August 26, 2006
SAD to say, but suburban schools also have a problem with illegal immigrants, only theirs are pint-size and most are American citizens.Take Greenwich. Students from bordering communities like Port Chester, N.Y., and Stamford, Conn., keep striving to land seats in Greenwich classrooms. Who can blame them? Just as Mexicans sneak into California because thatÂ’s where the better jobs are, students sneak into Greenwich because thatÂ’s where the better schools are.
Greenwich, one of AmericaÂ’s wealthiest towns, has not yet surrounded itself with a chain-link fence and National Guard troops. But it has its own version of a border patrol. A private eye, the kind who might be expected to snoop around motels, has been hired to check out tips of juvenile border crossings. Tattletale parents will report that theyÂ’ve spied a student crossing the Mill Street bridge from Port Chester or spotted another being dropped off by a car with New York license plates. The gumshoe, camera in hand, might shadow the third grader to his home.
The school district would not identify its Sam Spade, except to say heÂ’s a former Greenwich police officer and that he is paid $15,000 a year. He also does the shoe-leather sleuthing of confirming whether students live where their leases and utility bills say they do. In the 2004-5 school year, Greenwich investigated 62 cases and found 20 intruders. Dr. John Curtin, assistant superintendent, told of one student whose address was a golf course and who, upon inquiry, turned out to be the child of a maintenance worker legitimately housed on the greens.
Most suspicious cases donÂ’t arise from border crossings, but from the turmoil of 21st-century life. Parents divorce, executives get posted overseas. ThatÂ’s one reason why Greenwich is thinking of going high-tech with software, already used by West Hartford, Conn., schools, that crosschecks people who file change-of-address forms with the post office against the districtÂ’s database.
Why does Greenwich work so hard at stopping illegals? Put simply, state and local laws require students to attend schools where they live. Pelham, N.Y., bordered by the Bronx and Mount Vernon, takes similar steps, budgeting $50,000 to track down alien students. In the past year, according to Dr. Charles Wilson, the superintendent, it expelled half the 60 students it investigated.
I guess some illegal aliens are just a little bit more equal than others -- and the inferior ones have American citizenship. Because after all, Greenwich and its ilk don't have to worry much about the OTHER illegal aliens. Those are paid for by the taxpayers of the less affluent community who would desperately like their children to have the same sort of facilities and education Greenwich students get.
Posted by: Greg at
05:30 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 495 words, total size 3 kb.
August 25, 2006
A geography teacher put on paid leave for refusing to remove Mexican, Chinese and United Nations flags from his classroom will be allowed to return to school today after district officials backed down.But Eric Hamlin, who teaches seventh-graders in Jefferson County, hopes his experience will inspire a backlash against a Colorado law that restricts display of other nations' flags.
"This hasn't been a teacher-versus-school- district issue," Hamlin said. "This has been a teacher taking on the state statute, with the school district stuck in the middle as the enforcer."
Carmody Middle School principal John Schalk put Hamlin on paid leave Wednesday after the teacher refused three orders to take the flags out of his classroom.
The school district cited a state law prohibiting the display of any flag but the American, Colorado or local flags on public buildings, including schools. Temporary displays for instructional or historical purposes are exempt, but the school principal did not consider Hamlin's display temporary enough.
District officials agreed Thursday that Hamlin could keep the flags up for six weeks, then exchange them with other flags from his collection of more than 50. The district said he could keep his next set of flags, 25 of them from Middle Eastern nations, up for 12 weeks.
See, the display is educational, part of a legitimate educational display in a classroom, which is clearly contemplated under the statute. Not that such logic satisfies the legislator who sponsored the current law.
Former state Rep. Carl Miller, who sponsored legislation in 2002 strengthening a 1971 law restricting foreign flag displays, said the school was right to put Hamlin on leave and should not have let him return so soon.Miller, a Democrat from Leadville, disagreed with Jefferson County Superintendent Cindy Stevenson, who said the outcome was a "win-win situation."
"The only win-win I see is that Mr. Hamlin wins, China wins, Mexico wins and the United Nations wins," he said.
Miller said he and former Democratic Sen. Alice Nichol, co- sponsor of the legislation, intended for temporary displays to last a few days, not weeks.
First, the legislation has no time-limit. Second, the exception allowing for educational displays does exist, and using the flags during a period of time that it takes to cover a unit or set of units is quite appropriate.
What this really shows is that Colorado has a truly stupid law on the books, and that there needs to be a revision of that law by the Colorado legislature.
OPEN TRACKBACKING AT: Stop the ACLU, Wizbang, Samantha Burns, Is It Just Me?, Adam's Blog, Bacon Bits, Bullwinkle Blog, Stuck on Stupid, Conservative Cat, Third World County
Posted by: Greg at
11:19 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 468 words, total size 4 kb.
August 24, 2006
One in four Houston Independent School District students displaced by Hurricane Katrina failed to make enough academic progress to be promoted to the next grade this school year — a far higher rate than their classmates and an indicator of the massive challenges still facing area schools.About 700 of the 2,900 Katrina students returning to HISD this year were held back, including 41 percent of high school sophomores and 52 percent of juniors. That 24 percent retention rate was among the highest in the area, according to retention rates released by some local school systems.
"These kids have worked hard, but many of them were not prepared for the rigorous Texas standards," HISD spokesman Terry Abbott said.
On the other hand, many of these kids didn't work hard at all, based upon my experience. They arrived woefully behind due to an inadequate system of education in New Orleans and the surrounding area, took the initial outpouring of generosity (our school bought every single evacuee kid over $200 in clothes and school supplies -- despite having many impoverished children in the neighborhood who didn't gt freebies from every social service agency) as a sign that the year was a free ride, and complained that what was expected of them was more than they would need back in Louisiana schools and therefore didn't do much work because they expected to be back there this fall. Add to that the isues raised in the article and you can understand why the numbers show what they show -- especially since HISD received so many of the children coming from the lowest socio-economic backgrounds.
I hate to say it, but looking back over the last year I'm just not surprised by the number of failing kids, especially in the upper grades.
Posted by: Greg at
10:33 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 330 words, total size 2 kb.
August 22, 2006
A Stuart Middle School teacher has been removed from the classroom after he burned two American flags in class during a lesson on freedom of speech, Jefferson County Public Schools officials said.
Dan Holden, who teaches seventh-grade social studies, burned small flags in two different classes Friday and asked students to write an opinion paper about it, district spokeswoman Lauren Roberts said.
Let’s look at the purpose of the assignment. The goal was to offer a provocative example of free speech to discuss the extent and the limits of the First Amendment. That is perfectly appropriate. The associated assignment is also perfectly appropriate.
But burning a flag – or anything else – in a classroom without proper precautions is reckless because of the possibility of fire. And engaging in such an inflammatory action risks causing a fire of a different sort, one which causes the point of the lesson to be lost.
And that is what happened.
Pat Summers, whose daughter was in Holden's class, said more than 20 parents showed up at the school Monday, upset over the incident.
I don’t blame them. This is the sort of lesson that you prepare for by contacting the parents in advance in order to have them aware for what you are going to do. Maybe the parents won’t buy-in to your lesson plan, but they will at least be aware of what is happening in the classroom. You also need to have administration support for such a lesson. It appears that olden failed to do either of these things. And one must ask whether a certain course of action will serve the intended purpose and reach the appropriate educational goal.
And that is where I feel that Holden failed. He chose an action which offends most Americans as an instructional tool in a middle school classroom. The kids are not (quite) old enough to deal with the issue in the way he wanted them to. And the parents are rightly offended that an action of this sort took place in their children’s classroom without their being made ready to deal with the fallout.
So what we have here is a critical-thinking assignment that went awry because a teacher failed to think through the implications of his lesson plan. This does not appear to have been an attempt to inspire anti-Americanism. I do not believe that disrespect was intended. And I do no believe that Holden should be fired – just cautioned to use better judgment – and not to play with fire in the future.
And as for the flag-burning issue itself, I’ve long stated my opposition to amending the Constitution to deal with that action. If it is your flag, feel free to burn it, trample it, or wipe your butt with it. But if you are a teacher, I would urge you to keep such actions out of the classroom.
Posted by: Greg at
12:06 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 539 words, total size 3 kb.
A Stuart Middle School teacher has been removed from the classroom after he burned two American flags in class during a lesson on freedom of speech, Jefferson County Public Schools officials said.
Dan Holden, who teaches seventh-grade social studies, burned small flags in two different classes Friday and asked students to write an opinion paper about it, district spokeswoman Lauren Roberts said.
LetÂ’s look at the purpose of the assignment. The goal was to offer a provocative example of free speech to discuss the extent and the limits of the First Amendment. That is perfectly appropriate. The associated assignment is also perfectly appropriate.
But burning a flag – or anything else – in a classroom without proper precautions is reckless because of the possibility of fire. And engaging in such an inflammatory action risks causing a fire of a different sort, one which causes the point of the lesson to be lost.
And that is what happened.
Pat Summers, whose daughter was in Holden's class, said more than 20 parents showed up at the school Monday, upset over the incident.
I donÂ’t blame them. This is the sort of lesson that you prepare for by contacting the parents in advance in order to have them aware for what you are going to do. Maybe the parents wonÂ’t buy-in to your lesson plan, but they will at least be aware of what is happening in the classroom. You also need to have administration support for such a lesson. It appears that olden failed to do either of these things. And one must ask whether a certain course of action will serve the intended purpose and reach the appropriate educational goal.
And that is where I feel that Holden failed. He chose an action which offends most Americans as an instructional tool in a middle school classroom. The kids are not (quite) old enough to deal with the issue in the way he wanted them to. And the parents are rightly offended that an action of this sort took place in their childrenÂ’s classroom without their being made ready to deal with the fallout.
So what we have here is a critical-thinking assignment that went awry because a teacher failed to think through the implications of his lesson plan. This does not appear to have been an attempt to inspire anti-Americanism. I do not believe that disrespect was intended. And I do no believe that Holden should be fired – just cautioned to use better judgment – and not to play with fire in the future.
And as for the flag-burning issue itself, IÂ’ve long stated my opposition to amending the Constitution to deal with that action. If it is your flag, feel free to burn it, trample it, or wipe your butt with it. But if you are a teacher, I would urge you to keep such actions out of the classroom.
Posted by: Greg at
12:06 PM
| Comments (31)
| Add Comment
Post contains 546 words, total size 4 kb.
August 20, 2006
Munachiso Onuoha anxiously awaited her first day of fifth grade in Prince George's County yesterday afternoon."I am so nervous, just thinking of all the things that could not go right," she said. "I've been sleeping well. Tonight might be another story, though."
And trust me, there is always something "that could not go right" that you will not think of. Be prepared to role with it, whetehr it is being challenged by a kid over discipline matters or having a girl go into labor in your class (it actually happened to me on my first day at my current school). And yes, you can pretty well guarantee that your principal or department chair will walk in on something or other that does not constitute your finest moment.
But really, don't worry, even if they have this expectation of you.
Glenn Dale Principal Lia Thompson predicted that the two would energize returning faculty."They bring excitement and energy -- their enthusiasm, their love for the profession they've chosen, their eagerness to do the best that they can for the students they're working with," Thompson said.
Hopefully your colleagues still have that same drive -- even those of us who are a little bit cynical. I can guarantee you that we will do evrything we can for you new teachers, because we still remember that trrifying first day and agonizing first year -- the year when we went home utterly drained each day. We want you to make it, and we want you to stay.
And rest assured that the principal hasn't forgotten what it was like his or her first year -- and will probably be willing to concede, if pushed, that you are not making any more of a hash of it than they did during that first year.
Good luck, rookies!
Posted by: Greg at
10:12 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 348 words, total size 2 kb.
, Fast forward to the present. The class of 2006 saw 126 students take the AP English test -- roughly 40% of the class. Of those students, 19 scored a 4 or 5, and 43 scored a 3. That means only about 50% potentially received college credit.
Now does this mean that the program has declined in quality, and that today's teachers do not teach the material as well as my teacher did? Hardly -- it is indicative of the reality that explanding AP programs result in lower average scores because less able students are placed in the classes. That does not mean that these students are ill-served by being in the program -- indeed, the experience of being in the AP program may raise the level of their learning in a dramatic fashion. But the expansion will hurt the overall "snapshot" that most folks focus on -- the overal test scores.
Which leads me to an article in today's Washington Post.
Prince George's County schools chief John E. Deasy this week is rolling out a $33 million proposal to improve the school system's uneven academic performance, an initiative that includes a partnership with the College Board to expand Advanced Placement course offerings countywide.* * *
Deasy proposed that by the 2007-08 school year each of the county's 22 major high schools should offer at least eight AP courses, which are meant to introduce students to college-level study. Currently, AP offerings in the county vary widely. Many high schools have only a few.
The College Board, which oversees the AP program, will help the school system train a new corps of 200 AP teachers over the next year. In addition, the school system plans to expand subsidies for AP test fees to help ensure that needy students take the tests.
"It's a monumental culture shift," Deasy said. "AP will be on the tongue of every kid around here before too long."
Michael Marchionda, a College Board official working on the project, called it "a multiyear effort" to widen student access to AP. "It's very comprehensive," he said.
The county school board will consider the plan Thursday and is expected to support it.
"People asked for rigor," said Chairman Beatrice P. Tignor (Upper Marlboro). "We've got rigor."
And i hope the district does have a rigorous program, one which holds to the very strict standards of teh College Board. But I hope tha the district recognizes that test scores -- on average -- will drop if there is an increase in the size and scope of the program.
I also hope that parents realize what they are getting themselves and their children into when thy sign up for the AP program. Such classes are -- and are supposed to be -- at or near the college level. In my own district, we struggled for years with parents who insisted upon putting their child into AP classes -- and then insisted upon taking them out when the student didn't continue to receive the same A he or she had gotten in regular level classes. But most importantly, I hope that teh Prince George District sticks to its guns -- because we have found that the presence of AP classes raises the level of instruction in all classes in the school as regular level teachers collaborate with and adopt strategies used by the AP teachers.
Posted by: Greg at
03:53 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 693 words, total size 4 kb.
August 13, 2006
It should be interesting, given we are going off the block schedule these kids have always known and going on a traditional schedule of 45-minute periods.
Posted by: Greg at
10:19 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 40 words, total size 1 kb.
July 27, 2006
After all, how can you possibly justify a policy that allows a professor to reject any accommodations for a student with a handicap?
Gary Bradford, 42, of Baytown, who also suffers from rickets, watched from his wheelchair as his lawyer handed university General Counsel Dona Hamilton a copy of a lawsuit seeking to change a policy that allowed a professor to refuse his request for someone to help him take notes.The lawsuit asks U.S. District Judge Kenneth Hoyt to strike down a policy that allows professors at the university the choice of whether to comply with special requests for assistance from disabled students.
"We want to teach (professors) that the school writes their paychecks and they are going to have to accommodate students," said Bradford. He is not seeking monetary damages.
The defendants in the lawsuit are the board of regents, several administrators and a professor.
Bradford — who was born without arms, his hands attached to his shoulders — said he is a vocalist and wanted to complete about 20 hours of course work needed for a bachelor's in music.
He enrolled at UH in the Fall of 2005 and the school's Academic Accommodations Evaluations Committee and Center for Students with Disabilities recommended assistance with note-taking and extended time for taking tests, the lawsuit says. Bradford, who uses two sticks to type, should also be allowed to use a computer for essays and essay exams, the school recommended.
Professors in all classes but one allowed a teaching assistant to take notes for Bradford, he said. But the professor who taught a writing-intensive social sciences course that was required for graduation refused to give Bradford her notes or a copy of a slide presentation during a lecture, according to the lawsuit.
The four teaching assistants assigned to the class refused to take notes for Bradford, the lawsuit says.
He appealed to the head of the Educational Psychology Department and was told that the decision whether to accommodate him was left to the professor.
Good grief! Refusing to permit as simple an accommodation as note-taking? Refusing to provide a print-out of a Power-Point presentation? And in the educational psychology department, which I presume is at least loosely affiliated with the College of Education and therefore ought to be especially conscious of legal mandates in education! Such callous disregard for and rejection of such simple accommodations is beyond the pale.
Now I realize that college is different from high school, which is the level on which I teach. But given that professorial workloads are generally significantly lighter than mine, I can see no excuse for this.
Good luck, Mr. bradford. I hope you ask for the professor in question -- and her teaching assistants -- to be drummed out of education. They d not belong.
Posted by: Greg at
01:36 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 534 words, total size 3 kb.
July 26, 2006
Is access to graduate education in America exclusively for the upper class?As a first-year graduate student struggling to make ends meet, I believe the answer is yes. In my experience, searching for funding to pay the extensive costs of my higher education has been an upward climb leading only to dead ends.
I am a single mother who qualifies for the maximum amount in federal aid for graduate students. But this amount barely covers my tuition; paying for housing, books and living expenses is up to me.
I have no college fund, trust or inheritance. I don't independently qualify for private student loans because I lack the substantial credit or employment history that is required, and I do not have the luxury of having a willing and eligible co-signer. Furthermore, I can work only part-time jobs while in school; otherwise I would not qualify for child-care assistance.
Well, you could do what I did -- get a graduate assistanship and WORK your way through graduate school. While I did get some assistance from my parents, i don't come from wealth -- my father was a just-retired military officer and my mother a housewife.
I can't help but notice the little detail you include that reveals the true problem you have. It is single parenthood. Had you kept your knees tightly together, you wouldn't have a child and you would be able to make your way through graduate school on a significantly tighter budget. But you don't want to focus on that issue, because it might mean that some of the blame for your financial issues might bounce back on YOU, dear.
But of course, you see yourself as a victim of a government that has lost sight of what you view as its proper role.
We are failing to redistribute the wealth in America, and the divide between the upper and lower classes is widening. It's clear that a federal need-based grant program for graduate students must be created. This would help level the playing field by creating access to graduate programs for students -- access based on merit and ambition rather than economic resources.
Sorry, girlfriend, but the role of the government is not the redistribution of wealth. Since you are seeking a degree in public administration, you might be familiar with a document called the United States Constitution. If you read it, you might note that it sets out a number of tasks for the federal government -- and redistributing wealth is not one of those tasks. So you clearly don't know enough to even be in graduate school in your field -- and might I add, it certainly explains why you haven't gotten any of the few scholarships you have deigned to apply for. After all, while you have ambition, you clearly fall short in the merit department.
So forget continuing as a full-time student at your high-dollar private university. Consider attending a public university -- one with a lower price tag and more financial aid opportunities.
Or perhaps you should recognize that you made a poor choice to try to balance graduate school and single parenthood -- and go out and get a job to support yourself, instead of expecting one more public dolar handout.
Posted by: Greg at
03:08 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 575 words, total size 3 kb.
July 25, 2006
NEWARK East Brunswick High School football coach Marcus Borden won his lawsuit against the school district today in the culmination of a dispute over the coach's role in pre-game prayer by the team.After hearing oral arguments from Borden and school board attorney Martin Pachman in federal district court, U.S. District Judge Dennis Cavanaugh ruled in Borden's favor, permitting the veteran coach to silently bow his head and "take a knee'' while his players engaged in student-initiated, student-led, nonsectarian pregame prayer.
Pachman unsuccessfully argued that Borden's request to silently bow and "take a knee'' where in violation of the First Amendment clause that prohibits government from establishing religion.
"It is a very important victory for public school teachers and coaches,'' said Borden's attorney, Ronald J. Riccio. "It reaffirms that government can't be hostile to religion, that they have to remain neutral and that not all things that partake of religion are impermissible or in violation of the establishment clause.''
In other words, as we so often say here, the right guaranteed under teh First Amendment is freedom of religion, not freedom from religion.
Posted by: Greg at
02:00 PM
| Comments (365)
| Add Comment
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.
P July 24, 2006
NUT seek pre-school gay awareness
But it isn't -- and shows just how far some are willing to go into indoctrinating young people into the "gay is good" cult of the Left.
Nurseries must play their part in challenging homophobia from an early age amongst pupils, the National Union of Teachers (NUT) has warned.The NUT reacted to The Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) consultation from the Department for Education and Skills on policies regarding pre-school children up to 5 years old.
The report said: “By five years old many children have already internalised gender-role expectations, through the process of socialisation. Early years education, amongst other cultural and social factors, plays an important role in young children’s socialisation.
“Research shows that children as young as five begin to display disapproval of peers’ role-inconsistent behaviours and are self-critical when judging how they would feel if they were playing with role-inconsistent toys. Young children monitor their behaviour against gender stereotypes, feeling pride on performing gender role-consistent behaviour.
“In the case of homophobia, the use of the word ‘gay’ is prevalent in primary schools and young boys who are perceived to not conform to masculine stereotypes are at risk of bullying, isolation and social exclusion.
“It is too late to wait until primary school to challenge prejudice and intolerant abusive language. The EYFS curriculum needs to alert early years teachers to their responsibilities to challenge gender stereotypes and to challenge language that is negative or prejudiced.”
The document also called for pre school children to be made aware of different family structures such as civil partnerships, gay parents or grandparents, adoptive parents and guardians, “Many gay parents do not ‘come out’ to their nursery schools because they fear their children will be bullied as a result of the sexual orientation of their parents. Now that civil partnerships are legal, nursery settings need to use the curriculum to educate children about all types of family and to promote respect and understanding.
"Increasingly there are resources such as reading books available for nursery settings which give positive examples of diversity.”
Last week gay charity Stonewall produced a DVD entitled Spell It Out to be distributed to teachers in all LondonÂ’s secondary schools, as part of its campaign to combat homophobic bullying.
The Guardian recently reported that Stonewall had won a government tender to produce guidance on tackling homophobic bullying in all schools.
So start spoon-feeding the gay agenda to kids in pre-school -- sexualizing children at an even younger age. And ignore, of course, that there are certain norms of family structure and gender roles in society -- norms that I will gladly concede are not rigid, but to which the bulk of people in Western society conform.
What next? Subliminal pro-homosexual messages in the neo-natal nursery at the hospital?
In short, I think that NUT is nuts.
Posted by: Greg at
12:25 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 494 words, total size 3 kb.
July 22, 2006
The issues vary from state to state. But many Southern Baptist colleges and their state conventions have been battling over money, control of boards of trustees, whether the Bible must be interpreted literally, how evolution is taught, the propriety of some books for college courses and of some plays for campus performances and whether cultural and religious diversity should be encouraged.At the root of the conflicts is the question of how much the colleges should reflect the views of their denomination. They are part of the continuing battle among Southern Baptists for control of their churchÂ’s institutions.
More than 20 years ago, theological and cultural conservatives gained control over moderates in the Southern Baptist Convention, the denominationÂ’s broadest body, representing more than 16 million worshipers. Similar shifts then occurred in many, but not all, state Baptist conventions, which have considerable independence.
And therein lies the problem. When one is dealing with the department of theology, it is really easy to demand conformity. But when one starts strying outside of that field, the issues become more murky. Academic freedom is important, but so is the question of maintaining the focus on the religious mission of the school. After all, if one wishes to produce not just scholars, but scholars with a Christ-centered world-view, does it not make sense to draw lines that foster that world-view?
Ultimately, such conflicts lead to either a disaffiliation between the school and the religious institution, or to a "hostile takeover" of the board of trustees by the institution. In the case of Catholic colleges and universities, many retain an affiliation with a religious order, but are effectively insulated from control by local bishops or the Vatican by a structure which guarantees such independence. Unfortunately, this means that many such schools are Catholic in name but not in practice. I suspect that, as this conflict continues among the Baptists, that we will see something similar happen.
Posted by: Greg at
06:13 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 393 words, total size 3 kb.
July 12, 2006
The Washington Post article notes this issue.
Educators said it's difficult to pin down one cause. Bad teaching, chaotic home lives, low expectations for some students, cultural bias, the fact that older students simply don't read enough -- all have been faulted.And student attitude can be a factor.
"By late elementary school, kids who are struggling readers have developed strategies to avoid reading," said Sylvia Edwards, a reading specialist with the Maryland State Department of Education. "They are under the radar, scraping by."
Even in relatively affluent areas, over 20% of kids reach high school with serious reading difficulties -- a problem that is even more marked among minority and special population sub-groups. And unfortunately, most teachers at that level are not trained to teach reading, because that is a skill teacher training programs for secondary teachers presume is unnecessary because students are expected to be functionally literate by the time they reach middle school.
The teaching of reading therefore needs to continue beyond the primary grades, into the upper elementary grades and on through graduation. The high-stakes testing regimens of NCLB make this even more essential, for without those reading skills there is little hope of students ever passing the exams needed to graduate. That will mean revamping our teacher training paradigm, and retraining teachers already in the classroom to meet that new reality.
Posted by: Greg at
10:31 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 289 words, total size 2 kb.
July 05, 2006
Now there is an effort to revise those standards to focus more on the fundamentals of language.
The education agency already has convened a teacher study group to study the English TEKS, and the revisions were scheduled to be presented to the board for approval later this year. But the board stopped that process in April and set a June 14 work session to hear from reading experts about the curriculum.That meeting changed the minds of some board members, including board chairman Geraldine "Tincy" Miller, who apologized to McLeroy at the end of the meeting.
"I really was convinced we had an incredible curriculum, and it just needed a little tweaking," said Miller, R-Dallas. "We need to stop this process right now."
One criticism voiced at the session is that the TEKS are too student-centered, often asking students to use their attitudes, behaviors and ethics to interpret texts. For example, students in fourth through eighth grades are expected to "describe mental images that text descriptions evoke" and "compare text events with his or her own or other readers' experiences."
McLeroy calls such standards "fuzzy English" and wants to expunge them from the state's curriculum. He said such standards can't be measured on state tests.
Board member David Bradley, R-Beaumont, voted in 1997 in favor of an alternate set of standards that was heavier on the basics of spelling and grammar. Critics said the alternate standards would wind up micromanaging teachers by dictating what and how they must teach rather than giving them the flexibility to determine how to reach individual students.
The problem is that the standards adopted were not terribly flexible, nor were they particularly measurable. it was all well and good that students were expected to express themselves in multi-media presentations -- except that the reality is that most texas schools lacked (and still lack) the computer and video equipment to make that a reality. And the hoped-for flexibility was not a reality -- teachers were still expected to produce results on a high-stakes test, so it was those portions of the TEKS that were measured on the TAKS test that became the focus of drill-and-kill instruction in many classrooms.
And still students reached upper grades without mastering fundamentals. My students this year had spent all but one year of their education under the new standards, but they still exhibit the same problems as under the old standards. Purposeful reading and writing remain beyond the reach of too many of them -- a complaint I've heard from fellow teachers in a number of districts. Vocabularies are limited ("Mister, quit using big words like "contemporary."). Spelling is terrible. The mechanics of the English language are a mystery ("Do we have to use paragraphs?" "Where's the verb? What's a verb?").
So I salute the State Board of Education in taking the opportunity to direct the teaching of English back to the fundamentals.
Posted by: Greg at
03:54 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 598 words, total size 4 kb.
June 25, 2006
And in this article, we find that students in two schools could lose excellent teachers. The problem is that they came to this country on cultural exchange visas that require they return to their home country for two years.
Most foreigners who marry U.S. citizens while on a visitor visa can adjust their status without leaving the country. But if they overstay a J-1 visa -- the three-year kind Chamorro has -- they must leave the United States to apply for a family member visa even if they marry a citizen, said Michael Defensor, a spokesman for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services.On rare occasions, the U.S. grants waivers -- for example, if the return home would constitute extreme hardship to the family. Chamorro has argued that her husband, a freelance photographer, would suffer hardship in Colombia because of the country's high crime rate and poor pay for photographers. But Defensor said an extreme hardship would have to be something such as a medical condition that cannot be treated in the home country or a situation where a person's life would be in danger.
Chamorro came to the United States through the North Carolina-based Visiting International Faculty Program, which brings teachers from around the world to work in U.S. schools for up to three years. Teachers with the program sign a pledge to return to their country for at least two years afterward.
Most return to their countries within three years, said Ned Glascock, a spokesman for the program. "The idea is that teachers and others who qualify come for three years to teach about their cultures and then return home and share everything they've learned," he said. "The cultural exchange goes full circle, and they become cultural ambassadors for our country."
Since the program began in 1987, it has brought 7,000 teachers to the United States, he said, adding that "99.9 percent" of them have returned to their countries. "We're very clear with our teachers that it's not a program that's intended as a means of immigration to the United States," he said.
And i agree with the program and its rationale -- but the reality is that there are some people in that program who do marry US citizens. It is not a large number, and the requirement that these couples split or relocate abroad is draconian, given the myriad methods for adjusting the status of other immigrants -- including amnesty programs for illegal aliens.
Besides, at a time when teachers in math and science are at critical shortage levels, what are we doing sending back qualified ones who want to stay?
Posted by: Greg at
11:16 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 497 words, total size 3 kb.
June 15, 2006
Unfortunately, the best educational practice -- teaching all sides of the issue -- has been unanimously repealed by the State Board of Education.
The state school board, with six new members, on Wednesday changed its answer on a history question that had turned into an emotional religious debate.The reconfigured board, with six new appointments by Gov. Ernie Fletcher, reversed a decision two months earlier that would have taught students about a new way to describe historic dates traditionally identified as B.C. or A.D.
Those designations carry religious overtones because they stand for Before Christ, and Anno Domini — Latin for "in the year of the Lord."
The board's April 11 decision to adopt curriculum changes that included teaching the designations of B.C.E. for Before Common Era and C.E. or Common Era, had drawn criticism from some activist ministers and religious groups. Some conservative Christians complained the change was an attempt to sterilize a reference to Christ.
"It's part of a larger effort to expunge religious references in our culture," said Martin Cothran, a policy analyst at The Family Foundation, a conservative group based in Lexington. "I think it's not something that's coming from regular people. It's coming from certain other sectors of our society who think that we ought not to talk about religion in our public life."
Frankly, I view Mr. Cothran to be an utter jackass for making such a statement. It is about preparing students for college level work, where they will almost certainly be exposed to scholarly works which use the alternative dating system. Indeed, the areas in which the alternative designations are most likely to be found are scholarly works dealing with Biblical archaeology and scripture studies! Why? Out of respect for the many Jewish scholars (and small number of Muslim scholars) who work in those fields.
I teach the issue in my classroom within the first day or two of the beginning of the school year. I point out that multiple dating systems have existed throughout history and that some are used today. I note that the dating system we use in our society contains an affirmation of faith -- and that an alternative designation is sometimes used by scholars. I also note that the abbreviation may legitimately be rendered as either the "Chrisitan Era" or the "Common Etra", but that either alternative still revolves around the traditional rendering of the date of the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. I then ask that they be consistent in their use of one or the other system -- and that my personal choice is the traditional BC/AD, but that either choice is 100% correct. I then move on -- usually to a quick review of longitude and latitude, having spent (at most) 15 minutes on the calendar issue.
This really is not a substantive issue -- I cannot understand the need for state-mandated ignorance of such a minor issue.
Posted by: Greg at
12:51 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 540 words, total size 3 kb.
June 14, 2006
In the ongoing attempt to punish a student for blogging (chronicled here and here), the Plainfield School Board "magnanimously" decided not to expel a 17-year-old student for posts on his Xanga site that referenced the Columbine massacre.
Unfortunately, the Board did remove the student from Plainfield South High School for the fall semester and place him in the district's alternative school.
PLAINFIELD — A teen's Internet rants against his high school bought him no less than a semester in an alternative school.The 17-year-old student claimed in his personal blog site that he felt "threatened" by district staff and that the Columbine killers went on the murderous rampage because they were bullied.
If he follows the rules, he will be able to return back to Plainfield South High School second semester, said his mom who, in an effort to protect her son, didn't want her name used.
The Plainfield School Board "deliberated very carefully and had a very good discussion prior to rendering a decision" Monday night, said Superintendent John Harper, who couldn't comment further on the student disciplinary matter due to state and federal laws.
On Tuesday, a school administrator called the mother with the board's decision. The mother said during the expulsion hearing the school district painted a picture of her son as someone who was dangerous.
In reality, she said he was just venting on his blog site about how he felt when the school disciplined his friends for what they posted on their Xanga sites."(School staff) kept saying he wanted people to die. He didn't threaten a single person," she said about the expulsion hearing that lasted about 4½ hours last month.
The mother said her son told the hearing officer, "I did not say I was going to be the Columbine student."
She claimed what her son was trying to say was that the school would upset the wrong person and they would have another Columbine on their hands. However, the school staff told her that is not how they interpreted it, she said.
She feels that the board's decision is unfair.
"This is wrong. He did not threaten anyone. It was written from a home computer on home time," she said. "He didn't mention anyone's name. He didn't mention the school. He never made a direct threat."
Carl Buck, the student's attorney, did not return phone calls. But last month, he said the district was taking away the student's education for exercising his freedom of speech.
Now I cannot help but be troubled by this development, even though the board did not expel the student in question. If allowed to stand, this sets a startling precedent -- that speech on the internet is subject to a lower standard of First Amendment protection than speech in other media. It also allows schools a shocking level of control over students away from school.
Consider this -- the district is considering adopting a policy that reads as follows. I'll look at the current situation in light of its terms, because it seems to indicate teh mindset of the district authorities.
"While the district respects rights to freedom of expression under the First Amendment, students may be disciplined for Web site postings that materially and substantially disrupt the educational process or constitutes threats which endanger the health, safety and well-being of district or staff members."
This policy looks pretty reasonable until you dig into it.
First, it is limited to internet postings. These same words would not have been actionable under this policy had a student spoken them on a talk-radio call, uttered them in a television interview, or had them published in a newspaper or magazine. Were these other media included, there would be outrage on the part of free speech and press advocates around the nation. Indeed, the district would recognize that it was crossing into a constitutional quicksand were it to try to implement such restrictions on other forms of dissemination of such speech. That is why there is the specific limit in the policy. The target is therefore medium -- one which the district finds threatening because it is unfiltered by call-screeners or editors -- and the student is simply a convenient scapegoat.
Secondly, how can the words of a student on a website which cannot be accessed from school and which were posted from home, "materially and substantially disrupt the educational process" absent a bona fide threat or some other school-related nexus (posting test answers or instructions for hacking the district server, etc)? The actions of the school administration makes it abundantly clear that there was no bona fide threat discerned -- they did not contact law enforcement to report the alleged threat, which is would be the standard protocol if there were any reason to believe that the young man was contemplating acts of violence at school.
Third, the idea that these words constitute "threats which endanger the health, safety and well-being of district or staff members" is absurd. Who was threatened? What impact did it have on their well-being? Nobody and none, as demonstrated by the inaction of the school. Had this been a true threat which constituted a problem, the police should have been notified. More importantly, the student should not have been permitted to return to the Plainfield South to attend his regular classes during the last few weeks of the school year if his words or actions constituted a threat to the well-being of any individual. Oh, and I cannot help but notice who the district leaves out of the policy. A threat to the safety and well-being of other studetns is not included in the policy -- so I can only presume that the real "offense" being targetted by the policy is an adolescent failing to show proper respect and deferrence to teachers and administrators outside of school hours. In this case, the offense is a failure to kow-tow to a couple of pompous administrators who sought to regulate off-campus, after-school speech that is beyond the legitimate reach of public officials under the First Amendment.
And therein lies my concern. In the watershed decision on the civil liberties of students, Tinker v. Des Moines, the majority held that students do not shed their civil liberties at the schoolhouse gate. Implicit in this position is the understanding that students do, in fact, have those civil liberties away from school. That notion is meaningless if a school can act to punish a student based upon the exercise of one of those civil liberties away from school and outside of school hours. It is my sincere hope that the student and his family pursue this matter in court, for I believe they have a strong case that will define the parameters of protected student speech on the internet, and the degree to which school authorities may intrude into the after-school activities of students.
I've only encountered one post on the district's decision at this time. McKreck over at Occidentality offers a perspective that is somewhat more sympathetic to the school district, though he agrees that the decision was incorrect.
Posted by: Greg at
11:51 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 1229 words, total size 8 kb.
June 13, 2006
Harvard University will expand child-care and academic grants to support female and minority faculty and staff as they climb the ladder at the prestigious school, university officials plan to announce today.The plan outlines the first steps that Harvard will take to spend the more than $50 million that president Lawrence H. Summers pledged about a year ago to improve the climate for women on campus. Summers caused a furor last year by speculating about women's aptitude for science. That episode, coupled with complaints about his management style, led to his resignation, effective June 30.
The episode also led to two task forces, a flurry of recommendations, and a new position, a senior vice provost for faculty development and diversity. The office of Evelynn M. Hammonds will release its first annual report today.
Hammonds said in a telephone interview yesterday that Harvard will spend $7.5 million on child care and grants to help faculty and staff meet the demands of work and family.
Sounds to me like unequal treatment creating a hostile environment and unequal playing field based upon race and gender.
Posted by: Greg at
09:14 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 199 words, total size 1 kb.
June 08, 2006
We've seen some places try peanut bans on the basis of a single child with an allergy. While I disagree with the draconian measure, I can commend the motivation.
But this strikes me as the first step towards schools dictating what parents decide to feed their kids, treading into an area of parental autonomy that is not for schools to violate.
Parents who visit their children at lunch would be required to eat school food rather than bring the children fast-food lunches under a proposed wellness policy in the Palmyra Area School District.That doesn't set well with some parents. Lori Swisher, who has three children at Forge Road Elementary School, agreed the schools don't need soda machines or daily doughnuts, but bristled at "one more government restriction."
Swisher said she occasionally has brought pizza or a sub to her kids at school. "I like to think I serve mostly healthy meals, but when all three have sports, sometimes fast food is the option," she said.
The school board will vote June 15 on the guidelines, which Collene Van Noord, director of curriculum and instruction, said is part of a nationwide effort to combat childhood obesity by teaching healthy eating and exercise habits.
What next? A ban on all meals from home?
Posted by: Greg at
10:57 PM
| Comments (155)
| Add Comment
Post contains 237 words, total size 2 kb.
Two Hillsborough County middle school teachers have resigned after students saw them having sex in a classroom, a report released Wednesday states.Foreign language teacher Frances J. Sepulveda, 30, and physical education teacher Bryant J. Wilburn, 29, quit two days after the May 22 incident at Coleman Middle School, 1724 S. Manhattan Ave.
Sepulveda's classroom door was locked and paper covered its window, but a boy and a girl saw the teachers through the window, the report states.
Hillsborough school district spokesman Steve Hegarty said information about the incident will be sent to the state Department of Education.
"These teachers showed appallingly bad judgment," he said. "We dealt with it quickly, and the teachers are no longer welcome in the Hillsborough County classroom."
Appallingly poor judgment? That is certainly an understatement.
But at least they were not fooling around with students.
Posted by: Greg at
09:16 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 168 words, total size 1 kb.
June 05, 2006
Why can't a teen be expected to wait 90 minutes to use the restroom -- especially with many schools having 10-minute passing periods between classes?
Even though Daniel Thornton occasionally needed to go to the bathroom during his AP history course last year, he also needed a B on the midterm to maintain his grade. So he did what lots of students at Forest Park Senior High School in Woodbridge do in their Darwinian pursuit of academic success: Thornton endured a full bladder and instead hoarded his two restroom passes, which, unused, were worth six points of extra credit.It was enough to bump the 18-year-old's midterm grade from a C-plus to a B.
"Occasionally it made days unpleasant, but I was just very careful. I would try to go in the five minutes beforehand or afterwards, between classes," said Thornton, who will graduate this month. "Some of my classmates definitely had a lot of trouble. People around me would fidget, especially girls."Bladder control, especially in an era of 90-minute classes, is a vital skill in many Washington area high schools, where administrators often limit access to restrooms during class to reduce interruptions and quash potential mischief in areas without adult supervision.
Restrooms, of course, have been a choice milieu for school scofflaws since the advent of indoor plumbing. With school security a top priority, administrators have become vigilant enforcers as they try to block loitering, bullying or drug use in student restrooms.
What I've noticed is that many kids are using the restroom as the new phone booth. I've heard whispered comments about same-sex encounters as well -- especially in the girls restroom. And of course, there are the other illicit transactions mentioned in the article.
And the interesting thing is that it is usually the same kids wanting to go at the same time.
And I won't get into the question of the girls whose period apparently begins on the first day of school and runs through the end of May -- shouldn't they seek medical assistance?
What I am saying is that 90% of these bathrooom breaks are about getting out of class for illicit purposes -- not taking care of necessary bodily functions.
As a result, I will be very happy to see my school return to a more traditional schedule, with 45 minute periods. After all, there will be no excuses for not being able to wait in most instances -- and since our school declares teh first 20 minutes and last 20 minutes of each period to be a "dead time" when no student is permitted in the hall, we won't have any time to send them anyway!
Posted by: Greg at
11:20 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 502 words, total size 3 kb.
May 31, 2006
A Cape Breton University (CBU) professor is the target of a human rights complaint by a homosexual student. Comments posted by the professor at his private web site critical of the Anglican Church of Canada for its permissive and condoning stand in relation to same-sex "marriage" are the cause of the complaint.History Professor David Mullan wrote to his local Anglican bishop in 2004, criticizing the trend: "When Anglicanism in some manner recognizes homosexuality as a legitimate 'lifestyle' for Christians, it will become a church in schism," he charged.
On February 20, homosexual CBU student Shane Wallis, who also co-ordinates the campus' Sexual Diversity Office, lodged a formal human rights complaint with the University. In an e-mail response to Wallis' charge of a human rights offence, Wallis stated in his complaint that Mullan responded that "homosexuality is a repudiation of nature and the apotheosis of unbridled desire."
Please note that in this instance, "sexual diversity" means "anything except monogamous heterosexuality" -- and that while Shane Wallis may believe in "sexual diversity", he does not believe in intellectual diversity. After all, his complaint is based upon the expression of views and beliefs that contradict his own.
What is more, the university has adopted a procedure that repudiates basic human and civil rights.
From Professor Mullan's web site it can be seen that, because the University has acknowledged that the proceedings of a CBU human rights tribunal may be used against him in a court of law, he has declined to participate in complaint hearings. He has, however, challenged both Wallis and the University to acknowledge his free speech rights as a Canadian."I have a Human Rights complaint against me, as a result of two letters to my former Anglican bishop placed on my private website and a reply I sent Shane Wallis in response to an unsolicited email," Professor Mullan explains on his web site.
"I met yesterday morning (in April) with the Human Rights Officer. At that time I asked her whether anything I said in the process might be used against me in court. Today, after legal consultation, she replied that yes, it could be. I immediately told her that I would not participate in the process. I told her also in our meeting that I find that the requirement that I give evidence, effectively incriminating myself (rather like the Tudor Court of Star Chamber and the ex officio oath) when asked for it is in my judgement a violation of the common law, and of my rights as a free-born Englishman. The procedure is a farce, and if pushed I will sue the institution for violating my civil rights."
"The process can never be fair until these conditions are altered, and until the complainant stands under potential judgement for entering a frivolous complaint," he adds. "No one in his right mind would participate in this without incurring the fees of a solicitor, and when found innocent, someone needs to re-imburse the defendant."
What is more, Wallis filed a second complaint because Mullan had the integrity to go public with this attempt to suppress his fundamental human rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion. It would appear that the recently discovered right to not be offended, right to not be challenged in one's beliefs, and right to screw anything you want are being used to trump those rights. The complaint about breaking confidentiality is apparantly based upon the newly discovered "right to do secretly what no one would stand for publicly" -- for the proceeding has no right to remain silent, and any and all involuntarily coerced statements made in the proceedings may be used against the speaker in a court of law. Again, basic human rights are not a consideration at Cape Breton University.
When i was young, Canada was a free country -- or so it appeared when I visited there. When did that change?
Oh, and by the way, I wrote Shane Wallis the following email. I hope he is man enough to respond.
Shane--How is it that you have come to the conclusion that your own personal weaknesses and inadequacies are a legitimate basis for suppressing the human rights of individuals to hold religious beliefs and to express them publicly?
Did your university teach you the fascist view that only government-approved thoughts, beliefs, and opinions may be expressed in public, or was did you learn that elsewhere?
Why do you fear views which differ from your own? Is it a fear of diversity, or a recognition of the weakness and inadequacies of your own beliefs?
By the way, my questions have nothing to do with your sexual practices or personal relationships -- they have to do with fundamental questions of human rights enshrined in the founding charters of free societies. I hope you'll take a moment and respond.
Regards
Greg
AKA Rhymes With Right
www.rhymeswithright.mu.nu
To Dr. Mullan, I offer my prayers and best wishes as he fights the good fight for freedom in Canada. And I remind him that America is still free -- though the sodomy lobby is would certainly like to make it less so.
Posted by: Greg at
01:22 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 913 words, total size 6 kb.
A 6-year-old special education student who kicked a Naples teacher's aide and spent several hous in juvenile jail is facing felony battery charges.Her mother, however, wants to know why the case has gone so far.
Takovia Allen suffers from behavioral problems and attends a special class at Lely Elementary in Naples.
According to an arrest report, on May 2, a teacher was trying to line up students to go to music class. Takovia refused to go and kicked the teacher's aide in the ankle.
After a discussion among school officials and two law enforcement officials called to the school, the girl was arrested.
Takovia was taken to juvenile jail and held there for several hours before being released to her mother.
She is being charged with battery on a public education employee.
It's possible she will enter a program that includes counseling. If she completes the program successfully the charges could be dropped.
Is a six-year-old really able to formulate the level of intent necessary to commit a FELONY?????
I know the goal is to get the kid counseling (which may or may not really be necessary), but i think the method used here is heavey-handed.
Posted by: Greg at
09:22 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 228 words, total size 1 kb.
So is the right to choose to commit sodomy with a person of your same sex.
But taking a JROTC class in high school -- such a choice must NOT be allowed!
Or at least that is the direction things are headed.
Let's hope that the School Board listens to the wise opinion of the Argus.
THE San Francisco Board of Education is going too far in its latest plan to consider giving the boot to Junior ROTC at city high schools.The board of education says it's taking the action in response to the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy, which requires gay service members to conceal their sexuality.
This is just the latest in a long history of actions that have given the city an anti-military reputation, and we think it's time for city officials to cool it on the rhetoric. It's getting old and the sons and daughters of California and San Francisco who serve their nation in times of need deserve better.
Sentiment against the Iraq war is high and it can be tempting to make headlines by taking out frustrations on the military. City officials need to keep in mind — both with regard to the ROTC program and to other issues — that the war is a policy issue; it's not the fault of the ROTC program, military recruiters or the brave men and women who serve.
But there's a more important issue than whether the board is being unfair to the military. It's the some 1,600 students enrolled in the program who could end up being hurt the most.
They now earn physical education credits and learn discipline through the JROTC and each of them is in the program because they want to be. When board members vote in June, they should keep those students in mind.
My guess, though, is that this opinion will be ignored.
After all, this is San Francisco we are talking about, where something as trivial as the good of students can never be allowed to trump a far-left political statement.
OPEN TRACKBACKS: Third World County, Conservative Cat, Bacon Bits, Blue Star Chronicles, Adam's Blog, Sed Vitae, Cigar intelligence Agency
Posted by: Greg at
02:57 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 390 words, total size 3 kb.
May 29, 2006
It is a kind of Alice-in-Wonderland idea. If you do not finish high school, head straight for college.But many colleges — public and private, two-year and four-year — will accept students who have not graduated from high school or earned equivalency degrees.
And in an era of stubbornly elevated high school dropout rates, the chance to enter college through the back door is attracting growing interest among students without high school diplomas.
That growth is fueling a debate over whether the students should be in college at all and whether state financial aid should pay their way. In New York, the issue flared in a budget battle this spring.
They are students like April Pointer, 23, of New City, N.Y., a part-time telemarketer who majors in psychology at Rockland Community College, whose main campus is in Suffern, N.Y. Ms. Pointer failed science her senior year of high school and did not finish summer school.
But to her father's amazement, last year she was accepted at Rockland, part of the State University of New York.
"He asked, 'Don't you have to have a high school diploma to go to college?' " she said. "I was like, 'No, not anymore.' "
As a high school teacher, this worries me. No, not because of job security issues, but because it seems to devalue even further the worth of a high school diploma I realize that there is no stopping private schools from doing what they want to do regarding admission to college, but it seems to me that there should at least be a minimum standard for admission to public colleges and universities. I'm sure that many of these students are part of the group that need significant amounts of remediation when they arrive on campus.
And then there is the question of giving these students financial aid. Should we be offering financial assistance to those who di not even make full use of the "free" (not really, given the taxpayer burden, but free to them) educational opportunities thaty had on the high school level?
Posted by: Greg at
11:01 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 383 words, total size 2 kb.
Sadly, decency failed, and the resolution passed.
The 69,000-member National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education (NATFHE) voted to boycott Israeli academic professionals and institutions of higher learning unless they “dissociate themselves” from Israel’s “apartheid policy” in Judea and Samaria.The reactions to the decision were swift.
The British government at once released a statement condemning the move In an effort to contain the damage. A statement by Foreign and Commonwealth Office Minister Lord Triesman, the UK expressed its regrets and called the decision “counterproductive and retrograde”. Triesman was careful, however, to add, “We also recognize the independence of the NATFHE”.
Triesman served as deputy general secretary of the union in 1984. He also served as general secretary for the Association of University Teachers (AUT) trade union from 1993 to 2001.
Israel Education Minister Yuli Tamir slammed the NATFHE on the vote. She had already spoken last week with the British minister for higher education and asked him to step in to prevent the boycott. “The decision to boycott academic institutions is a move worthy of condemnation and revulsion,” she said. “Those who are implementing this boycott are harming academia’s freedom and turning it into a tool for political forces.”
In an appeal to the international community, NRP Knesset member Zevulun Orlev wrote to parliament members in Britain, France and Germany to demand they join with Israel in condemning the action. Orlev, chairman of the Knesset Science Committee, told his European counterparts, “This is a test of the free world. We expect you to condemn this anti-Semitic and racist decision and to help institutions of higher education in your countries tighten their cooperation with science, technology and higher education institutes in Israel.”
Professor Yehezkiel Teler, Vice Chairman of the Higher Education Council called the decision an echo of the Nazi boycott prior to World War II. “Now Britain is politicizing academia, in opposition to every academic value accepted in the world,” he said. “This will come back on them like a boomerang,” he predicted.
Haifa University, represented by its president, Aharon Ben Ze’ev also slammed the decision as a political move unbefitting an academic organization. “Any attempt to create ties between politics and academic research is simply McCarthyism,” he said.
Professor Yosef Yeshurun, the rector at Bar Ilan University, called the decision “negative”. He added that it “destroys bridges instead of building them”.
* * *
There were actually two motions which were voted on, both making reference to political issues involving relations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority.
The first called upon the NATFHE membership to help aid, protect and support PA institutions and universities, and to maintain ties with the PA. The first vote also accused Britain of “scandalous incitement” against Hamas, according to the Ynet news service report.
The second motion called for the boycott against “Israel’s persistent apartheid policy”. The new security fence was cited as part of the “apartheid policy”. In addition, the union leveled accusations of discriminatory practices in the education system.
Both motions were approved in a vote of 106 to 71 with 21 abstentions. In addition to boycotting Israeli institutions and academic professionals, union members will also no longer submit articles to Israeli research journals.
The group confirmed its anti-Semitism by failing to offer even a single word of condemnation directed at the campaign of murder conducted by Terrorstinian groups against innocent Israeli citizens. Perhaps at the next convention they will adopt a national student dress code requiring that members wear brown shirts and greet each other with a click of the heels and a straight-arm salute. It would be consistent with their resolution this year.
This boycott is reeks to high heaven.
I therefore renew my earlier statement about the proper response to this action by the NATFHE.
In the event this resolution passes, the United States needs to implement a policy of denying visas to all members of the National Association of Teachers in Further and Higher Education "who do not publicly dissociate themselves from" the group's anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist policies.
This is material support of terrorism, and it must not be permitted to stand.
MORE AT: Arkopolo, PaleoJudaica, Dutchblog Israel, Western Resistance, Solomonia, Adloyada, Freunde der offenen Gesellschaft, Step-by-Step, Engage, EclectEcon, Zionism on the Web, Gates of Vienna
Posted by: Greg at
05:48 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 764 words, total size 6 kb.
May 28, 2006
In effect, it argues against freedom of speech and press for students -- and does not consider the implications of its position.
Here is the scary part of the editorial.
On the other hand, should the school — which cannot comment on individual disciplinary cases — sit idle while one of its students humiliates it online? Certainly in the post-Columbine era, school officials have to be quick to react to any perceived threat. But does criticism, whether warranted or not, necessarily convey a threat?We think the school was right in suspending the student over the posts. Disciplinary action should be considered for anyone crossing the line with inappropriate language verbally or in print, at school or in the workplace. Standards have to be maintained.
Hold on -- is it the position of the Herald News that government entities may act to punish speakers or writers that "humiliate" it? Does this mean that a critical editorial in the Herald News or an article that casts government in an unflattering light could be grounds for official action against the newspaper -- perhaps an arrest and criminal charges? Do such words, which "humiliate" government, render them outside the protection of the First Amendment?
And then there is the other issue -- one that shows that the editorialist does not understand the situation at all. This is not a case of inappropiate language being used in the workplace or school. The blog was written and posted outside of school from a private computer in the student's home. There is no "at school" nexus -- except for the fact that the kid was writing about school. Is it the position of the Herald News that speech about governement entities has no First Amendment protection, regardless of wher it occurs? Sounds to me like the sort of stuff that saw John Peter Zenger tried by colonial authorities in the 1730s -- he libeled the government and its officials by printing unflattering information about them, and the fact that the information was true constituted an aggravating factor, not a mitigating one. Such attrocities were part of the reason for the adoption of the First Amendment.
Now I'm curious about something -- would the editorialist be taking the same position on the punishment of this student if the basis were a letter to the editor or guest column that appeared in its own pages? How about if it were comments quoted by one of its reporters in an article? How about an appearance on tlevision or radio? In short, does the Herald news feel that the medium of communication is what confers protection, not the words?
Posted by: Greg at
10:53 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 488 words, total size 3 kb.
May 24, 2006
A 17-year-old high school student who posted comments online about Plainfield School District 202 is facing expulsion because of his blog, his attorney said.After serving a 10-day suspension over his posting on Xanga.com, the teen is scheduled for a hearing Thursday on the matter, attorney Carl Buck said. The student is back in school but could be expelled and sent to an alternative school, Buck said.
"They are trying to terminate his educational rights," he said. "Neither the parents, student or I believe this warrants expulsion. This seems pretty aggressive for the kind of [posting] we are talking about here."
Now I'm the first to accept that certain sorts of off-campus speech can be grounds for discipline, but what are we talking about in this case? Fortunately, we can judge for ourselves.
On May 1, the student posted a letter to Plainfield School District on his blog site on www.xanga.com , telling off the district, using vulgar words and saying he could put whatever he wanted on his site.On a second post on May 2, without mentioning the school the student wrote:
"I feel threatened by you, I cant even have a public Web page with out you bullying me and telling me what has to be removed. Where is this freedom of speech that this government is sworn to uphold? ... did you stop to think that maybe this will make parents angry that you are bullying their children around? did you ever stop to think that maybe now you really are going to have a threat on your hands now that you have just pissed off kids for voicing their opinions? Did you ever stop to think this will start a community backlash? The kids at Columbine did what the did because they were bullied.
In my opinion you are the real threat here. None of us ever put in our xanga's that they were going to kill or bring harm to any one. We voiced our opinions. You are the real threat here. you are depriving us of our right to learn. now stick that in your pipe and smoke it."
Now I don't see a threat there. Do you? I don't see anything that merits a suspension, much less expulsion. What is the theory upon which this district is taking disciplinary action against this young man, since it is off campus speech on his own time from his own home, on a website that cannot be accesed from the school?
In a written statement, officials said they don't monitor student Web sites or look up postings unless they create a disturbance at school."When a posting creates a disturbance to the educational environment or threatens the safety and security of students or staff members, it is the responsibility of the school district to look into the matter," the statement said.
"The district respects the 1st Amendment rights of our students, but not all words can be categorized as protected speech."
Now that is a mighty broad criteria for monitoring and exerting control upon off-campus activity outside of school hours. I don't know what was in his friend's blog that led to his being disciplined and censored, but it is irrelevant to the action being taken against him. He voiced a pretty clear First Amendment argument from a libertarian perspective in the initial post on May 1 (LANGUAGE ALERT).
dear plainfield school district 202:i know you read this. and you suck. suspend me or what ever you would like to do. but this is my fuckin web site and i can put what ever i want on it. kinda goes with the first amendment. by suspending kyle again for his xanga you guys are pathetic and totally irrational. first amendment you fucks. freedom of speech. and who the fuck are you to say what some one can do from there own personal computer. one more thing kiss my ass.
edit: this one is for you, and yes i have drank it and yes it was delicious!(come get me)
His argument, while less articulate than I would like to see and too profanity-laced, is really quite straight-forward. Outside of school, students have First Amendment rights which must be respected by government officials -- and since they do not "surrender those rights at the schoolhouse gate" it is beyond the scope of school authorities to punish or prohibit that speech except in the most dire of circumstances. I don't see where this even begins to qualify as such a circumstance.
And the second post, which does refer to sanctions being imposed against students for posting about drug and alcohol use at student parties (the paper above editted that out) is probably wrong in asserting that the school has no authority to punish descriptions of illegal activity by students -- but they have that authority only to the degree that students are partcipating in extracurricular activities, and the punuishments can only extend to removal from those activities. But his reflection on bullying is dead on, as is his observation about the possibility of public backlash cause by the extension of school authority beyond the school building and school day and into student homes. His comment on Columbine is hardly sufficient to qualify as a threat, and without a threat there can be no reasonable basis for action.
Now the administration does claim the authority to punish a wide area of speech -- and I am frankly frightened by the scope of their claimed authority.
[Superintendent John] Harper said school districts across the state are having to deal with policy issues regarding Web sites like www.xanga.com . Many area schools, like Plainfield School District, are creating new guidelines for their student handbooks for next school year."Kids don't realize that if there is a connection with the school or has a potential of creating a disturbance to the school, they can be disciplined for it and they don't appreciate the personal threat to them for posting information on the Internet," Harper said. "It is our responsibility to educate kids and help them work through some of these issues."
Harper said students need to understand that the First Amendment does not give them "absolute authority to say whatever they want to say in any situation.
"The First Amendment doesn't give an individual the right to scream 'Fire' in a crowded theater and say that is protected by First Amendment rights," Harper said.
"Certainly things that are insulting to a school administrator or to a teacher are protected by the First Amendment rights," Harper continued. "We are looking at safety issues, potential disturbances to the school environment. Those are parameters, those are criteria we will look at when it comes to the issue.
"If we do have a student using inappropriate language on a Web site it is not our business. If they write obscenities in regards to one of our staff members that is grossly obscene, we feel that we would have the right to take action in that kind of case," Harper said.
I'm flabbergasted. First, he trots out the "fire in a crowded theater" analogy -- but then seems to extend it to any speech that the school dislikes on the basis that it could cause a disruption. Does this include a letter to the editor about the school? Would it include an interview by a television station? How about a call to a local talk radio station about events at school. It seem that the definition of "disruption" is "anything that paints the school in a bad light." And while there may be some extreme instances in which a school could act against a student who was grossly disrespectful to a teacher or administrator, it would probably have to be so extreme as to violate provisions of criminal or civil law before the school could act on such speech if it was engaged in off campus. So while Harper claims that he isn't out to control all off campus speech (ore even all off campus internet speech), I think the clear implication of his statement is that the school claims jurisdiction ofver all student speech which comes to its attention, whether it is speech at school or speech away from school.
Schools are supposed to prepare our students for life in a free and democratic society, one in which government is limited and citizens have broad rights to speak and write as they see fit, even if it criticizes or offends public officials. I therefore urge the Plainfield district to rethink its gross abrogation of the constitutional liberties of its students.
And I urge the student, who goes by the handle Heckler3672bro, to write a thank you note to Superintendent Harper and his building administrators for the college scholarship money that he will be receiving from the district following the conclusion of his lawsuit against the district.
OPEN TRACKBACKING TO: Free Constitution, Blue Star Chronicles, Bacon Bits, Conservative Cat, Freedom Watch, Stop The ACLU, Stuck on Stupid
Posted by: Greg at
02:05 PM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1551 words, total size 10 kb.
May 23, 2006
Keller school district officials are hoping to clear up a flap over a school yearbook cover by issuing an apology to parents.A letter from Superintendent James Veitenheimer was sent Monday to parents of students at Liberty Elementary School in Colleyville. The same letter was e-mailed over the weekend, officials said.
The superintendent said "we would like to express our regrets for any distress" resulting from the cover photo of the newly minted Liberty Nickel without the words "In God We Trust."
* * *
District officials said the photo could have been used in its entirety without violating district policy."While it is always easy to look back on campus decisions in hindsight and agree that a different decision could have been made, our principals often find themselves on the front lines of issues regarding the separation of church and state," Dr. Veitenheimer's letter said. "In most of these cases, school administrators find themselves making decisions that are not going to please all parties involved.
"Unfortunately, the decision at Liberty Elementary School fell into this category," the letter said.
This was the sort of decision that any competent administrator could have made without too much trouble – the censorship of incidental references to religion is not necessary, especially when it comes to reproducing works of art or US currency and there is no intent to engage in religious proselytism. And if he was not sure, a quick call to the district’s lawyer could have settled the matter.
But he principal decided to knuckle under to the PC urgings of a couple of parents, and the district decided to be “sensitive” by shielding kids from exposure to the same coinage they bring to school to buy their lunches. What cowardice!
Posted by: Greg at
11:21 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 350 words, total size 2 kb.
A spring term that began with controversy at the University of St. Thomas ended the same way Saturday when a student used part of his commencement address to admonish people he considered "selfish," including women who use birth control.The remarks by Ben Kessler, a well-known student recently honored by peers and faculty as Tommie of the Year, led to catcalls and boos during commencement at the Catholic university in St. Paul. Others booed those who were booing. Some students walked out on their own graduation ceremony.
Buzz about the incident dominated post-graduation parties, spread throughout the community and sparked a flurry of e-mails. By Monday, there were scattered requests to strip Kessler of his Tommie of the Year award and questions about why St. Thomas officials didn't try to pull the plug on Kessler's speech as the crowd's unhappiness intensified.
"He definitely ruined the day for pretty much everyone in the audience," said Darin Aus, who was awarded his bachelor's degree Saturday and stayed for the entire ceremony. "He made people mad enough to leave their own graduation."
Kessler, a celebrated football player with a deep Catholic faith, apologized Monday in a written statement distributed by the university.
"Instead of providing hope to all, I offended some by my words and by my decision to speak those words at commencement," he wrote.
He was unavailable for comment beyond the statement.
The university's president, the Rev. Dennis Dease, also expressed regret "that graduates and their families and guests were offended by Mr. Kessler's remarks." Dease said he told Kessler it was inappropriate for him to use commencement to express his opinions.
The problem is, what he said didn’t just express his opinions – they also expressed the teachings of Catholic Church.
I guess Father Dennis Dease is one of those priests who doesnÂ’t think the last four popes should have expressed their opinions on the issue of birth control, either.
I guess this is jus one more example of folks thinking that the expression of conservative or traditional or Christian viewpoints on a college campus is wrong, while the expression of secular liberalism is to be celebrated.
Even if the venue is a school allegedly founded and operating on Christian values.
I, for one, applaud Ben Kessler for standing up for Catholic teachings at a Catholic school – even if the administrators are too lukewarm in their faith to do so.
Posted by: Greg at
11:20 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 443 words, total size 3 kb.
Illegal or inappropriate blogging or social behavior over the Internet is now a violation of District 128's student code of conduct at both Libertyville and Vernon Hills High Schools and can lead to denial of extracurricular student privileges.The board of education of Community High School District 128 approved the revision Monday night without dissent before a packed house of media, parents and students at Vernon Hills High School. It is one of the first such school board policies in Illinois to address some of the risque social mores students frequently encounter when surfing Internet blogs and various Web sites designed to attract children.
Like many other schools, the district requires a certain standard of conduct from students in order to participate in athletics, fine arts or extracurricular activities. Signatures from both a student and parent bind them to honor the Student Code of Conduct. Nearly 80 percent of the district's 3,200 students are involved in one or more of these extracurricular activities.
The newly amended policy approved Monday night consists of a simple sentence. It reads: "Maintaining or being identified on a blog site which depicts illegal or inappropriate behavior will be considered a violation of this code."
Now letÂ’s look at some potential problems here.
“Being identified on” someone’s website is now an offense, based entirely on what the other content is found on the site. Now this is entirely beyond one’s control – and this policy does not make an exception for “being identified on” a site when one is in no way connected with the illegal or inappropriate behavior depicted elsewhere on the site.
The definition of “inappropriate” is frighteningly vague. Does this mean the expression of opinions and positions not endorsed by the school administration is now the basis for disciplinary action if those officials consider such dissent to be “inappropriate”? What about discussions of and reflections upon experiences at school – comments on the personalities of teachers and classmates, or criticism of the quality of the education being received? Are such comments “inappropriate” blogging? Since I went to high school just a couple of miles down the road from Libertyville High School and also spent my seminary years in the area, I know that many folks might consider the legal possession and use of firearms by a minor to be “inappropriate” – would pictures of a student with his legal firearms be considered “inappropriate”? I won’t even get into the question of profane language or the sort of provocative photos some photos some ditzy teens post on MySpace or Facebook. Are these really school issues – even as regards extracurricular activities? After all, these restrictions clearly have the potential to implicate the First Amendment.
So I’ll throw this one out to you folks – what do you think on this issue? Is the board up in Libertyville making good policy, or is it crossing a line into a place where school boards ought not go?
Posted by: Greg at
11:18 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 517 words, total size 3 kb.
May 22, 2006
A few students turned their backs but more stood to applaud as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice received an honorary degree and addressed graduates at Boston College on Monday.After weeks of turmoil and anti-war protests over Rice's invitation to address the Catholic school, Rice told graduates that their education comes with responsibilities.
She drew scattered applause when she discussed what she called a "commitment to reason," or an obligation to test and challenge their own views.
"There is nothing wrong with holding an opinion and holding it passionately," Rice said, "but at those times when you are absolutely sure you're right, go find someone who disagrees."
About 50 students stood with their backs toward the stage as Rice was introduced to give her commencement speech, but they were quickly drowned out by a standing ovation.
A half-dozen signs that said "Not in my name" were held in the air by students, who sat down by the time Rice started to speak. One banner that said "BC honors lies and torture" was held on the side of the stadium, away from where the students were sitting.
Other students cheered Rice, and an Internet broadcast of the ceremony included a shot of a student, talking on his cell phone, with an "I Like Condi" button pinned to his graduation cap.
I think the Secretary of State put it well when she commented on the potential for protest before the graduation itself.
"People have the right to protest, but I hope when they protest they realize also that people now have a right to protest in Baghdad and Kabul, and that's a very big breakthrough for the international community," Rice said Monday before the BC commencement."I think it's just fine for people to protest as long as they do so in a way that doesn't try to have a monopoly on the conversation," Rice told WBZ-AM in an interview. "Others have right to say what they think as well."
I think those who attended today’s graduation showed they understand the values of America in their response to her speech. We can listen to those with whom we disagree with respect, and honor their right to express their thoughts and views. There is a time and a place for speak dissenting words, and a manner for appropriately expressing opposition to the views of another. It seems that the students of Boston College understand that, even as the graduates of New York’s New School proved that they missed that part of their education with their uncouth reception of Senator John McCain – and their own school’s president, former Senator Bob Kerrey.
Posted by: Greg at
04:23 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 491 words, total size 4 kb.
A Keller school district parent said political correctness has run amok at her daughter's elementary school, where the principal chose to omit the words "In God We Trust" from an oversize coin depicted on the yearbook cover.Janet Travis, principal of Liberty Elementary School in Colleyville, wanted to avoid offending students of different religions, a district spokesman said. Students were given stickers with the words that could be affixed to the book if they so chose.
What exactly was it about this image that was so offensive – after all, each and every student probably has at least one of these in a pocket or piggy bank – and the school probably gives tehm as change.
Officials chose an image of an enlarged nickel for the yearbook cover because this is Liberty Elementary's first year and because the nickel has a new design this year.The nickel design features President Jefferson and the word Liberty in cursive, with the words "In God We Trust" along the right edge.
Keller administrators agreed with the decision, which Travis made in conjunction with a school parents group, district spokesman Jason Meyer said. District policy states, in part: "The District shall take no action respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech."
Principals must strive to remain neutral regarding religion, Meyer said.
Oh, please! An accurate depiction of United States coinage has now been deemed to be offensive by school officials in Keller, Texas. That is nuts!
The ACLU, of course, thinks this is just great.
Michael Linz, a Dallas attorney with the American Civil Liberties Union, said the district's move was appropriate, sensitive and constitutional."Sometimes administrators and schools are really caught trying to make appropriate decisions with respect to people's views. Someone is always going to complain," he said. "I think that the school administrators were drawing the appropriate line by trying not to offend others."
Presumably this clown would find it appropriate to forbid carrying US currency on campus, for fear that some little kid might spy the dreaded “G word” on a coin or bill.
Common sense will not, of course, ever be permitted to prevail – after all, that isn’t “sensitive”.
Posted by: Greg at
04:16 PM
| Comments (85)
| Add Comment
Post contains 427 words, total size 3 kb.
When graduating senior Jed Michal told his classmates Sunday to treat each day as though it were their last, he spoke from experience.The leukemia patient gave his valedictorian's speech via teleconference from his hospital room at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, where he is recovering from a bone-marrow transplant.
"Everything we are and become is not what happens to us — it's what we do with the hand life deals us," said Michal, 19, as he faced a televised image of his classmates back home in Colorado. "Live each day as if it is your last. After all, it may very well be."
Fighting leukemia for more than two years, Michal underwent the transplant a week ago, using marrow from his 25-year-old brother. He became valedictorian of his class of 19 students at Flagler High School in east Colorado despite missing nearly his entire junior year due to his illness.
He hopes to leave the hospital next month, move back to Colorado this fall and begin studying agricultural business at Colorado State University in January.
IÂ’m already willing to bet that this young man will fulfill his wildest dreams.
Congratulations, Jed.
Posted by: Greg at
04:15 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 1 kb.
May 18, 2006
A child custody battle between a former Strongsville High School substitute teacher and her former student lover is now over.Christine Scarlett, 39, will share custody with the father of her 2-year-old son, former Strongsville football captain Steven Bradigan.
The two had an affair when Bradigan was still a 17-year-old high school student.
Scarlett's lawyer Eric Laubacher said the two put their differences aside and did what's best for their son. He said he doesn't believe criminal charges will be filed against Scarlett.
School officials fired Scarlett when they found out about the affair.
Two questions.
First, why is this child being left in the custody of a known sex offender when the father was willing to take custody? I see no reason the judge should have accepted the arrangement.
Second, why is this sex offender not in jail – and deemed unlikely ever to be charged?
Rest assured that if this wee a male teacher and a female student, the pervert in question would be doing hard time.
Posted by: Greg at
11:51 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 178 words, total size 1 kb.
May 17, 2006
Steve White, a political candidate and eighth grade teacher, was dismissed from his position late Tuesday night after an investigation found he showed videos with sex acts, nudity and other obscene images to students.“I think the evidence was clear,” said Dr. Barry Carroll, superintendent of Limestone County Schools, who recommended the Board of Education cancel White’s contract following the hearing.
During a two-week-long investigation in April, Carroll said pornographic material was found in WhiteÂ’s computer and administrators determined that White was showing videos rather than teaching science in his class at West Limestone High School.
White was placed on paid administrative leave April 7. Some of the students who were interviewed following the allegations on April 10 testified during Tuesday nightÂ’s hearing.
* * *
In a copy of the letter Carroll sent White on April 24 informing him of his intention to recommend canceling his contract, Carroll listed reasons for termination as “incompetency, insubordination, neglect of duty, immorality and failure to perform duties in a satisfactory manner or other good and just cause.”
Here is the list of reasons Carroll gave White in the letter:
1. Mr. White lets students watch videos and computer images in his classroom rather than engage in teaching;2. Mr. White shows videos and computer images to his students which are inappropriate to be shown at school and inappropriate for the age of the students.
3. Mr. White has shown students in his class videos and computer images with sexual themes.
4. Mr. White has shown students in his class computer images purporting to show a former president and his wife engaged in sexual activity;
5. Mr. White has shown members of his class computer and video images showing an older lady answering questions relating to sex and other subjects using profanity. (EditorÂ’s note: According to a student, these were clips of The Fruitcake Lady, a character shown on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.)
6. Mr. White has shown students in his class a computer image of a girl exposing her breast;
7. Rather than teach science, Mr. White shows students videos and computer images;
8. In violation of school board policy IFBG-A., Mr. White has used his computer to access Internet sites or programs which are offensive and otherwise not suitable or proper for use in the Limestone County School system;
9. Mr. White, in violation of school board policy, has pornographic images on his computer;
10. Mr. White has shown students computer images of a girl with a can of beer and a cigarette.
It is unclear to me precisely which charges wee determined to be true in the hearing, which White requested be closed to the public. His attorney indicates that there will be an appeal.
Posted by: Greg at
11:57 AM
| Comments (43)
| Add Comment
Post contains 479 words, total size 3 kb.
May 16, 2006
Findings
The conclusions of the investigative committee that examined seven allegations of research misconduct against University of Colorado ethnic studies professor Ward Churchill:Charge A: That Churchill misrepresented the General Allotment Act of 1887 in his writings by incorrectly writing that it created a "blood quantum" standard that allowed tribes to admit members only if they had at least half native blood.
Finding: Falsification, failure to comply with established standards regarding author names on publications.Charge B: That Churchill misrepresented the Indian Arts and Crafts Act of 1990 by incorrectly writing that the act imposed a "blood quantum" requiring artists to prove they were one-quarter Indian by blood.
Finding: Falsification, failure to comply with established standards regarding author names on publications.Charge C: That Churchill incorrectly claimed there was "some pretty strong circumstantial evidence" that Capt. John Smith introduced smallpox among the Wampanoag Indians between 1614-1618.
Finding: Falsification and fabrication.Charge D: That in several writings Churchill falsely accused the U.S. Army of committing genocide by distributing blankets infested with smallpox to Mandan Indians in the Upper Missouri River Valley in 1837.
Finding: Falsification, fabrication, failure to comply with established standards regarding author names on publications, and serious deviation from accepted practices in reporting results from research. The committee also found that Churchill was "disrespectful of Indian oral tradition."Charge E: That Churchill claimed as his own work a 1972 pamphlet about a water-diversion scheme in Canada titled "The Water Plot." The work actually was written by a now-defunct environmental group, "Dam the Dams."
Finding: Plagiarism.Charge F: That Churchill plagiarized part of an essay written by Rebecca L. Robbins in a book he published in 1993.
Finding: No misconductCharge G: That Churchill plagiarized the writings of Canadian professor Fay G. Cohen in a 1992 essay.
Finding: Plagiarism.
While three of the panel members believe that the misconduct rises to the level at which termination might be justified, the panel offered a 4-1 recommendation in favor of a 5-year suspension. I would argue that such a suspension is insufficient, and that the higher penalty must be invoked in order to establish the seriousness of the misconduct and the importance of intellectual and academic honesty in the context of academic freedom.
I would also note that the charges in question have NOTHING to do with the inflammatory statements made regarding the victims of the 9/11 terrorist acts – they have to do with serious violations of scholarly standards and ethics. That is as it should be.
Posted by: Greg at
10:42 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 435 words, total size 3 kb.
May 15, 2006
Six Northern Kentucky University students could see charges of dismantling an anti-abortion display dismissed if they complete community service under a deal offered by prosecutors.But prosecutors didn't offer that deal to Sally Jacobsen, the NKU literature professor involved in the April 12 incident.
Jacobsen is charged with criminal solicitation. Police said she encouraged students in one of her classes to destroy the display, which consisted of rows of about 400 white crosses. Jacobsen and the six students also were charged with criminal mischief and theft by unlawful taking.
A student Right to Life group put up the display, saying it represented aborted fetuses.
Jacobsen's attorney, Margo Grubbs, entered a plea of not guilty on her behalf Thursday in Campbell District Court, and a new court date was set for May 23.
The six students appeared before District Judge Karen Thomas but did not enter pleas. Thomas said charges would be dismissed if they completed a diversion program, which typically consists of community service.Assistant County Attorney Rick Woeste said that based on the evidence so far, Jacobsen played a different role because she was the teacher.
Jacobsen abused her role as a teacher – she merits different treatment than her students.
Posted by: Greg at
09:35 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 226 words, total size 2 kb.
May 13, 2006
Racism:The systematic subordination of members of targeted racial groups who have relatively little social power in the United States (Blacks, Latino/as, Native Americans, and Asians), by the members of the agent racial group who have relatively more social power (Whites). The subordination is supported by the actions of individuals, cultural norms and values, and the institutional structures and practices of society.
So when your little white child is assaulted by a gang of black or Hispanic kids because he is white, it isn't an act of racism. When a white teacher is targetted for firing by a group of minority parents who shout "discrimination" because he or she has high expectations for students, it isn't an act of racism. And when a teacher calls another teacher a "cracker bitch" because of a disagreement over material to use in the following year's curriculum, it was not an act of racism.
On the other hand, a gang of white kids beating up a minority child, white parents objecting to a minority teacher, or a racial slur directed at a minority teacher are all acts of racism and will be treated as such.
I guess some animals really are more equal than others in Seattle. It is all a matter of the color of one's skin, not the content of one's character.
I wonder what federal law and the US Constitution have to say about such race-based politcies and practices? Or is "equal protection of the law" a culturally racist construct that needs to be eliminated in the name of "Equity and Race Relations".
(H/T AndrewsDad, Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Posted by: Greg at
04:12 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 332 words, total size 2 kb.
79 queries taking 0.3162 seconds, 943 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
