked that less than 30 books were being checked out on some days, which is 0.15% of their books. Their answer, get rid of the books and bring in the Kindle.
The heat that was received over this switch was an expensive espresso machine (12K), cost of the Kindle, technology becoming obsolete, and the sentimental value of the books. The 12 thousand dollar machine was a huge debate, but it did bring in new customers and they will be able to sell their drinks. The cost of the Kindle at $259 was justified that the books are at most $9.99 from Amazon and as cheap as $5 compared to $30 for a hard copy book. The other fear is that the technology will become obsolete in 10 years where as hard copy books have not changed much in 100 years. Finally, people just hang onto books. They get sentimental and think that it is against the rules to throw things out.
I think that this move is bold and on the cutting edge. I just heard about the Kindle 3 weeks ago. I know; I had to come out from under my rock. We also landed on the Moon! They are a neat little technology. Why hinder technology if it is cost effective, efficient, gets the job done and kids love it.
I do support their idea of keeping some of the texts around in order to use the hard copy versions. I think that the Kindles will increase student usage of the library and will be easier to use for research with the 360,000 titles that Amazon has to offer. Without innovation and stepping out into the unknown, the Portobello mushroom would have never been discovered. Yes, some people have gotten sick, but progress was made. I think that we need to step out as educators and try out new technology.
What do you think?
Philip
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)