While Hogwarts certainly has the appeal of towering spires, talking paintings, and petrified knights to compete with, there is an equal amount of magic happening in the home of the Windsor Wizards.
As I strolled through the hallowed hallways of WHS the other day, I experienced something that no sorcerer – no matter their strength and wisdom – could have possibly conjured up with the flick of their wand. I noticed a student – a sophomore at that – who was reading something quite familiar to me. He held a copy of “World Train” before him and his eyes raced back and forth across the page, mesmerized by the adventure he had come to discover. Now, being only my second week on the job, I’ve been unable to introduce my books and the stories they weave.
I leaned down next to him and our conversation went as thus:
MD: What’cha reading?
SQUASHMORE: Oh. It’s called “World Train”.
MD: Huh…what’s it about?
SQUASHMORE: This guy that dies and wakes up in Hell. He has to fight Death and Satan to get out and then the world gets flooded. He’s trying to find his way to heaven. It’s really cool. I wish they would make books like this into movies.
MD: That does sound really cool. Did you pick it up at Barnes & Noble?
SQUASHMORE: No. Online.
MD: Oh. That’s cool. I’ll have to see if I can find it.
SQUASHMORE: For sure. I think there’s gonna be another one.
MD: Nice.
At that point, I stood up and walked away with a smile on my face. For a second, I wondered if what I just did was a jerk move (for not telling him who I was or signing his book), or if it was just plain badass on my part. I got to my office, sat down in my chair, put my hands above my head and it was clear…that was badass. Straight up. How many other people get to do something like that in their lifetimes? Besides, I figure before the end of the school year, I’ll see the little squashmore again and I’ll make an effort to get his name and chat with him without revealing my identity. Come the end of the year, he’ll get a nice surprise signature in his yearbook. I think it makes for a better story in the end – something that he’ll remember forever and that’s what it’s about. We both end up feelin’ like we’re on Cloud 9, and we both end up with an awesome memory to boot.
And just in case you find my blog squashmore, rest assured…there’s definitely another one coming :)
Friday, August 26, 2011
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Reality is stranger than fiction...
Alright, so I haven’t blogged in a while. And I apologize to all of my readers out there…but as any true geek knows, it’s never too late to bust out a handy phoenix down to bring life back to that which has been slain and cold for quite some time.
Since my last post, I’ve published two novels (“World Train: Beginning” & “Snapshots to Bliss”) and instructed countless students on the basics, struggles, and eventual successes in writing. One of the most common questions I get as an author is: ‘Where do you get your ideas from?’ The simple answer would be: from the world around me – but simply put…the simple answer is shallow and stupid. When an author is asked that question, he or she should know that the person asking the question wants something more than that. They want a revelation – they want something magical and inspiring…something that convinces them that they can be the next Stephen King or JK Rowling themselves. But what the person asking the question doesn’t realize is that the trick in being a “good” writer comes in realizing that the real world in which we live in every day is far more bizarre and far-fetched than the ogres, spaceships, wizards, vampires, and werewolves that we read about in the world of books.
This past spring, I discovered that my significant other had been living these different lives for the majority of our 10-year relationship. She had at least six rectified (sorry, terrible pun there :p) affairs of five or more months behind my back and countless one night stands to be sure. She got other men to divorce their wives for her and then left them. She made promises to not only me but of course to all the other guys she was sleeping with. She covered everything up with lies upon lies. The way the mutual therapist we had both been seeing explained it to me was that she suffered from multiple personality disorder due to the inability to understand her true identity. She would put on these different “masks” (if you will) around different people and in different situations. It was hard to hear, but the therapist explained that I had fallen in love with a mask, and not a person. I’ve been generous in describing the situation, leaving out all of the confessions she made, the money she stole, the pregnancies she aborted, and of course the way it all went down, but there’s a reason I bring all of this up. While going through the initial shock of it all, one of my good friends reminded me that ‘truth is always stranger than fiction’. And my friend is absolutely right. You can turn on the news almost every day and wonder how certain things can happen in the world, or how certain people could even think of doing such things. You can wonder all day where the wiring in someone’s brain went funny, but it’ll never change the fact of what they did regardless of how little sense it seems to make. In fiction – while it is a medium that is completely fabricated – a writer needs to be aware of the line between believability and the mere ridiculousness that will turn their readers off. Is this line in a different place for different writers? Sure, I think it would be silly to argue that it wasn’t. The more one works within the realm of fiction, the further out that line gets. But the important thing to remember as a writer, is that there is a line somewhere in fiction that stops far before the reality of the world in which we live. I know, I know…most of the writers out there (especially young writers) wouldn’t hesitate to challenge this. It’s an easy argument to make: ‘because you can make up whatever you want in fiction, one can go way beyond the limitations of reality’. True, buuuuuuuut…as strange as it sounds, the fiction you write – even if it has wyverns and warlocks – has to still be believable to that line. In reality, we are always faced with thoughts, events, and situations that will never make any sense to us regardless of how much we try to think about them. We are forced to accept the bizarre things that happen in the world around us because we know it is reality. However, we are not forced to accept the bizarre things that happen in a fictional world, and that’s where a lot of young writers fail. They put together something they feel is a masterpiece, yet they lose their readers and they wonder why. They begin to question if they are even a good writer or not, and to be honest, I’ve worked with wonderful writers – writers abundant with talent. Most times with fiction, it doesn’t have anything to do with whether you write well or not, it has to do with this issue of believability – this imaginary line in our craft.
So hopefully this gives you a little more insight to the generic author answer for getting their ideas from the world around them. It’s counterintuitive, but understanding that the boundaries are far greater in reality than they are in fiction is a very important step for any aspiring writer to make.
Since my last post, I’ve published two novels (“World Train: Beginning” & “Snapshots to Bliss”) and instructed countless students on the basics, struggles, and eventual successes in writing. One of the most common questions I get as an author is: ‘Where do you get your ideas from?’ The simple answer would be: from the world around me – but simply put…the simple answer is shallow and stupid. When an author is asked that question, he or she should know that the person asking the question wants something more than that. They want a revelation – they want something magical and inspiring…something that convinces them that they can be the next Stephen King or JK Rowling themselves. But what the person asking the question doesn’t realize is that the trick in being a “good” writer comes in realizing that the real world in which we live in every day is far more bizarre and far-fetched than the ogres, spaceships, wizards, vampires, and werewolves that we read about in the world of books.
This past spring, I discovered that my significant other had been living these different lives for the majority of our 10-year relationship. She had at least six rectified (sorry, terrible pun there :p) affairs of five or more months behind my back and countless one night stands to be sure. She got other men to divorce their wives for her and then left them. She made promises to not only me but of course to all the other guys she was sleeping with. She covered everything up with lies upon lies. The way the mutual therapist we had both been seeing explained it to me was that she suffered from multiple personality disorder due to the inability to understand her true identity. She would put on these different “masks” (if you will) around different people and in different situations. It was hard to hear, but the therapist explained that I had fallen in love with a mask, and not a person. I’ve been generous in describing the situation, leaving out all of the confessions she made, the money she stole, the pregnancies she aborted, and of course the way it all went down, but there’s a reason I bring all of this up. While going through the initial shock of it all, one of my good friends reminded me that ‘truth is always stranger than fiction’. And my friend is absolutely right. You can turn on the news almost every day and wonder how certain things can happen in the world, or how certain people could even think of doing such things. You can wonder all day where the wiring in someone’s brain went funny, but it’ll never change the fact of what they did regardless of how little sense it seems to make. In fiction – while it is a medium that is completely fabricated – a writer needs to be aware of the line between believability and the mere ridiculousness that will turn their readers off. Is this line in a different place for different writers? Sure, I think it would be silly to argue that it wasn’t. The more one works within the realm of fiction, the further out that line gets. But the important thing to remember as a writer, is that there is a line somewhere in fiction that stops far before the reality of the world in which we live. I know, I know…most of the writers out there (especially young writers) wouldn’t hesitate to challenge this. It’s an easy argument to make: ‘because you can make up whatever you want in fiction, one can go way beyond the limitations of reality’. True, buuuuuuuut…as strange as it sounds, the fiction you write – even if it has wyverns and warlocks – has to still be believable to that line. In reality, we are always faced with thoughts, events, and situations that will never make any sense to us regardless of how much we try to think about them. We are forced to accept the bizarre things that happen in the world around us because we know it is reality. However, we are not forced to accept the bizarre things that happen in a fictional world, and that’s where a lot of young writers fail. They put together something they feel is a masterpiece, yet they lose their readers and they wonder why. They begin to question if they are even a good writer or not, and to be honest, I’ve worked with wonderful writers – writers abundant with talent. Most times with fiction, it doesn’t have anything to do with whether you write well or not, it has to do with this issue of believability – this imaginary line in our craft.
So hopefully this gives you a little more insight to the generic author answer for getting their ideas from the world around them. It’s counterintuitive, but understanding that the boundaries are far greater in reality than they are in fiction is a very important step for any aspiring writer to make.
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Academia's Gates
On January 19th, classes for the 2010 Spring semester at Colorado State University began. For some, this generates enthusiasm as academic life wakes from its frosty four-week slumber. For others, while the temperatures are low and snow seems to grow, Winter Break has come to a close far too quickly and the beckoning of school can be likened to an everlasting annoyance that seems to never go away. For myself, a graduate student on the cusp of breaking free from the "institution" with my Masters in hand in May, there are neither feelings of excitement nor annoyance, yet there are both. The fact that my graduation looms in a mere three months and change seems almost unreal when considering my life has been lived mostly within the context of school. Yet, there is a very real feeling, an acknowledgement of the unrelenting, mostly repulsive, and raw world awaiting me outside of academia's gates. While the first step I take after being handed my degree will undoubtedley be filled with a nurtuting replenishment of strength, confidence, and relief, student loan collectors and a large unemployment pool will await me at my second step. While scholars such as Linda Brodkey and Donna LeCourt acknowledge the fact that class difference does exist and is created by those who are educated, and those who are not, it is important to remember the mantras of those who don't give a damn. The high school dropouts, homeless drunks, and drug dealers of the world still understand that education cannot protect anyone from bullets, corruption, and sickness...just some of the elements that lurk just outside of the sanctuary of school and knowledge. So while earning my Masters degree will mark an unprecedented and remarkable achievement in regard to my own life considering the things I've been through, it is important to keep such an accomplishment in an appropriate perspective. Will my degree transform me into Superman? Will it allow me to walk on water and part the Red Sea? No. My degree will be a perishable, paper representation documenting the journey of my previous three years. The knowledge represented by that paper is but a tool in which to navigate the mysterious, thick fog of life which awaits after graduation. So should I be excited? Or aprehensive? Perhaps both. I will undoubtedley celebrate my graduation with a party and a few friends. I will undoubtedley walk on a sunny May day with a great feeling of satisfaction and pride. But I will also undoubtedley acknowledge the upcoming events as just one of the many steps in a seemingly unending, yet inevitably ending, path of life. The sun will one day set on my life, but rise on yet another's who approaches the great gates of academia.
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
"Busy"
Okay, so I haven't blogged since before Obama was elected President. I really want to make up an excuse. Got lost at the Super Bowl - sounds kinda boring, besides, only rich people who don't really like football go to the Super Bowl. Perhaps I fell into the dwarven kingdom and was put on an express to an ogre bank where humans are treated and traded as currency. Er, sounds a little too Harry Potterish. Lazy? Um, no scratch that. Forgetfu...wait. "Busy". That's right. I like that word. It can mean so much, and yet, it can mean nothing at all. Side note: I saw on my brother's facebook of all places the other day that "ain't nobody = somebody". If you think about it, I guess that's right.
Seriously though, I spent the Spring semester doing my student teaching for CSU. I was placed at Poudre High School (was strange at first because I went to Rocky a lifetime ago - lucky for those Impalas, I never really had Lobo pride to begin with) and inherited 3 World Literature classes to teach. I'll be honest, at first, I was not enthusiastic about teaching a bunch of 10th graders. I wanted seniors, or at the very least, juniors...just not sophomores. I had the perception that they were kind of like a nasty piece of gum that sticks to the bottom of your shoe - annoying, germ-ridden, and clingy. Kind of like the kid, Timmy, from Jurassic Park - anybody remember him? Put simply: In the end, my perception couldn't have been more wrong.
Of my 3 classes, I got a good mix. I would soon deem my 6th hour class "remedial English" (to friends and family) after the first couple of weeks due to the grotesque amount of testosterone, ankle monitors, court orders, swear words, and damaged brain cells present in the class room. Not everyone in the class was like that though - I had a couple of students who helped me keep my sanity. My 8th hour were a group of angels in comparison. They were never rude or obscene, they loved to chime in and participate, and they all had glowing personalities that I will never forget. My 3rd hour class was between the two, a good medium of everything. You had your trouble-causers, but there were also those eager to learn as well.
When I first began teaching, I knew that I had to "win them over" - I NEEDED students to know that I was cool (er, not like the other teachers they had in a good way). I NEEDED them to know that we had a common ground that related my teaching with their individual lives and the things that they REALLY cared about. I think back to all of the silly (how kind of me to use that adjective lol) education classes I took prior to student teaching, and one of the pillars of teaching knowledge they try to force you to build a foundation of technique and style upon is: 'never develop personal relationships with students'. This stems from society's unfortunate fear of teachers sleeping with students which in a media-crazed age has come to the forefront more than ever. I'm not saying that it doesn't happen, but we are kind of seeing a Red Scare effect in the world of education because of it. Teachers are unfairly judged by student's parents, administrators, and the public in general in regard to the student-teacher relationship. It's to the point where they (the universities / education departments and programs) are trying to train future teachers how to give generic feedback / compliments in grading. Really? 'Good job Jimmy!' 'Really loved your essay Sarah!' Etc. The reasoning? To quote a seminar instructor I once had at CSU: 'If you give individualized feedback, a student could read it the wrong way and you could have a potential lawsuit on your hands.' Sad. "The Red Scare of Education" in action. Back to my student teaching, I threw this advice and training out the window. I thought back to my high school years and what I really remembered. I remembered Mr. Speer, I remembered Mr. Ballain, Ms. Tappendorf, Mr. Michowski, Mrs. Serrano, Ms. Carpenter...I'm sure I learned stuff - material, but the specific things I remembered were the mentors, the teachers who made a difference in my life. Was I at Poudre to teach material? Sure, but I was there to be a role model first. I was there to be a mentor because kids these days don't have enough good ones if any at all (coincidentally my graduate thesis is on this very subject ;p). So how was I going to do this? Develop individualized relationships with the students. Build trust and respect. Then teach. Even my 6th hour class whom my match-up teacher (that had given me his classroom) was at a loss at how to get them to respond to anything. 75% of 6th hour had 'F's when I took over. Only one student had above a 'D'. By the time I finished my student teaching roughly 25% of the class had an 'F' or a 'D', and this wasn't because I gave out "freebies" or were easier on their grading; on the contrary I was admittedly tougher on them grading-wise compared to my 3rd and 8th hour classes. They responded to my teaching because they respected me as a human being and I respected them back. At the end of the year, I had an assignment where students were to write a good-bye letter to me and tell me what they liked the best about my class and what kind of suggestions they had for improvement in my teaching for future students. 1 of 96 students gave constructive criticism regarding what I should do differently (don't rock back and forth when listening to students speak). The rest said 'don't change anything, you're my favorite teacher' or some variation thereof. I don't say this to toot my own horn as much as I say it as criticism on the way the current education system is structured and the way in which education training is being taught to future teachers. Teachers are being trained to be more-or-less drones that vomit up information from textbooks than anything else. We should be encouraging students to be free-thinkers instead of memorizing zombies. We need to show them that it is okay to be who you want to be, not what society and cliques and education says you should be. We - teachers - need to learn how to be role models and mentors ourselves because that is what the students of tomorrow need more than anything else. I went back to visit my classes a few weeks after student teaching was over (at the end of their school year) and at the end of the day, my match-up teacher took me aside and said: 'they love you, man. I don't know what you did or how you did it, but they love you.' Simple. Show them that you do care about them on an individual level. Be genuine. Give them respect. Smile. Celebrate them. One of my tougher students in 6th hour (been to jail multiple times, and has major problems with male authority) wrote the following verbatim for the good-bye letter assignment (he wanted me to keep it and this is only the end part of it): 'I wish I could have known you a long time ago. You're the only teacher that tells me I have good style when I use the word 'fuck' in my writing. I wish you weren't going because this class is going to be really boring without you. I don't even know if I will come anymore. Thank you for being so cool. You're the only person that has ever made me believe in myself.' He had a 43% in the class when I began teaching. I told him to stick it out for the last three weeks after I was gone. He showed up every day and ended the year with an 85.4%. The last sentence for the assignment, he says PERSON, not teacher. Students need role models.
Seriously though, I spent the Spring semester doing my student teaching for CSU. I was placed at Poudre High School (was strange at first because I went to Rocky a lifetime ago - lucky for those Impalas, I never really had Lobo pride to begin with) and inherited 3 World Literature classes to teach. I'll be honest, at first, I was not enthusiastic about teaching a bunch of 10th graders. I wanted seniors, or at the very least, juniors...just not sophomores. I had the perception that they were kind of like a nasty piece of gum that sticks to the bottom of your shoe - annoying, germ-ridden, and clingy. Kind of like the kid, Timmy, from Jurassic Park - anybody remember him? Put simply: In the end, my perception couldn't have been more wrong.
Of my 3 classes, I got a good mix. I would soon deem my 6th hour class "remedial English" (to friends and family) after the first couple of weeks due to the grotesque amount of testosterone, ankle monitors, court orders, swear words, and damaged brain cells present in the class room. Not everyone in the class was like that though - I had a couple of students who helped me keep my sanity. My 8th hour were a group of angels in comparison. They were never rude or obscene, they loved to chime in and participate, and they all had glowing personalities that I will never forget. My 3rd hour class was between the two, a good medium of everything. You had your trouble-causers, but there were also those eager to learn as well.
When I first began teaching, I knew that I had to "win them over" - I NEEDED students to know that I was cool (er, not like the other teachers they had in a good way). I NEEDED them to know that we had a common ground that related my teaching with their individual lives and the things that they REALLY cared about. I think back to all of the silly (how kind of me to use that adjective lol) education classes I took prior to student teaching, and one of the pillars of teaching knowledge they try to force you to build a foundation of technique and style upon is: 'never develop personal relationships with students'. This stems from society's unfortunate fear of teachers sleeping with students which in a media-crazed age has come to the forefront more than ever. I'm not saying that it doesn't happen, but we are kind of seeing a Red Scare effect in the world of education because of it. Teachers are unfairly judged by student's parents, administrators, and the public in general in regard to the student-teacher relationship. It's to the point where they (the universities / education departments and programs) are trying to train future teachers how to give generic feedback / compliments in grading. Really? 'Good job Jimmy!' 'Really loved your essay Sarah!' Etc. The reasoning? To quote a seminar instructor I once had at CSU: 'If you give individualized feedback, a student could read it the wrong way and you could have a potential lawsuit on your hands.' Sad. "The Red Scare of Education" in action. Back to my student teaching, I threw this advice and training out the window. I thought back to my high school years and what I really remembered. I remembered Mr. Speer, I remembered Mr. Ballain, Ms. Tappendorf, Mr. Michowski, Mrs. Serrano, Ms. Carpenter...I'm sure I learned stuff - material, but the specific things I remembered were the mentors, the teachers who made a difference in my life. Was I at Poudre to teach material? Sure, but I was there to be a role model first. I was there to be a mentor because kids these days don't have enough good ones if any at all (coincidentally my graduate thesis is on this very subject ;p). So how was I going to do this? Develop individualized relationships with the students. Build trust and respect. Then teach. Even my 6th hour class whom my match-up teacher (that had given me his classroom) was at a loss at how to get them to respond to anything. 75% of 6th hour had 'F's when I took over. Only one student had above a 'D'. By the time I finished my student teaching roughly 25% of the class had an 'F' or a 'D', and this wasn't because I gave out "freebies" or were easier on their grading; on the contrary I was admittedly tougher on them grading-wise compared to my 3rd and 8th hour classes. They responded to my teaching because they respected me as a human being and I respected them back. At the end of the year, I had an assignment where students were to write a good-bye letter to me and tell me what they liked the best about my class and what kind of suggestions they had for improvement in my teaching for future students. 1 of 96 students gave constructive criticism regarding what I should do differently (don't rock back and forth when listening to students speak). The rest said 'don't change anything, you're my favorite teacher' or some variation thereof. I don't say this to toot my own horn as much as I say it as criticism on the way the current education system is structured and the way in which education training is being taught to future teachers. Teachers are being trained to be more-or-less drones that vomit up information from textbooks than anything else. We should be encouraging students to be free-thinkers instead of memorizing zombies. We need to show them that it is okay to be who you want to be, not what society and cliques and education says you should be. We - teachers - need to learn how to be role models and mentors ourselves because that is what the students of tomorrow need more than anything else. I went back to visit my classes a few weeks after student teaching was over (at the end of their school year) and at the end of the day, my match-up teacher took me aside and said: 'they love you, man. I don't know what you did or how you did it, but they love you.' Simple. Show them that you do care about them on an individual level. Be genuine. Give them respect. Smile. Celebrate them. One of my tougher students in 6th hour (been to jail multiple times, and has major problems with male authority) wrote the following verbatim for the good-bye letter assignment (he wanted me to keep it and this is only the end part of it): 'I wish I could have known you a long time ago. You're the only teacher that tells me I have good style when I use the word 'fuck' in my writing. I wish you weren't going because this class is going to be really boring without you. I don't even know if I will come anymore. Thank you for being so cool. You're the only person that has ever made me believe in myself.' He had a 43% in the class when I began teaching. I told him to stick it out for the last three weeks after I was gone. He showed up every day and ended the year with an 85.4%. The last sentence for the assignment, he says PERSON, not teacher. Students need role models.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Top 10 reasons NOT to vote for Barack Obama
It was beautiful last Sunday at the CSU Oval. The leaves were yellow, crisp, and falling like feathers behind a light wind that could barely be felt. Over 50,000 people were going crazy and filling every available patch of grass that the Oval had to offer while many more were forced to stand behind steel barriers and police barricades. Music was blaring over the strategically placed speakers and a large stage displayed the biggest American flag I've ever seen behind its temporarilly lonely podium. I felt as though I was experiencing a true reconstruction of the 60's or 70's - I felt as though I was in the scene of a movie like "Forest Gump" during the anti-Vietnam rally. Then Barack Obama appeared and gave his speech to the excitement and frenzy of the crowd. And although his speech was obiously rehearsed and replicated many times throughout his campaign across the country to generate support, it was still an experience that I'll never forget.
At this point, you may be scratching your head as to why I'm writing a 'Top 10 reasons NOT to vote for Barack Obama' piece if I attended his rally last weekend. Well, it's interesting because I am a Barack Obama guy - I'm a teacher, I'm somewhat forced to vote for him (which I already did). I'm writing this piece because I have a lot of friends and family members who are John McCain supporters, and being McCain supporters, they have a plethera of reasons to not vote for Obama. Worse yet, they actually believe what they are saying is true. These are the "best" reasons that some McCain supporters (that I know) could come up with for not voting for Barack Obama - and keep in mind, the people who said these things weren't trying to be funny or ridiculous, they were dead set that these things were in fact true and they would argue until they were blue in the face to try and convince you of their validity.
Top 10 Reasons NOT to Vote for Barack Obama:
10. "I'm not voting for him because he's a Democrat. All you have to remember is that Democrats take money out of your pocket, and Republicans put money in your pocket."
MY RESPONSE: Actually, Obama will put more money in the average person's pocket than McCain will. McCain will keep things the way they currently are while Obama wants to give tax breaks to everyone who makes under 250,000$.
9. "[Obama's] not getting my vote because he's all about the special interest groups...if elected, he's going to give our hard earned money back to special interest groups."
MY RESPONSE: Alright, a little bit more legit on the outside, but what this poor McCain supporter doesn't understand is that McCain and the Republican party considers the entire branch of education a "special interest group". So yeah, by those standards, Obama will give "special interest groups" hundreds of millions, the most that any President has ever given to "special interest groups" in the history of the United States.
8. "He's not getting my vote because he'll take my guns away."
MY RESPONSE: Actually, if you do your homework, his gun policy is the same as McCain's.
7. "Normally I'd vote for [Obama], but I'm a Packers fan and he's a Bears fan...I can't vote for a Bears fan."
MY RESPONSE: Because in the grand scheme of things, that matters, right?
6. "How could anybody vote for [Obama]? You know that he's just lying. If he gets elected, the first thing he'll do is raise taxes - he's just outright lying."
MY RESPONSE: Uh-huh, you keep telling yourself that pal.
5. "[Obama supporters] are stupid. Don't they realize that if we elect a black man, [foreign countries] won't trade with us anymore and the economy will really be screwed."
MY RESPONSE: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
4. "Who could vote for a murderer? By supporting gay rights, Obama is killing thousands of potential babies."
MY RESPONSE: Oh my...I'm not even sure how to handle this one. Perhaps this person would have been better served with the 'he's a murderer because he doesn't oppose abortion' approach.
3. "All these Obama people are under his spell. He's not getting my vote - he's a dark jedi and his mind powers won't work on me."
MY RESPONSE: Who would win in a lightsaber fight? Darth Vader or Barack Obama? We better not give George Lucas any ideas, before long it'll be in the theaters.
2. "If [Obama's] elected President, he'll cut military spending and Russia will invade us."
MY RESPONSE: !!!!!!! Russians huh? Even if the Cold War were still going, this still wouldn't sound right. If you're going to believe that we're gonna be invaded if Obama is elected, it might sound a little better if you said the Chinese.
1. "I won't vote for him because he's Barack Obama."
MY RESPONSE: Well, I guess if he's anything, he's Barack Obama, so that's as good a reason as any.
So there you have it. The Top 10 reasons NOT to vote for Barack Obama. I guess my point with writing this piece is to encourage people to get out there and educate themselves before casting their vote. Clearly it may be a little too much to ask for the 10 people above, but look beyond the attack ads and the radio banter. Know why you're voting the way you are so you don't end up on a list like this. So many - it seems - really have no idea what each candidate stands for and they vote based on the affiliation of 'Republican' or 'Democrat'. Get educated or please don't potentially effect the lives of those who are educated by voting.
At this point, you may be scratching your head as to why I'm writing a 'Top 10 reasons NOT to vote for Barack Obama' piece if I attended his rally last weekend. Well, it's interesting because I am a Barack Obama guy - I'm a teacher, I'm somewhat forced to vote for him (which I already did). I'm writing this piece because I have a lot of friends and family members who are John McCain supporters, and being McCain supporters, they have a plethera of reasons to not vote for Obama. Worse yet, they actually believe what they are saying is true. These are the "best" reasons that some McCain supporters (that I know) could come up with for not voting for Barack Obama - and keep in mind, the people who said these things weren't trying to be funny or ridiculous, they were dead set that these things were in fact true and they would argue until they were blue in the face to try and convince you of their validity.
Top 10 Reasons NOT to Vote for Barack Obama:
10. "I'm not voting for him because he's a Democrat. All you have to remember is that Democrats take money out of your pocket, and Republicans put money in your pocket."
MY RESPONSE: Actually, Obama will put more money in the average person's pocket than McCain will. McCain will keep things the way they currently are while Obama wants to give tax breaks to everyone who makes under 250,000$.
9. "[Obama's] not getting my vote because he's all about the special interest groups...if elected, he's going to give our hard earned money back to special interest groups."
MY RESPONSE: Alright, a little bit more legit on the outside, but what this poor McCain supporter doesn't understand is that McCain and the Republican party considers the entire branch of education a "special interest group". So yeah, by those standards, Obama will give "special interest groups" hundreds of millions, the most that any President has ever given to "special interest groups" in the history of the United States.
8. "He's not getting my vote because he'll take my guns away."
MY RESPONSE: Actually, if you do your homework, his gun policy is the same as McCain's.
7. "Normally I'd vote for [Obama], but I'm a Packers fan and he's a Bears fan...I can't vote for a Bears fan."
MY RESPONSE: Because in the grand scheme of things, that matters, right?
6. "How could anybody vote for [Obama]? You know that he's just lying. If he gets elected, the first thing he'll do is raise taxes - he's just outright lying."
MY RESPONSE: Uh-huh, you keep telling yourself that pal.
5. "[Obama supporters] are stupid. Don't they realize that if we elect a black man, [foreign countries] won't trade with us anymore and the economy will really be screwed."
MY RESPONSE: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
4. "Who could vote for a murderer? By supporting gay rights, Obama is killing thousands of potential babies."
MY RESPONSE: Oh my...I'm not even sure how to handle this one. Perhaps this person would have been better served with the 'he's a murderer because he doesn't oppose abortion' approach.
3. "All these Obama people are under his spell. He's not getting my vote - he's a dark jedi and his mind powers won't work on me."
MY RESPONSE: Who would win in a lightsaber fight? Darth Vader or Barack Obama? We better not give George Lucas any ideas, before long it'll be in the theaters.
2. "If [Obama's] elected President, he'll cut military spending and Russia will invade us."
MY RESPONSE: !!!!!!! Russians huh? Even if the Cold War were still going, this still wouldn't sound right. If you're going to believe that we're gonna be invaded if Obama is elected, it might sound a little better if you said the Chinese.
1. "I won't vote for him because he's Barack Obama."
MY RESPONSE: Well, I guess if he's anything, he's Barack Obama, so that's as good a reason as any.
So there you have it. The Top 10 reasons NOT to vote for Barack Obama. I guess my point with writing this piece is to encourage people to get out there and educate themselves before casting their vote. Clearly it may be a little too much to ask for the 10 people above, but look beyond the attack ads and the radio banter. Know why you're voting the way you are so you don't end up on a list like this. So many - it seems - really have no idea what each candidate stands for and they vote based on the affiliation of 'Republican' or 'Democrat'. Get educated or please don't potentially effect the lives of those who are educated by voting.
Saturday, May 10, 2008
Mr. Cuddemi Part 1
As classes for the Spring semester at Colorado State University dwindled to a halt last week, the class I taught for decided to pay a visit to Kinard Junior High School for a meeting with their enthusiastic and well-traveled Principal, Joe Cuddemi. He began by telling us about the time he spent teaching on a Native American reservation in Montana twenty or thirty years ago. The reservation was still very much racist towards the white man, but Cuddemi had been brought in to teach English and figured it came with the territory. The chief of the reservation was named "Matt" and made it a point of not speaking to the white man and rumor even had it that "Matt" would kill the white man if he would show his face. Well, Mr. Cuddemi remained passionate about teaching and worked to the best of his abilities to help the Native American people. It was difficult for Mr. Cuddemi to find comfort in this environment, but he would try to play basketball or hike in the mountains with his students in an attempt to bridge the racial barriers that separated them. Well, one day, one of Mr. Cuddemi's students approached and told him: 'Matt would like to speak with you.' Mr. Cuddemi was filled with fear as he knew how the Native American chief felt towards the white man, but he swallowed his fear and sought out the reservation leader. Upon finding him, "Matt" said: 'Do you have faith white boy?' Mr. Cuddemi replied: 'Excuse me?' "Matt": 'Do you have faith?' Mr. Cuddemi thought for a moment and answered: 'Faith in what?' The Native American leader had his cousin "Leon" with him, and at this point, told his family member to grab the horse whips and a pail of water. 'Come.' "Matt" instructed Mr. Cuddemi and proceeded to lead him to a small teepee. They entered, "Leon" placed the two horse whips in the dirt and left the pail of water next to his chief. "Leon" left once again, retrieved stones that were white from being in intense heat, and placed the rocks between the Native American leader and Mr. Cuddemi. 'Tell me white boy, do you have faith?' "Matt" repeated as he put a horse whip in each hand, dipping the ends in the pail of water. 'I'm not sure what you're asking me.' Mr. Cuddemi responded. In a quick and somewhat violent fashion, "Matt" attacked the white-hot stones with the horse whips and the teepee filled with steam. They sat there for a long time, Mr. Cuddemi became weak and expressed to the reservation leader that he may faint. Once again, "Matt" asked Mr. Cuddemi if he had faith. This time, Mr. Cuddemi didn't respond as he began to wobble and feel his body giving way. 'Come.' "Matt" summoned his foreign guest outside of the teepee. Mr. Cuddemi crawled out of the steam and held himself up by a pair of trembling forearms. "Matt" leaned down next to Mr. Cuddemi's face and said: 'Look there. Do you see the horses on the horizon?' Mr. Cuddemi raised his head and looked to where the sun was setting. 'Yes. I see the horses.' He answered. 'Do you see the horse that stands taller than the rest. The horse that refuses to bow before his brothers?' Mr. Cuddemi once again scanned the horizon and after a moment told the Native American chief that he did, in fact, see the horse that stood taller than its brothers. "Matt" smiled, clapped Mr. Cuddemi on the back in an affectionate way, and said: 'Then today my white brother, you have faith.' It was at this moment - Mr. Cuddemi claims - that he learned what teaching was really about. It was about faith and understanding. Passion and a conquering of fear. From this point forward, Mr. Cuddemi vowed to never forget the lessons by which "Matt" and he exchanged during the late afternoon on a brilliant and beautiful Montanta reservation.
Studebt
Here's a video that I created which examines the reality and perils surrounding student loan debt.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Teachertube video
Here's an awesome video that I found on teachertube.com. As a future educator, it's interesting to think about how the world is changing and what kind of responsibilities we'll have to be accountable for technology-wise. Even from the perspective of a non-educator, this video should teach you some things which are applicable to the world we live in. Check it out!
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Mentors and Education
What does a teacher do? Yes, we carry out lesson plans and teach children how to be literate in each of our specific content areas. Yes, we basically babysit your kids while you put time in your own job. And yes, we manage classrooms and deal with school issues. But really, is that all we do? No, we teach kids how to think critically, and we're supposed to prepare them for the pressures of the cruel, cold world which awaits them once they receive their diploma. Truth is, teachers are mentors, and the ancient idea of the bearded wise sage has always fascinated me. The topic of mentors is barely recognized in life, but it is something which remains crucial to the productive functioning of healthy individuals and the lost component in an otherwise sick and ruined society. When children reach middle school, they go through many psychological, physical, and emotional changes. During this time, the majority of kids will rebel against their parents and their teachers, adopting an "I can do this myself" attitude which roots itself in the very core of immaturity. Children want control of their own lives, they want to make their own choices, and they care but little (if at all) to what others may say to them. If you look at our society, it is unfortunate yet true that most of these children will grow into adults and never deviate from their immature attitude towards life. Individuality becomes a way of life in high school - a counter productive comfort zone if you will - and it shapes who they will become for the rest of their lives. Mentors - teachers, parents, etc. - can change this pattern and encourage the development to maturity. Without mentors, kids are generally directed toward self-centered ideals and care little about whom they affect with their decisions and words. It is also noteworthy to observe that young adults who have mentors usually regress at some point, feeling as if they've learned all that they need to figure it out by themselves. During such a regression, these kids break away from their mentor(s) and foster the same type of individualistic behavior of those who refused to let mentors play a role in their lives in the first place. The important lesson to learn here is that everyone - no matter what you do for a living or how old you are or what circumstance you find yourself in - needs to have mentors in their life. Period. Without the presence of the mentor figure in one's life, direction becomes convoluted and perspective diminshes. The truth that many youths (and sadly adults) cannot seem to grasp - or are unwilling to grasp - is the truth that you cannot make it through life in a truly happy and productive fashion without the help of others. You must depend on other people for support - there's no getting around it. And a key part of that support is played by the mentor figure. So, to those of you who are teachers, you need to embrace this mentor role and offer your students the kind of support they will need to mature and live a productive and healthy life. For those of you who aren't teachers, think of the mentors in your life. Thank them and show them the appreciation they deserve. As a teacher, it is the one reason above many that we go to school everyday - you have no idea how heart-warming it is to have a student stay after class to thank you. Bottomline: Everyone needs mentors. Think of them, thank them, and never forget them because without them, you would be lost.
Creative control in the classroom
Is it just me, or does creativity have but a fading pulse of life left in the modern classroom? From my observations, it seems that most new teachers give creativty an honest shot, putting countless hours into the planning of their lessons and a great deal of thought into unique and new ways of presenting information. However, as the grind of each school year wears on each teacher, they become more and more prone to the mindless redundancy of worksheets, essays, and multiple choice tests. As educators, it's easy to preach in favor of creativity and idealistic environments that foster the imagination, however, it is not as easy to practice what is being preached. Most good teachers never lose their creative edge. They draw upon the very roots of why they became an educator in the first place - for the students and for the future. Unless we want the future to become the sterile black and white world we fear, we need to remember expression. We need to remember perspective. And we need to remember how we thought of the world when we were children. Too often the artist is forgotten in our world - and when I say artist, I mean more than a painter or someone who draws. I mean the writers, the architects, the visionaries, the sculptors, and the innovators. Our society seems to punish those who pursue their creative passion - as if we are to weed them out and exterminate them. Yet, without the artists of the world, nothing would function. Everything would become two-dimensional and stale. We would be nothing more than a collection of mindless bodies given mundane tasks to carry out - square pegs that fit into square holes...used until we could be used no more and then discarded and shut down. Because many of our society's artists are forced to be a part of the machine somehow, we choose education. We choose to be teachers, and even in this choice, the path is marred with challenges and systems of protocol which try to dictate the way in which we carry out our day. It's imperative that we never forget our creative side. Teachers seem to be the only hope for the children of tomorrow, and without expression, perspective, and creativity, teachers will be unable to move and inspire the next generation. So, for all of you fellow teachers out there, when you go home to create your next lesson plan or your next unit, remember this. I know it's easy to sit back, have a beer, turn on a baseball game, and let the worksheets dictate the rest, but don't give in. It's tough to conjure up the energy to create more lesson plans after a long day in the classroom, but it's worth it. Put yourself in your student's shoes and ask yourself if you wish you had a teacher who did that for you. Don't sell yourself short - afterall, you're not a teacher for yourself, you're a teacher for your students.
Monday, April 7, 2008
Teaching the Best
"A teacher affects eternity; he can never tell where his influence stops."
-Henry Adams
Can there possibly be a more important profession than teaching? Is the act of teaching the most noble act that one can aspire to do? To my first question, I've thought about this for a long time, and I would honestly have to say 'no'. It's the reason I've chosen to wander down the path that I am. I'll say it clear as day: there isn't a more important profession in the history of mankind than that of an educator. I say this because without teachers, there would be nothing else - only chaos and radically undeveloped tribes roaming the globe. Some would argue that law enforcement might be more important for the same reasons - without it, we would be left with chaos. True, but without teachers and education, there would be no law enforcement, there wouldn't be anything. Everything - in its roots - begins with the foundation of education and is carried out by a teacher. What about the President of a country - isn't that more important? Again, without a foundation of education, we would have no organization, no government, and subsequently, no President. Or, even if there could be a President without the foundation of education, it wouldn't be any different than a group of chimpanzees declaring a leader. I asked my friend this question and he brought up the medical profession - doctors. Surely they're more important, they save lives and prevent disease and plague. Back to the basis of my argument, without education and teachers, would we even have doctors? They were taught by somebody - even if it was other doctors, they were still taught. Which brings me to my second question - is the act of teaching the most noble act that one could aspire to do? To this, I would have to give a resounding 'yes'. Even if you aren't pursuing a career in education, you can still teach others. You can still contribute to society and engage in the most noble act there is - teaching. So think about this. Think about where our community, our country, and our world would be without the benefits of organized education and without teachers willing to dedicate their lives to the carrying out of organized education. Think of the undeveloped countries in Africa and the Middle East and look at the way their educational systems are organized. How would life in these areas be different if they had the same educational systems and the same kinds of teachers that we do? Bottomline is: Go out and teach. Regardless of what your chosen career is, or what you do, teach others and contribute to the foundation that is education - there is no higher calling.
-Henry Adams
Can there possibly be a more important profession than teaching? Is the act of teaching the most noble act that one can aspire to do? To my first question, I've thought about this for a long time, and I would honestly have to say 'no'. It's the reason I've chosen to wander down the path that I am. I'll say it clear as day: there isn't a more important profession in the history of mankind than that of an educator. I say this because without teachers, there would be nothing else - only chaos and radically undeveloped tribes roaming the globe. Some would argue that law enforcement might be more important for the same reasons - without it, we would be left with chaos. True, but without teachers and education, there would be no law enforcement, there wouldn't be anything. Everything - in its roots - begins with the foundation of education and is carried out by a teacher. What about the President of a country - isn't that more important? Again, without a foundation of education, we would have no organization, no government, and subsequently, no President. Or, even if there could be a President without the foundation of education, it wouldn't be any different than a group of chimpanzees declaring a leader. I asked my friend this question and he brought up the medical profession - doctors. Surely they're more important, they save lives and prevent disease and plague. Back to the basis of my argument, without education and teachers, would we even have doctors? They were taught by somebody - even if it was other doctors, they were still taught. Which brings me to my second question - is the act of teaching the most noble act that one could aspire to do? To this, I would have to give a resounding 'yes'. Even if you aren't pursuing a career in education, you can still teach others. You can still contribute to society and engage in the most noble act there is - teaching. So think about this. Think about where our community, our country, and our world would be without the benefits of organized education and without teachers willing to dedicate their lives to the carrying out of organized education. Think of the undeveloped countries in Africa and the Middle East and look at the way their educational systems are organized. How would life in these areas be different if they had the same educational systems and the same kinds of teachers that we do? Bottomline is: Go out and teach. Regardless of what your chosen career is, or what you do, teach others and contribute to the foundation that is education - there is no higher calling.
The Man Behind the Myth
I've created a 'WebQuest' designed for an 11th-12th grade English classroom. Check it out and let me know whether you think it's appropriate or not. Do you think it would work? If you could place yourself in the classroom I've described as a student, would this be interesting to you? What would you change and why? Thanks!
Friday, April 4, 2008
Cliques
One of the many unfortunate things I'll have to deal with when I officially become a teacher in the near future is cliques. You can't avoid them, you can't ignor them, and you can't change the fact that they'll always be there. So, with that being said, I thought I would present a different kind of question: If I were to convince every child to become a member of one particular clique, which would I reccomend (essentailly, which clique is the "best" or most harmless)? My initial reaction would be to steer my kids towards being 'Preps' because as a teacher, who wouldn't want to have a bunch of hard-working, brown-nosing kids who pump out A's? Although, would I be doing these kids a disservice in the long run? Most other people (the non-'Preps') view the 'Preps' primarily as arrogant jerks and teacher's pets. I say screw these "other people" - being a 'Prep' will set you up for life. Not only would you receive 4.0's and get into the best colleges, you'll also get hired in many jobs before the "other people" belonging to the other cliques. Sure, they may be jealous of you during grade school, but one day, they will inevitably respect you and give you mad props for being such a dedicated fool. Let's talk about the other cliques and why I wouldn't steer my kids in that direction. 'Jocks'. They seem to be blessed with physical prowess and generally make friends with the 'Preps' - which is a really good thing because the 'Preps' will allow the 'Jocks' to cheat off of them on tests and papers in exchange for protection. However, there's a reason the 'Jocks' are cheating - they're not very smart. You can only make it so far in life by cheating off of others, so I wouldn't want my kids to be 'Jocks'. How about 'Nerds'? They're really smart and they dig Chewbacca and the USS Enterprise. 'Nerds' get good grades and great opportunities in life outside of grade school, but I wouldn't reccomend my students take this path because 'Nerds' don't get chicks, they're generally wimpy, they get picked on a lot, and because they're picked on a lot, they become really spiteful and bitter - not a way to live life. Let's move on. 'Punks' or 'Skaters' (same thing). They do a lot of drugs and drink a lot of alcohol all the while making a point to rebel against anything and everything in the world (even if it's good) and through this act of rebellion, they generally make really dumb decisions and end up in the adult world as 'losers'. I can't think of anything good to say about 'Punks' - unique wardrobe maybe? What about the 'Goths'? For many of the same reasons surrounding the 'Punk', I wouldn't reccomend any of my kids to become a 'Goth'. They're basically a 'Punk' that starts to cut themselves and listen to depressing music - at least 'Punks' listen to rock and ska. 'Goths' retract from the world and become very spiteful, like 'Nerds', but in a really bad self-defeatist way. Nuff' said there. Then there's the 'Drama kid' or 'Theater person'. This clique seems to promote an abundance of emotion and unneccesary blowing-things-out-of-proportion mentality. They over-react to just about anything, and often times start to play ball on the other side of the fence if you get my drift (not that there's anything wrong with that of course). I would steer my kids away from the 'Theater people' just to save them the perils of needless and completely manufactured stress at such an early age. Next is the 'Band person'. I wasn't ever really sure why, but everybody seemed to avoid these people like the plague back in my day. They really aren't that bad. They're kind of like a cross between a 'Nerd' and a 'Theater person' without the bitterness and the abundance of emotion. 'Band person' is alright - I'm down with that. They're just a little awkward socially, but that's about it. Then there's the 'Loner' or 'Outcast'. They don't have friends. The aren't good in social situations. Their grades depend on the subject. They never stand out. And they are pretty much forgettable. Really, it's not that bad of a clique if you think about it though. They may be labeled as 'Loners' or 'Outcasts' because they don't belong to any of the other cliques and that's a good thing. The undefined kids are labeled as 'Loners' and 'Outcasts' even though they may not display any of the typical attributes of the 'Loner' / 'Outcast'. And the last clique that's coming to mind is the 'Gangster' or 'Homie G'. They create fear, they're "tough", they protect others who are similar to them or belong to their "gang". They steal. They peddle drugs. They drink a lot. And sometimes they stab people - until they get out of grade school, then they get guns and ghetto cars. Definitely don't want my kids to be 'Gangsters'. All-in-all, I'm going to have to say if I had to convince my students to choose a clique, I'd advise them to become a 'Prep' because it will help them the most in the long run ('Band person' is a close second). Of course, it's terrible that we even think of the world in such a stereotypical fashion, but as I started the post off with, that's the way it is and it'll never change. I encourage everyone to try whenever they can not to be judgemental, although I realize such an ideal is outrageously ridiculous. When I become a teacher, I'll never - in fact - steer my students towards any clique above the rest, I'll speak to them in terms of rising above that. Screw everybody else - be you. Let others label you and don't give in. Even beyond grade school, the world - the people you meet - will judge you and label you and it's up to each and every person the just say, 'to hell with it', and be yourself. Who cares about how some label you, the people who truly care will see you for what you are. Instead of getting up on the soap-box (as I just embarassingly did) and fighting this issue, teachers stand pat and ignore it. And by ignoring it, they in turn foster it. Educators need to help students and encourage them not to cave-in to the pressures of their peers and the cliques they're surrounded by. Although, I won't lie, it would be nice to have all of my classrooms full of 'Preps' :P
Monday, March 31, 2008
Teaching Trade-Off 3
As the discussion continues over whether teachers are underpaid or not in America, I thought I would dig a little deeper and investigate what teachers make in foreign countries to provide this issue with some more depth. According to economist.com, these are the countries that pay their teachers more on average than the United States (if the US is considered 0%):
Turkey (+154%)
South Korea (+134%)
Germany (+60%)
Japan (+56%)
Switzerland (+49%)
Scotland (+48%)
Spain (+36%)
England (+32%)
Austrailia (+30%)
Italy (+11%)
France (+3%)
Sweden pays their teachers about the same as the United States, and there are only two countries (Iceland -15% & Norway -16%) where teachers are paid less than here on American soil. If we want to look into it further, and according to a study done at Drake University in 2006, the countries that have a better high school graduation (or equivalent) rate than the United States are (consider the US had a 78% high school graduation rate in 2006):
Turkey (97%)
South Korea (95%)
Germany (95%)
Japan (95%)
Switzerland (91%)
Scotland(90%)
Spain (89%)
England (88%)
Austrailia (88%)
Italy (82%)
Iceland (79%)
The similarities are eerie between the two lists. France is the only country that pays their teachers more but has a lower graduation rate (although this should not come as too big of a surprise seeing as France only pays their teachers 3% more than we pay our own; and to be fair, France's graduation rate is only slightly below ours). So basically, if you're to set up an X / Y axis graph where one variable represents teacher wage, and the other variable represents graduation rate, you could make the argument that they correlate with one another and the higher the wage, the better the graduation rate. If you just look at the numbers, on average, 8 out of every 10 American high school students will graduate, where nearly a perfect 10 out of 10 will graduate in Turkey. This may not seem like a big difference, but when you apply it to a large population, it can have a devastating effect. Another factor to be taken into account is that Turkey has a much smaller population than the United States (as do many of the countries on the above lists), but the population size really shouldn't matter that much. There is still enough people in each demographic to gain accurate and comparable results. One factor that cannot be quantified or represented by numbers or graphs which may play a significant role in the outcome of these numbers are the cultural factors. Every society and culture has different attitudes towards how they raise their children and in what ways they choose to live their lives. I would argue this point in favor of the data above. It is clear in the societies that value education more (the countries that pay their teachers more) that their people are finding success and knowledge on a more consistent basis (higher graduation rates). Hopefully this sheds some light on the issue of teacher pay and how we view education in America.
Turkey (+154%)
South Korea (+134%)
Germany (+60%)
Japan (+56%)
Switzerland (+49%)
Scotland (+48%)
Spain (+36%)
England (+32%)
Austrailia (+30%)
Italy (+11%)
France (+3%)
Sweden pays their teachers about the same as the United States, and there are only two countries (Iceland -15% & Norway -16%) where teachers are paid less than here on American soil. If we want to look into it further, and according to a study done at Drake University in 2006, the countries that have a better high school graduation (or equivalent) rate than the United States are (consider the US had a 78% high school graduation rate in 2006):
Turkey (97%)
South Korea (95%)
Germany (95%)
Japan (95%)
Switzerland (91%)
Scotland(90%)
Spain (89%)
England (88%)
Austrailia (88%)
Italy (82%)
Iceland (79%)
The similarities are eerie between the two lists. France is the only country that pays their teachers more but has a lower graduation rate (although this should not come as too big of a surprise seeing as France only pays their teachers 3% more than we pay our own; and to be fair, France's graduation rate is only slightly below ours). So basically, if you're to set up an X / Y axis graph where one variable represents teacher wage, and the other variable represents graduation rate, you could make the argument that they correlate with one another and the higher the wage, the better the graduation rate. If you just look at the numbers, on average, 8 out of every 10 American high school students will graduate, where nearly a perfect 10 out of 10 will graduate in Turkey. This may not seem like a big difference, but when you apply it to a large population, it can have a devastating effect. Another factor to be taken into account is that Turkey has a much smaller population than the United States (as do many of the countries on the above lists), but the population size really shouldn't matter that much. There is still enough people in each demographic to gain accurate and comparable results. One factor that cannot be quantified or represented by numbers or graphs which may play a significant role in the outcome of these numbers are the cultural factors. Every society and culture has different attitudes towards how they raise their children and in what ways they choose to live their lives. I would argue this point in favor of the data above. It is clear in the societies that value education more (the countries that pay their teachers more) that their people are finding success and knowledge on a more consistent basis (higher graduation rates). Hopefully this sheds some light on the issue of teacher pay and how we view education in America.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Clinton and education
The following information was obtained through education.com. Next up in my look through the candidates and their viewpoints on various aspects of education is Hillary Clinton. Education.com spoke with Catherine Brown, one of Clinton's policy advisors to discuss the following issues related to education.
HILLARY CLINTON
In General
2008 promises to be a cutthroat year when it comes to Democratic politics, and presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton is having to cling tight to stay on top. But despite lots of talk about the economy, the war in Iraq, and pulling out “the race card”, few of the candidates have spent much time discussing an issue that’s at the forefront of most parents’ minds: education.
Standardized Testing
Say goodbye to the bubble test. While Clinton “supports having an accountable education system,” Brown says she wants to give school districts more flexibility in how they measure success. And since bubble tests can’t test critical thinking and problem solving abilities, Clinton “would like to provide states with the flexibility to use performance assessments, such as class projects and presentations, aligned with state standards,” Brown says. Clinton is also committed to making sure that standardized tests don't force schools to focus solely on math and reading, to the detriment of other subject areas. “She wants to ensure that art, music, and other programs continue to be a rich part of children’s educational experiences,” Brown says.
School Choice
Charter schools, magnet schools, school vouchers…where does Clinton stand? According to Brown, “Hillary supports public school choice, as well as charter schools, and has for many years. But she is a strong advocate for public schools.” In other words, she’s for choice within the public school system, but not for vouchers that allow parents to use public money for private school education. “Research thus far has not shown that children who attend private schools through voucher programs do better on math and reading tests than their counterparts in public schools,” Brown says. Translation: Clinton doesn’t want to drain precious resources from the public school pot.
No Child Left Behind
Goodbye to NCLB? Likely. “Hillary believes No Child Left Behind has proven to be too rigid and unworkable for our teachers, principals, and most importantly for our children. She thinks it’s time to end this one-size-fits-all approach to education reform, and start a new beginning that prepares every child to succeed in our global economy,” Brown says. When asked how she’ll make sure schools are successful and accountable, without NCLB forcing their hand, Clinton’s campaign office points to a few key ideas:
-More funding for schools. One of the main problems with NCLB, they contend, was that schools weren’t given enough money to make it successful.
-State standards that move kids towards an ultimate goal—college. Clinton says standards should be directly aligned with college-prep needs.
-Improved efforts to recruit and retain outstanding teachers, especially in urban and under-resourced areas.
-More after school programs, “that keep young people safe in the riskier hours of the day”.
-Multiple pathways to graduation and mentoring for at-risk youth, in order to lesson the high school dropout rate.
College Funding and Affordability
Many other countries seriously subsidize the cost of college. Could America be next? Well, maybe. Clinton wants to give a $3,500 tuition tax credit to all families with a kid in college. Sure, $3,500 might not cover the full cost of most universities, but according to the Clinton campaign, it’s more than 50% of the cost of tuition at the average public institution. Clinton says she will also increase Pell Grants. When the Pell Grant was first introduced it covered 99% of the cost of a two-year college, 77% at a four-year public school, and 36% at a private school—now it doesn’t even come close. Clinton wants to make sure that each year the Pell is adjusted to take rising college costs into account. And she wants to do good for do-gooders, by giving Americorps members, who do 1-2 years of full-time public service, $10,000 to put towards college. She also wants to start a Public Service Academy, which her campaign says will be “like the West Point of public service”.
Other key points of Clinton's college affordability plan:
-Improve college graduation rates by creating a $250 million graduation fund.
-Strengthen community colleges with $500 million in incentive grants, and make transferring to a 4-year institution easier.
-Eliminate the need to fill out the FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid) form. Instead, allow families to check a box on their tax return requesting financial aid. Upon checking that box, they will receive a letter from the Department of Education with a coupon showing the amount of grants and loans they’re entitled to. Schools can reach out directly to the Department of Education to collect the funds.
-Force schools to provide Truth in Tuition Disclosures—in other words, require them to tell families in advance how much college will cost from Freshman year onwards.
Universal Preschool
Should preschool be free for all children? Clinton says yes. In fact, universal pre-K is one of her cornerstone educational issues. According to Nobel Laureate and University of Chicago Economics Professor James Heckman, half of the black-white achievement gap that exists at the end of high school is evident before children start kindergarten. But state-funded pre-K still only serves one out of every five 4-year-olds in America. Clinton wants every kid in the country to have access to free preschool in the year before kindergarten and she’s proposed $10 billion in spending to make it happen. Her program would be “a federal-state partnership”, according to the Clinton campaign. In other words, while the Feds will provide some money, states need to match it dollar-for-dollar. They also need to follow some rules. For example, all teachers hired must have a bachelor’s degree and specialized training in early childhood development. Programs need to maintain a low teacher-student ratio. And the program has to be offered to all kids in the state, free of charge. Once states hit those benchmarks, they get to have some flexibility in how they use their funds, but not before that. Why the push for universal pre-K? Clinton contends, “Children who attend pre-kindergarten are less likely to enroll in special education; they are less likely to drop out of high school. They are more likely to go on and graduate from college. They are less likely to be unemployed, and they are less likely to go on welfare… If you put in a dollar in early childhood, you are going to get at least seven dollars back. Imagine if you could buy a stock with that kind of return.”
All this educational spending won’t come cheap. “Obviously we are spending more than half a trillion dollars on the Iraq war and when we finally end that, we are going to have to start getting ourselves out of deficit,” Clinton says, “But we need at the same time to make some investment that will keep our country strong.” Education, says Clinton, is a place to start.
Alright, so my impressions are: Clinton wants to get rid of standardized testing in favor of allowing teachers and schools more freedom to evaluate their students based on projects and presentations. I'm very in favor of this move, but perhaps Clinton should also think about training teachers to evaluate efficiently while earning their licensure so the system can still show tangible progress. Clinton encourages school of choice, but her main focus is on getting rid of the 'No Child Left Behind' Act. While there is A LOT of upside to this, Clinton needs to be careful to keep the good aspects of the NCLB Act (such as: every teacher candidate needs to have a Bachelor's degree and certified licensure - which she has proposed if NCLB is eliminated). Clinton also wants to help alleviate the financial burden for college and she beleives pre-K education is a neccessity to the better future of our country. Overall, Clinton seems to have a very detailed plan on how to improve our education system and the steps of those plans are very realistic. She is by far the best candidate of the four in regards to the issues revolving around education. If you care about the education of our country and the teachers who run that system, vote for Hillary.
HILLARY CLINTON
In General
2008 promises to be a cutthroat year when it comes to Democratic politics, and presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton is having to cling tight to stay on top. But despite lots of talk about the economy, the war in Iraq, and pulling out “the race card”, few of the candidates have spent much time discussing an issue that’s at the forefront of most parents’ minds: education.
Standardized Testing
Say goodbye to the bubble test. While Clinton “supports having an accountable education system,” Brown says she wants to give school districts more flexibility in how they measure success. And since bubble tests can’t test critical thinking and problem solving abilities, Clinton “would like to provide states with the flexibility to use performance assessments, such as class projects and presentations, aligned with state standards,” Brown says. Clinton is also committed to making sure that standardized tests don't force schools to focus solely on math and reading, to the detriment of other subject areas. “She wants to ensure that art, music, and other programs continue to be a rich part of children’s educational experiences,” Brown says.
School Choice
Charter schools, magnet schools, school vouchers…where does Clinton stand? According to Brown, “Hillary supports public school choice, as well as charter schools, and has for many years. But she is a strong advocate for public schools.” In other words, she’s for choice within the public school system, but not for vouchers that allow parents to use public money for private school education. “Research thus far has not shown that children who attend private schools through voucher programs do better on math and reading tests than their counterparts in public schools,” Brown says. Translation: Clinton doesn’t want to drain precious resources from the public school pot.
No Child Left Behind
Goodbye to NCLB? Likely. “Hillary believes No Child Left Behind has proven to be too rigid and unworkable for our teachers, principals, and most importantly for our children. She thinks it’s time to end this one-size-fits-all approach to education reform, and start a new beginning that prepares every child to succeed in our global economy,” Brown says. When asked how she’ll make sure schools are successful and accountable, without NCLB forcing their hand, Clinton’s campaign office points to a few key ideas:
-More funding for schools. One of the main problems with NCLB, they contend, was that schools weren’t given enough money to make it successful.
-State standards that move kids towards an ultimate goal—college. Clinton says standards should be directly aligned with college-prep needs.
-Improved efforts to recruit and retain outstanding teachers, especially in urban and under-resourced areas.
-More after school programs, “that keep young people safe in the riskier hours of the day”.
-Multiple pathways to graduation and mentoring for at-risk youth, in order to lesson the high school dropout rate.
College Funding and Affordability
Many other countries seriously subsidize the cost of college. Could America be next? Well, maybe. Clinton wants to give a $3,500 tuition tax credit to all families with a kid in college. Sure, $3,500 might not cover the full cost of most universities, but according to the Clinton campaign, it’s more than 50% of the cost of tuition at the average public institution. Clinton says she will also increase Pell Grants. When the Pell Grant was first introduced it covered 99% of the cost of a two-year college, 77% at a four-year public school, and 36% at a private school—now it doesn’t even come close. Clinton wants to make sure that each year the Pell is adjusted to take rising college costs into account. And she wants to do good for do-gooders, by giving Americorps members, who do 1-2 years of full-time public service, $10,000 to put towards college. She also wants to start a Public Service Academy, which her campaign says will be “like the West Point of public service”.
Other key points of Clinton's college affordability plan:
-Improve college graduation rates by creating a $250 million graduation fund.
-Strengthen community colleges with $500 million in incentive grants, and make transferring to a 4-year institution easier.
-Eliminate the need to fill out the FAFSA (Free Application for Federal Student Aid) form. Instead, allow families to check a box on their tax return requesting financial aid. Upon checking that box, they will receive a letter from the Department of Education with a coupon showing the amount of grants and loans they’re entitled to. Schools can reach out directly to the Department of Education to collect the funds.
-Force schools to provide Truth in Tuition Disclosures—in other words, require them to tell families in advance how much college will cost from Freshman year onwards.
Universal Preschool
Should preschool be free for all children? Clinton says yes. In fact, universal pre-K is one of her cornerstone educational issues. According to Nobel Laureate and University of Chicago Economics Professor James Heckman, half of the black-white achievement gap that exists at the end of high school is evident before children start kindergarten. But state-funded pre-K still only serves one out of every five 4-year-olds in America. Clinton wants every kid in the country to have access to free preschool in the year before kindergarten and she’s proposed $10 billion in spending to make it happen. Her program would be “a federal-state partnership”, according to the Clinton campaign. In other words, while the Feds will provide some money, states need to match it dollar-for-dollar. They also need to follow some rules. For example, all teachers hired must have a bachelor’s degree and specialized training in early childhood development. Programs need to maintain a low teacher-student ratio. And the program has to be offered to all kids in the state, free of charge. Once states hit those benchmarks, they get to have some flexibility in how they use their funds, but not before that. Why the push for universal pre-K? Clinton contends, “Children who attend pre-kindergarten are less likely to enroll in special education; they are less likely to drop out of high school. They are more likely to go on and graduate from college. They are less likely to be unemployed, and they are less likely to go on welfare… If you put in a dollar in early childhood, you are going to get at least seven dollars back. Imagine if you could buy a stock with that kind of return.”
All this educational spending won’t come cheap. “Obviously we are spending more than half a trillion dollars on the Iraq war and when we finally end that, we are going to have to start getting ourselves out of deficit,” Clinton says, “But we need at the same time to make some investment that will keep our country strong.” Education, says Clinton, is a place to start.
Alright, so my impressions are: Clinton wants to get rid of standardized testing in favor of allowing teachers and schools more freedom to evaluate their students based on projects and presentations. I'm very in favor of this move, but perhaps Clinton should also think about training teachers to evaluate efficiently while earning their licensure so the system can still show tangible progress. Clinton encourages school of choice, but her main focus is on getting rid of the 'No Child Left Behind' Act. While there is A LOT of upside to this, Clinton needs to be careful to keep the good aspects of the NCLB Act (such as: every teacher candidate needs to have a Bachelor's degree and certified licensure - which she has proposed if NCLB is eliminated). Clinton also wants to help alleviate the financial burden for college and she beleives pre-K education is a neccessity to the better future of our country. Overall, Clinton seems to have a very detailed plan on how to improve our education system and the steps of those plans are very realistic. She is by far the best candidate of the four in regards to the issues revolving around education. If you care about the education of our country and the teachers who run that system, vote for Hillary.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
McCain and education
The following information was obtained through education.com. Next up in my look through the candidates and their viewpoints on various aspects of education is John McCain. Education.com spoke with McCain's domestic policy advisor, Doug Holtz-Eakin about these issues.
JOHN MCCAIN
In General
His main focus is on choice and competition, which he says will bring about genuine accountability for our schools. McCain says schools should be allowed to compete for the most effective teachers, and if schools fail to meet needs parents should be given the choice to send kids to another school.
Standardized Testing
When it comes to improving the education system, McCain says accountability is the name of the game. “We must continue to set standards and hold schools accountable for their performance,” McCain says. Holtz-Eakin says the kind of accountability testing implemented through No Child Left Behind offers a good start. “We should never shrink from the truth, or seek to soften accountability where schools are failing in their most basic responsibility. Where schools fail to meet Annual Yearly Progress, they have failed students, parents and communities,” he says.
School Choice
McCain says that he and his wife decided to send their children to parochial school, and now he wants to make sure that all parents can have the same freedom. “I believe parents should be empowered with their school choice to send their children to the school that can best educate them just as many members of Congress do with their own children. I find it beyond hypocritical that many of those who would refuse to allow public school parents to choose their child's school would never agree to force their own children into a school that did not work or was unsafe. They make another choice. That is a right we should honor for all parents. It is fundamental and essential." Holtz-Eakin says that's why McCain will fight for the ability of all students to have access to schools of demonstrated excellence, including charter schools, parochial schools and home schools. “The deplorable status of preparation for our children, particularly in comparison with the rest of the industrialized world, does not allow us the luxury of eliminating options in our educational repertoire,” Holtz-Eakin says. McCain supports vouchers as a way of giving parents more options and encouraging healthy competition for public schools.
No Child Left Behind
This bill has received a lot of flack from both parties, but while McCain acknowledges that changes should be made, he says “improve it, don't discard it.” According to Holtz-Eakin, “No Child Left Behind has focused our attention on the realities of how students perform against a common standard. We no longer accept low standards for some students and high standards for others. In this age of honest reporting, we finally see what is happening to students who were previously invisible. That is a progress all its own, but merely compels us to seek and find solutions to the dismal facts before us.” So how does McCain plan on improving NCLB? Holtz-Eakin says the law needs to start addressing the underlying cultural problems in our education system, instead of avoiding genuine accountability. Instead, he says McCain wants to empower parents “by greatly expanding the ability of parents to choose among schools for their children. All federal financial support must be predicated on providing parents the ability to move their children, and the dollars associated with them, from failing schools.”
College Funding and Affordability
While McCain believes the federal government plays an important role in college funding, he also believes grants and loans should be targeted towards those with genuine need, according to Holtz-Eakin. “Moreover, it is imperative that the federal government be good stewards of this money, operating programs without waste, favoritism or loss of integrity,” Holtz-Eakin says.
Universal Preschool
Holtz-Eakin says it's clear that too many children aren't prepared for school when they arrive on the first day. “These children start school at a disadvantage and slip further and further behind with every passing year,” he says. “Research has shown that the best return on investment of our education dollar is in early childhood development.” McCain plans to better prepare American kids for school by reforming Head Start “into a program that serves the essential need of America’s children to be prepared to learn when they enter school,” says Holtz-Eakin.
McCain says that American education “must be worthy of the promise we make to our children and ourselves—the freedom and opportunity to chase our dreams.” Whether voters line up behind McCain's dream is the question of the hour—only they will be able to determine the path of American education in the 21 st century.
Alright, so my impressions are: McCain doesn't think 'No Child Left Behind' is a bad thing, he just thinks it needs some tweaking which is too bad because 'No Child Left Behind' is in fact a broken law that doesn't benefit students or teachers. McCain feels school of choice freedom will solve everything and this is really pretty ignorant to a lot of the issues that are happening right now in education. He doesn't have a plan to fix the college funding situation, and he thinks standardized testing is a good thing which to any teacher, this is a huge negative on McCain's resume regarding education. Standardized testing is the primary reason why 'No Child Left Behind' gets so much criticism. There are actually good elements to NCLB, but standardized testing is not one of them. Overall, McCain is a terrible candidate based on his educational views and if you vote for him, know that you go against the interests of every teacher in the United States of America and every child who is enrolled in a public school.
JOHN MCCAIN
In General
His main focus is on choice and competition, which he says will bring about genuine accountability for our schools. McCain says schools should be allowed to compete for the most effective teachers, and if schools fail to meet needs parents should be given the choice to send kids to another school.
Standardized Testing
When it comes to improving the education system, McCain says accountability is the name of the game. “We must continue to set standards and hold schools accountable for their performance,” McCain says. Holtz-Eakin says the kind of accountability testing implemented through No Child Left Behind offers a good start. “We should never shrink from the truth, or seek to soften accountability where schools are failing in their most basic responsibility. Where schools fail to meet Annual Yearly Progress, they have failed students, parents and communities,” he says.
School Choice
McCain says that he and his wife decided to send their children to parochial school, and now he wants to make sure that all parents can have the same freedom. “I believe parents should be empowered with their school choice to send their children to the school that can best educate them just as many members of Congress do with their own children. I find it beyond hypocritical that many of those who would refuse to allow public school parents to choose their child's school would never agree to force their own children into a school that did not work or was unsafe. They make another choice. That is a right we should honor for all parents. It is fundamental and essential." Holtz-Eakin says that's why McCain will fight for the ability of all students to have access to schools of demonstrated excellence, including charter schools, parochial schools and home schools. “The deplorable status of preparation for our children, particularly in comparison with the rest of the industrialized world, does not allow us the luxury of eliminating options in our educational repertoire,” Holtz-Eakin says. McCain supports vouchers as a way of giving parents more options and encouraging healthy competition for public schools.
No Child Left Behind
This bill has received a lot of flack from both parties, but while McCain acknowledges that changes should be made, he says “improve it, don't discard it.” According to Holtz-Eakin, “No Child Left Behind has focused our attention on the realities of how students perform against a common standard. We no longer accept low standards for some students and high standards for others. In this age of honest reporting, we finally see what is happening to students who were previously invisible. That is a progress all its own, but merely compels us to seek and find solutions to the dismal facts before us.” So how does McCain plan on improving NCLB? Holtz-Eakin says the law needs to start addressing the underlying cultural problems in our education system, instead of avoiding genuine accountability. Instead, he says McCain wants to empower parents “by greatly expanding the ability of parents to choose among schools for their children. All federal financial support must be predicated on providing parents the ability to move their children, and the dollars associated with them, from failing schools.”
College Funding and Affordability
While McCain believes the federal government plays an important role in college funding, he also believes grants and loans should be targeted towards those with genuine need, according to Holtz-Eakin. “Moreover, it is imperative that the federal government be good stewards of this money, operating programs without waste, favoritism or loss of integrity,” Holtz-Eakin says.
Universal Preschool
Holtz-Eakin says it's clear that too many children aren't prepared for school when they arrive on the first day. “These children start school at a disadvantage and slip further and further behind with every passing year,” he says. “Research has shown that the best return on investment of our education dollar is in early childhood development.” McCain plans to better prepare American kids for school by reforming Head Start “into a program that serves the essential need of America’s children to be prepared to learn when they enter school,” says Holtz-Eakin.
McCain says that American education “must be worthy of the promise we make to our children and ourselves—the freedom and opportunity to chase our dreams.” Whether voters line up behind McCain's dream is the question of the hour—only they will be able to determine the path of American education in the 21 st century.
Alright, so my impressions are: McCain doesn't think 'No Child Left Behind' is a bad thing, he just thinks it needs some tweaking which is too bad because 'No Child Left Behind' is in fact a broken law that doesn't benefit students or teachers. McCain feels school of choice freedom will solve everything and this is really pretty ignorant to a lot of the issues that are happening right now in education. He doesn't have a plan to fix the college funding situation, and he thinks standardized testing is a good thing which to any teacher, this is a huge negative on McCain's resume regarding education. Standardized testing is the primary reason why 'No Child Left Behind' gets so much criticism. There are actually good elements to NCLB, but standardized testing is not one of them. Overall, McCain is a terrible candidate based on his educational views and if you vote for him, know that you go against the interests of every teacher in the United States of America and every child who is enrolled in a public school.
Obama and education
The following information was obtained through education.com. Next up in my look through the candidates and their viewpoints on various aspects of education is Barack Obama.
BARACK OBAMA
In General Senator Obama recently announced an $18 billion plan to enhance early childhood education, improve the dropout prevention rate and provide teacher incentives. Obama has tried to use his comparative inexperience with Washington politics to his benefit, promising to take a fresh, objective look at the age-old debate over education issues. “A truly historic commitment to education – a real commitment – will require new resources and new reforms,” Obama says. “It will require a willingness to break free from the same debates that Washington has been engaged in for decades – Democrat versus Republican; vouchers versus the status quo; more money versus more accountability. And most of all, it will take a President who is honest about the challenges we face – who doesn’t just tell everyone what they want to hear, but what they need to hear.” Where does Obama stand specifically on the most pressing education issues? Let's take a look:
Standardized Testing
Standardized testing is stuck in the crossfire in the debate over accountability, and Obama has stepped up to take aim. He says that too often standardized tests fail to provide valuable or timely feedback. Meanwhile, “creativity has been drained from classrooms, as too many teachers are forced to teach to fill-in-the-bubble tests,” Obama says. While we do need some form of assessment, he says those tests should be measuring what is valuable for students to learn. “I will provide funds for states to implement a broader range of assessments that can evaluate higher-order skills, including students’ abilities to use technology, conduct research, engage in scientific investigation, solve problems, present and defend their ideas."
School Choice
Obama says his focus is on providing good schools for all kids, and that's why he does not support vouchers that allow parents to use public school money for private school. “We need to invest in our public schools and strengthen them, not drain their fiscal support,” he says. “In the end, vouchers would reduce the options available to children in need. I fear these children would truly be left behind in a private market system.” Obama is more open to charter schools working within the public school system, calling them “important innovators” which improve healthy competition among public schools. However, Obama says there needs to be strong accountability measures in place.
No Child Left Behind
Obama's catch phrase for this topic is, “ No Child Left Behind left the money behind,” meaning that unfulfilled funding promises have limited the program's effectiveness in improving public education. He says that the design of the law is also flawed; there needs to be better assessment and a greater effort to ensure that every child has a successful teacher. “Particularly at a time when our nation is facing a shortage in teachers due to retirement and retention problems, it is important to ensure that we can attract, support, and retain high-quality teachers,” he says. How does Obama propose we do this? By experimenting with alternative preparation, mentoring and professional development programs, in addition to providing fresh incentives for serving high-need schools. Specifically, he plans to provide funding for 200 new Teacher Residency Programs, an idea he introduced in the Senate last year. In these programs, individuals completing coursework for teacher certification could serve as apprentices in the classrooms of veteran teachers, as long as they pledged at least three years of service in the sponsoring district.
College Funding and Affordability
America lags behind many nations in the world when it comes to making college affordable. How does Obama plan to get us caught up with the rest of the world? The solution, he says, lies in his American Opportunity Tax Credit. “This universal and fully refundable credit will ensure that the first $4,000 of a college education is completely free for most Americans, and will cover two-thirds the cost of tuition at the average public college or university,” he says. “And by making the tax credit fully refundable, my credit will help low-income families that need it the most.” Obama says he also plans to free up more money for aid by using public instead of privately funded loan providers.
Universal Preschool
The first step in closing the achievement gap is making sure that children are prepared when they start school, according to Obama. And that, he says, means providing funding for voluntary, universal preschool programs . “Research shows that early experiences shape whether a child's brain develops strong skills for future learning, behavior and success. Without a strong base on which to build, children, particularly disadvantaged children, will be behind long before they reach kindergarten,” he says, adding that investing in early learning makes economic sense, as it can reduce the need for costly services, such as special education.
Obama says his education plans reflect a desire to “give every American child the chance to receive the best education America has to offer – from the moment they’re born to the day they graduate college.” And he says he would put the full resources of the federal government behind this plan. The big question for all the candidates is whether their plans can become realties, and, no matter how many bullet points they lay down or speeches they make, the answer ultimately lies in the hands of voters.
Alright, so my impressions are: Obama has good ideas in regards to fixing standardized testing and what standardized testing means, college affordability, and how the 'No Child Left Behind' Act really isn't doing much, but he really doesn't have any realistic means to bring change about (especially for a candidate whose campaign slogan promises change). He skirts the issues of school of choice and universal preschool, giving a lot of information that is pretty unrelated. Overall, I would say Obama is a victim of exactly what is doesn't want to be: a candidate who says the things that sound best to Americans. If he had realistic plans to back up some of his ideas, he may be worth a vote.
BARACK OBAMA
In General Senator Obama recently announced an $18 billion plan to enhance early childhood education, improve the dropout prevention rate and provide teacher incentives. Obama has tried to use his comparative inexperience with Washington politics to his benefit, promising to take a fresh, objective look at the age-old debate over education issues. “A truly historic commitment to education – a real commitment – will require new resources and new reforms,” Obama says. “It will require a willingness to break free from the same debates that Washington has been engaged in for decades – Democrat versus Republican; vouchers versus the status quo; more money versus more accountability. And most of all, it will take a President who is honest about the challenges we face – who doesn’t just tell everyone what they want to hear, but what they need to hear.” Where does Obama stand specifically on the most pressing education issues? Let's take a look:
Standardized Testing
Standardized testing is stuck in the crossfire in the debate over accountability, and Obama has stepped up to take aim. He says that too often standardized tests fail to provide valuable or timely feedback. Meanwhile, “creativity has been drained from classrooms, as too many teachers are forced to teach to fill-in-the-bubble tests,” Obama says. While we do need some form of assessment, he says those tests should be measuring what is valuable for students to learn. “I will provide funds for states to implement a broader range of assessments that can evaluate higher-order skills, including students’ abilities to use technology, conduct research, engage in scientific investigation, solve problems, present and defend their ideas."
School Choice
Obama says his focus is on providing good schools for all kids, and that's why he does not support vouchers that allow parents to use public school money for private school. “We need to invest in our public schools and strengthen them, not drain their fiscal support,” he says. “In the end, vouchers would reduce the options available to children in need. I fear these children would truly be left behind in a private market system.” Obama is more open to charter schools working within the public school system, calling them “important innovators” which improve healthy competition among public schools. However, Obama says there needs to be strong accountability measures in place.
No Child Left Behind
Obama's catch phrase for this topic is, “ No Child Left Behind left the money behind,” meaning that unfulfilled funding promises have limited the program's effectiveness in improving public education. He says that the design of the law is also flawed; there needs to be better assessment and a greater effort to ensure that every child has a successful teacher. “Particularly at a time when our nation is facing a shortage in teachers due to retirement and retention problems, it is important to ensure that we can attract, support, and retain high-quality teachers,” he says. How does Obama propose we do this? By experimenting with alternative preparation, mentoring and professional development programs, in addition to providing fresh incentives for serving high-need schools. Specifically, he plans to provide funding for 200 new Teacher Residency Programs, an idea he introduced in the Senate last year. In these programs, individuals completing coursework for teacher certification could serve as apprentices in the classrooms of veteran teachers, as long as they pledged at least three years of service in the sponsoring district.
College Funding and Affordability
America lags behind many nations in the world when it comes to making college affordable. How does Obama plan to get us caught up with the rest of the world? The solution, he says, lies in his American Opportunity Tax Credit. “This universal and fully refundable credit will ensure that the first $4,000 of a college education is completely free for most Americans, and will cover two-thirds the cost of tuition at the average public college or university,” he says. “And by making the tax credit fully refundable, my credit will help low-income families that need it the most.” Obama says he also plans to free up more money for aid by using public instead of privately funded loan providers.
Universal Preschool
The first step in closing the achievement gap is making sure that children are prepared when they start school, according to Obama. And that, he says, means providing funding for voluntary, universal preschool programs . “Research shows that early experiences shape whether a child's brain develops strong skills for future learning, behavior and success. Without a strong base on which to build, children, particularly disadvantaged children, will be behind long before they reach kindergarten,” he says, adding that investing in early learning makes economic sense, as it can reduce the need for costly services, such as special education.
Obama says his education plans reflect a desire to “give every American child the chance to receive the best education America has to offer – from the moment they’re born to the day they graduate college.” And he says he would put the full resources of the federal government behind this plan. The big question for all the candidates is whether their plans can become realties, and, no matter how many bullet points they lay down or speeches they make, the answer ultimately lies in the hands of voters.
Alright, so my impressions are: Obama has good ideas in regards to fixing standardized testing and what standardized testing means, college affordability, and how the 'No Child Left Behind' Act really isn't doing much, but he really doesn't have any realistic means to bring change about (especially for a candidate whose campaign slogan promises change). He skirts the issues of school of choice and universal preschool, giving a lot of information that is pretty unrelated. Overall, I would say Obama is a victim of exactly what is doesn't want to be: a candidate who says the things that sound best to Americans. If he had realistic plans to back up some of his ideas, he may be worth a vote.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Huckabee and Education
Over the course of the next week or two, I'll be sharing some information in regards to Mike Huckabee, Barrack Obama, John McCain, and Hillary Clinton which should shed some light onto their educational viewpoints and what they believe is the best course of action to take in the future of education. The following information was obtained through education.com. I'll start with Mike Huckabee, although it appears McCain will eventually be on the ticket come November. Education.com apoke with Alice Stewart, Huckabee's campaign press secretary about these issues:
MIKE HUCKABEE
In General
Huckabee's ideas about education reform include a focus on the value of arts education, as well as creating a personalized learning path for every student to focus on their interests –ideas that neither Democrats nor Republicans are broaching.
Standardized Testing
One of the hot-button issues of today's education debate is that of standardized testing, which aims to assess the overall performance of schools as well as that of individual students. While Huckabee supports testing, he says that it should be used in conjunction with a variety of other approaches to assessment. “Governor Huckabee believes that testing should be an important component, but not the only way we assess a student's progress,” says Stewart. “We know that students learn in a variety of ways, and No Child Left Behind must recognize multiple measures, including portfolios, oral presentations, experiential demonstrations, and other methods of demonstrating competence.”
School Choice
Where does Huckabee stand in the ongoing debate about charter schools, homeschooling, and school vouchers? He gives the green light for all three, but believes that “Vouchers should be decided by the states, not the federal government,” says Stewart. She adds that Huckabee thinks vouchers are good for failing urban schools, but may be more problematic in rural areas where alternative school choices are not within easy commuting range.
No Child Left Behind
Although Huckabee supports the accountability measures that NCLB represents, which prevent students from “falling through the cracks,” he thinks that the program needs some adjustment. Specifically, he says that NCLB does not take into account schools with high percentages of ESL and special needs students, and he stresses his commitment to staying true to art and music requirements in schools. “I believe passionately that music and the arts play a critical role in our school curriculum,” Huckabee says. Stewart underscores his point, saying that “Raising reading and math scores must not come at the expense of other elements of a well-rounded education, and NCLB must insist that schools not get away with teaching to the test.”
College Funding and Affordability
For the next generation of voters, college costs are a major concern. So what's Huckabee's plan? According to Stewart, “Governer Huckabee believes we should encourage scholarships and offer low-interest-rate or interest-free loans to students majoring in a variety of vital fields. We should recruit for science, math, and engineering, as we do for sports.” In other words, students focusing on important areas such as math, science, and engineering should get a leg up. “We should also offer forgiveness of student loans or tuition for post-graduate study to those who will teach in under-performing schools or do other national service,” adds Stewart.
Universal Preschool
As for expanding universal preschool education on a federal level, Huckabee maintains that individual states, and not the government at large, should resolve the issue themselves. “Education is best handled at a state level,” Stewart says.
But while Huckabee says that “the whole role of education is a state issue –it's not really a federal issue,” he does suggest that government has a part in the process: “I think the federal government can play a pivotal role primarily in helping to make sure that the best practices that are working in the states are shared with states who are struggling,” he says. An individualized approach, both at the level of schools and students, is his educational agenda, Stewart says. For students, Huckabee wants to see a “personalized learning” plan for each student, especially at the high school level. Stewart says that “each student will have a personalized learning plan ... where the student is the lead author based on his interests, passions, and dreams.”Says Huckabee: “If we really are serious then first of all we make sure that we build a curriculum around their interests rather than just push them into something that they don't care about.”
Alright, so my impressions are: He supports standardized testing (which sucks), believes No Child Left Behind is a good thing (boo, hiss) but believes it needs to be changed to take ESLs and special needs students into account (there's something good), he thinks student loans should have low interest or no interest depending on field (good that he thinks this, but will he do anything about it? Probably not), and (as I highlighted above) he thinks education is a state issue, not a federal issue (...what? Don't dump it on the state politicians, they'll dump it right back on you). Overall, I would say Huckabee is a poor candidate to vote for in regards to education.
MIKE HUCKABEE
In General
Huckabee's ideas about education reform include a focus on the value of arts education, as well as creating a personalized learning path for every student to focus on their interests –ideas that neither Democrats nor Republicans are broaching.
Standardized Testing
One of the hot-button issues of today's education debate is that of standardized testing, which aims to assess the overall performance of schools as well as that of individual students. While Huckabee supports testing, he says that it should be used in conjunction with a variety of other approaches to assessment. “Governor Huckabee believes that testing should be an important component, but not the only way we assess a student's progress,” says Stewart. “We know that students learn in a variety of ways, and No Child Left Behind must recognize multiple measures, including portfolios, oral presentations, experiential demonstrations, and other methods of demonstrating competence.”
School Choice
Where does Huckabee stand in the ongoing debate about charter schools, homeschooling, and school vouchers? He gives the green light for all three, but believes that “Vouchers should be decided by the states, not the federal government,” says Stewart. She adds that Huckabee thinks vouchers are good for failing urban schools, but may be more problematic in rural areas where alternative school choices are not within easy commuting range.
No Child Left Behind
Although Huckabee supports the accountability measures that NCLB represents, which prevent students from “falling through the cracks,” he thinks that the program needs some adjustment. Specifically, he says that NCLB does not take into account schools with high percentages of ESL and special needs students, and he stresses his commitment to staying true to art and music requirements in schools. “I believe passionately that music and the arts play a critical role in our school curriculum,” Huckabee says. Stewart underscores his point, saying that “Raising reading and math scores must not come at the expense of other elements of a well-rounded education, and NCLB must insist that schools not get away with teaching to the test.”
College Funding and Affordability
For the next generation of voters, college costs are a major concern. So what's Huckabee's plan? According to Stewart, “Governer Huckabee believes we should encourage scholarships and offer low-interest-rate or interest-free loans to students majoring in a variety of vital fields. We should recruit for science, math, and engineering, as we do for sports.” In other words, students focusing on important areas such as math, science, and engineering should get a leg up. “We should also offer forgiveness of student loans or tuition for post-graduate study to those who will teach in under-performing schools or do other national service,” adds Stewart.
Universal Preschool
As for expanding universal preschool education on a federal level, Huckabee maintains that individual states, and not the government at large, should resolve the issue themselves. “Education is best handled at a state level,” Stewart says.
But while Huckabee says that “the whole role of education is a state issue –it's not really a federal issue,” he does suggest that government has a part in the process: “I think the federal government can play a pivotal role primarily in helping to make sure that the best practices that are working in the states are shared with states who are struggling,” he says. An individualized approach, both at the level of schools and students, is his educational agenda, Stewart says. For students, Huckabee wants to see a “personalized learning” plan for each student, especially at the high school level. Stewart says that “each student will have a personalized learning plan ... where the student is the lead author based on his interests, passions, and dreams.”Says Huckabee: “If we really are serious then first of all we make sure that we build a curriculum around their interests rather than just push them into something that they don't care about.”
Alright, so my impressions are: He supports standardized testing (which sucks), believes No Child Left Behind is a good thing (boo, hiss) but believes it needs to be changed to take ESLs and special needs students into account (there's something good), he thinks student loans should have low interest or no interest depending on field (good that he thinks this, but will he do anything about it? Probably not), and (as I highlighted above) he thinks education is a state issue, not a federal issue (...what? Don't dump it on the state politicians, they'll dump it right back on you). Overall, I would say Huckabee is a poor candidate to vote for in regards to education.
Teaching Trade-Off 2
This past week, there's been some good discussion based off of a previous thread ('Teaching Trade-Off'), and one of the contributors (Heidi - thanks again, great perspective) brought up some very good questions. One of the questions she was unsure about was the exact reasons why educators leave the field in their first three years of experience. This intrigued me as well, so I've done a bit of research and found an interesting article which was published in the February 25th, 2008 edition of Time magazine called 'How to Make Great Teachers'. The article covers several important issues related to the field of education, but in regards to Heidi's inquiry as to why teachers usually quit so early into their career, Time magazine offers some answers. Here's some excerpts from the article:
Why do teachers bail? The biggest reason is pay. U.S. public-school teachers earn an average annual salary of less than $48,000, and they start off at an average of about $32,000. That's what Karie Gladis, 29, earned as a new teacher in Miami. She barely made it 31⁄2 years before leaving and taking a job in educational publishing. "It was stressful living from paycheck to paycheck," she says. "If my car broke down or if I needed dental work, there was just no wiggle room."
But money isn't the only reason public-school teachers quit. Ben Van Dyk, 25, left a job teaching in a high-poverty Philadelphia school after just one year to take a position at a Catholic school where his earning prospects are lower but where he has more support from mentors, more control over how he teaches and fewer problems with student discipline. Novice teachers are much more likely to call it quits if they work in schools where they feel they have little input or support.
The article also agrees that the solution to many education problems in America begins with paying teachers more money. As a part of the article, the author randomly polled 100 educators from K-12 public schools who had left their job in education within their first three years and asked why. The most frequent responses were:
1. Not enough pay
2. High stress levels
3. Lack of freedom (in curriculum and teaching methods I imagine)
4. Lack of job security
The last one kind of surprised me, but the article describes many teachers who fear for their jobs because of standardized testing and other teachers who have to take special care not to put themselves in any kind of situation where a student could get them fired (an example would be a male teacher who will not speak with a female student one-on-one after class unless they take the discussion into the hallway where others are present). Also, many teachers are laid off depending on state and government funding each year, and if you're among the youngest teachers in a school, you can bet your name is on the list. Anyway, I thought the article in Time was interesting and it related to the discussion postings in my blog 'Teaching Trade-Off'. And yes, Heidi, it's appauling to think a JC Pennies sales associate makes just as much as a starting teacher does. You suggest it shows the priorities of this country, and I agree with you. The real question is: do the powers that be in this country really want people to be educated? Sadly, I would say no because educated people pose a threat to the system.
Why do teachers bail? The biggest reason is pay. U.S. public-school teachers earn an average annual salary of less than $48,000, and they start off at an average of about $32,000. That's what Karie Gladis, 29, earned as a new teacher in Miami. She barely made it 31⁄2 years before leaving and taking a job in educational publishing. "It was stressful living from paycheck to paycheck," she says. "If my car broke down or if I needed dental work, there was just no wiggle room."
But money isn't the only reason public-school teachers quit. Ben Van Dyk, 25, left a job teaching in a high-poverty Philadelphia school after just one year to take a position at a Catholic school where his earning prospects are lower but where he has more support from mentors, more control over how he teaches and fewer problems with student discipline. Novice teachers are much more likely to call it quits if they work in schools where they feel they have little input or support.
The article also agrees that the solution to many education problems in America begins with paying teachers more money. As a part of the article, the author randomly polled 100 educators from K-12 public schools who had left their job in education within their first three years and asked why. The most frequent responses were:
1. Not enough pay
2. High stress levels
3. Lack of freedom (in curriculum and teaching methods I imagine)
4. Lack of job security
The last one kind of surprised me, but the article describes many teachers who fear for their jobs because of standardized testing and other teachers who have to take special care not to put themselves in any kind of situation where a student could get them fired (an example would be a male teacher who will not speak with a female student one-on-one after class unless they take the discussion into the hallway where others are present). Also, many teachers are laid off depending on state and government funding each year, and if you're among the youngest teachers in a school, you can bet your name is on the list. Anyway, I thought the article in Time was interesting and it related to the discussion postings in my blog 'Teaching Trade-Off'. And yes, Heidi, it's appauling to think a JC Pennies sales associate makes just as much as a starting teacher does. You suggest it shows the priorities of this country, and I agree with you. The real question is: do the powers that be in this country really want people to be educated? Sadly, I would say no because educated people pose a threat to the system.
Friday, February 29, 2008
Every Teacher's Bare Behind
I arrived at Lincoln Junior High School last week to discover that I was to teach my group of 7th graders a lesson for the upcoming CSAP testing (identifying adjectives, nouns, and verbs). While this lesson wasn't difficult for me to teach, it reminded me how CSAP testing interrupts the regular flow of a curriculum. You see, not only are teachers expected to cover the same amount of material now as they did prior to CSAP, they have to address and teach to CSAP because their jobs are on the line. If you're a teacher and your students don't perform well on the CSAP, it goes on your record and you become accountable. If a school has failing test scores on a consistent basis, it will be shut down by the state government and everybody in that school will be out of a job (as was the case with a Denver middle school three years ago). It rarely gets to this level as a principal will likely fire a teacher if their students don't perform well on the CSAP before it gets out of hand. Every day last week, my class at Lincoln was focusing on some aspect of CSAP preparation. My mentor told me that she wished this wasn't the case, but because of the 'No Child Left Behind' Act, this is unfortunately the outcome. As a future educator, it's very important for me to understand the pros and cons of the 'No Child Left Behind' Act as it will undoubetedly have an impact on my career. But for all of you who are reading this (and might not be teachers), it is also very important to understand because you may have children in public education, or will have children in public education very soon. So lets go over some of the pros and cons real quick:
PROS of 'No Child Left Behind'
1. CSAP testing. According to the NEA (National Education Association), test scores from CSAP indicate that the majority of students are becoming more proficient in Math and English on an annual basis (this is compared to previous results gathered from a national test such as SALT).
2. ELLs (English Language Learners) benefit from the program because standards are leveled and it "creates equal opportunity in education".
3. Forces teachers to be certified with a license. This is actually a useful benefit of NCLB. In a previous post, 'Bro C' stated that teachers weren't required to have a license, they just had to pass a state test (PLACE or PRAXIS) and have education equivalent to a Bachelor's Degree. This isn't true. NCLB requires that you must obtain a teaching license from an accredited college or university (which is what I'm doing currently - I wish I could just take the PLACE or PRAXIS and not be in 30k student loan debt lol).
4. NCLB gives students a school-of-choice option; they get to pick whatever school they want (in the past it was dictated by zip codes).
5. If you're a politician, it somehow makes you look better to endorse it and it definitely fattens your wallet, but let's not get into that.
CONS of 'No Child Left Behind'
1. CSAP testing. As stated above, it cuts into EXPECTED school curriculum and places pressure and accountability on the teachers (I suppose it's similiar to professional sports in a sense, if the players don't play well and the team is terrible, the coach gets canned). Shouldn't the accountability be on the students? (this differs from my professional sports analogy...in professional sports, a team can release or cut a player if the organization doesn't feel they are giving good effort. In education, a teacher can't release or cut a student if they just refuse to be accountable; the worst they can do is fail a student which in turn makes the teacher look bad on their record).
2. CSAP testing. Because of the pressures and accountability that CSAP testing puts on teachers, they HAVE to 'teach to the test' (so-to-speak). They spend valuable time and effort teaching kids how to get it right on the test instead of teaching kids how to understand the material. You're probably scratching your head and saying: 'doesn't teaching them how to get it right and how to understand it go hand-in-hand?' Simply put, no. It doesn't. Teachers no longer care if the kids understand it or not, they just want them to get it right because their job is on the line. Just because a kid knows that 2 + 6 = 8 doesn't neccesarily mean they understand WHY 2 + 6 = 8.
3. CSAP testing. What life skills will CSAP testing give students in the future? Seriously think about this. In all honesty, the knowlegde that children gain in order to perform well on the CSAP will most likely be of no value (or little value) when they grow into an adult and are faced with real-world problems.
4. NCLB facilitates military recruitment. Here's something I bet hardly any of you knew: NCLB REQUIRES that all students information be given to the military and be placed in their recruitment programs. Failure to do so results in the student's expulsion from public school. Hmmm...wonder why this is part of the tiny print in NCLB (a purely political concoction) although it has nothing to do with education or improving education.
5. Some students just don't learn as well under a "one-size-fits-all" standard of education. Some students require much more creativity than NCLB allows to grow and blossom as a future citizen in our society.
6. Teachers don't get anything from it. As if our jobs weren't stressful and hard enough, placing a "one-size-fits-all" standard on our career as well as our teaching methods, our curriculums, and our educational beliefs and consequent outcomes doesn't make it any easier. However, even if our personal finances don't receive any kind of boost, if our students perform well on the CSAP, our school gets more state funding - - yay. I guess. maybe. I don't know. I don't really care. I'm just glad I still have a job...I guess. yay.
So all-in-all, no wonder teachers hate NCLB so much. You would too if you were/are a teacher. Your freedom would be stripped away and you'd fear for your job as it would lay in Little Pedro and Sweet Sally's hands. In the next few posts, I'll be going over the educational beliefs of Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Barrack Obama, and Hillary Clinton, so all of you can gain a little information on how they'll impact my life if they're elected President of the United States in November. So shame on you if you vote for somebody that will make my professional life suck. Just kidding. Not really.
PROS of 'No Child Left Behind'
1. CSAP testing. According to the NEA (National Education Association), test scores from CSAP indicate that the majority of students are becoming more proficient in Math and English on an annual basis (this is compared to previous results gathered from a national test such as SALT).
2. ELLs (English Language Learners) benefit from the program because standards are leveled and it "creates equal opportunity in education".
3. Forces teachers to be certified with a license. This is actually a useful benefit of NCLB. In a previous post, 'Bro C' stated that teachers weren't required to have a license, they just had to pass a state test (PLACE or PRAXIS) and have education equivalent to a Bachelor's Degree. This isn't true. NCLB requires that you must obtain a teaching license from an accredited college or university (which is what I'm doing currently - I wish I could just take the PLACE or PRAXIS and not be in 30k student loan debt lol).
4. NCLB gives students a school-of-choice option; they get to pick whatever school they want (in the past it was dictated by zip codes).
5. If you're a politician, it somehow makes you look better to endorse it and it definitely fattens your wallet, but let's not get into that.
CONS of 'No Child Left Behind'
1. CSAP testing. As stated above, it cuts into EXPECTED school curriculum and places pressure and accountability on the teachers (I suppose it's similiar to professional sports in a sense, if the players don't play well and the team is terrible, the coach gets canned). Shouldn't the accountability be on the students? (this differs from my professional sports analogy...in professional sports, a team can release or cut a player if the organization doesn't feel they are giving good effort. In education, a teacher can't release or cut a student if they just refuse to be accountable; the worst they can do is fail a student which in turn makes the teacher look bad on their record).
2. CSAP testing. Because of the pressures and accountability that CSAP testing puts on teachers, they HAVE to 'teach to the test' (so-to-speak). They spend valuable time and effort teaching kids how to get it right on the test instead of teaching kids how to understand the material. You're probably scratching your head and saying: 'doesn't teaching them how to get it right and how to understand it go hand-in-hand?' Simply put, no. It doesn't. Teachers no longer care if the kids understand it or not, they just want them to get it right because their job is on the line. Just because a kid knows that 2 + 6 = 8 doesn't neccesarily mean they understand WHY 2 + 6 = 8.
3. CSAP testing. What life skills will CSAP testing give students in the future? Seriously think about this. In all honesty, the knowlegde that children gain in order to perform well on the CSAP will most likely be of no value (or little value) when they grow into an adult and are faced with real-world problems.
4. NCLB facilitates military recruitment. Here's something I bet hardly any of you knew: NCLB REQUIRES that all students information be given to the military and be placed in their recruitment programs. Failure to do so results in the student's expulsion from public school. Hmmm...wonder why this is part of the tiny print in NCLB (a purely political concoction) although it has nothing to do with education or improving education.
5. Some students just don't learn as well under a "one-size-fits-all" standard of education. Some students require much more creativity than NCLB allows to grow and blossom as a future citizen in our society.
6. Teachers don't get anything from it. As if our jobs weren't stressful and hard enough, placing a "one-size-fits-all" standard on our career as well as our teaching methods, our curriculums, and our educational beliefs and consequent outcomes doesn't make it any easier. However, even if our personal finances don't receive any kind of boost, if our students perform well on the CSAP, our school gets more state funding - - yay. I guess. maybe. I don't know. I don't really care. I'm just glad I still have a job...I guess. yay.
So all-in-all, no wonder teachers hate NCLB so much. You would too if you were/are a teacher. Your freedom would be stripped away and you'd fear for your job as it would lay in Little Pedro and Sweet Sally's hands. In the next few posts, I'll be going over the educational beliefs of Mike Huckabee, John McCain, Barrack Obama, and Hillary Clinton, so all of you can gain a little information on how they'll impact my life if they're elected President of the United States in November. So shame on you if you vote for somebody that will make my professional life suck. Just kidding. Not really.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Initiative
A response to the following quote:
"We are all leaders. Each one of us is setting an example for someone else, and each one of us has the responsibility to shape the future as we wish it to be."
-Keshavan Nair
Initiative
The General. The knight in shining armor. The apeaker. The director. The captain of the kickball team. These are all leaders, but they are also teachers. To the troops, the soldiers, the audience, the actors, and their teammates. They're leaders, but they're also teachers. As a person in this world, it is inevitable that we will always be a student to someone or something, but it is not inevitable that we become teachers and leaders ourselves. It becomes a choice that we must all make, a bridge that we choose to cross or stay put, but regardless of whether you are the teacher or the student, the capacity to be a leader yourself will always be there.
"We are all leaders. Each one of us is setting an example for someone else, and each one of us has the responsibility to shape the future as we wish it to be."
-Keshavan Nair
Initiative
The General. The knight in shining armor. The apeaker. The director. The captain of the kickball team. These are all leaders, but they are also teachers. To the troops, the soldiers, the audience, the actors, and their teammates. They're leaders, but they're also teachers. As a person in this world, it is inevitable that we will always be a student to someone or something, but it is not inevitable that we become teachers and leaders ourselves. It becomes a choice that we must all make, a bridge that we choose to cross or stay put, but regardless of whether you are the teacher or the student, the capacity to be a leader yourself will always be there.
Monday, February 25, 2008
Teaching Trade-Off
You hear it all the time, teachers aren't paid enough. As a student, I'm constantly reminded that becoming a teacher will not bring any monetary rewards worth noting. I decided to take a closer look into this, wondering: 'Just how much does a teacher make? How does it compare to other professions?' Here's what I found:
According to the NEA, the average teacher in a K-12 environment makes 28,553$ annually (Colorado is actually lower than the national average by the way), and according to the United States Department of Labor, a teacher makes 30,377$ on average every year. Here's a list (provided by the US Dept. of Labor) of other professions and what they make on an average annual basis:
Dentist 110,160$
Lawyer 78,170$
Nuclear Engineer 71,310$
Physical Therapist 56,600$
Computer Systems Analyst 52,180$
Gov. Security Officer 48,090$
Psychologist 48,050$
Construction Worker 47,610$
Librarian 38,470$
Technical Writer 36,480$
Funeral Direcctor 35,040$
Postal Worker 34,840$
Fire Fighter 31,170$
Plumber 30,720$
Teacher (K-12) 30,377$
Retail Sales Worker 29,570$
News Reporter 26,470$
Home Appliance Repairman 26,010$
Bus Driver 23,070$
Vending Machine Repair 23,040$
Music Instrument Repair 23,010$
Dancer 21,430$
Personal Guard 16,240$
Janitor 15,340$
Cook / Chef 13,440$
Obviously there are a lot more jobs out there than I've listed here, but I was just trying to get a sample from a variety of salary ranges. What this shows me is that teachers aren't necessarily in the pits for pay (considering they have summers off and have pretty good health benefits), but they aren't much better than the bus drivers and vending machine repair people of the world. To put it in context, your average retail sales associate at JC Pennies or Macys is making just as much as a K-12 school teacher. Also, look at some of the jobs that pay better than a K-12 teacher: funeral direcctor, construction worker, postal worker, plumber, LIBRARIAN! Seriously...ask any K-12 school teacher if they'd rather be a librarian based on monetary value and they'd say 'yes'. However, perhaps this is where the attitude comes in that teachers don't do it for the pay. To a certain extent, perhaps they understand there are much better paying jobs that are A LOT easier to do, but they love working with kids and they won't choose anything else. I personally feel teachers are grossly underpaid considering what they have to deal with and the amount of time they spend with other people's children (on average - if you discount sleep - a child spends more time around educators than their own parents), but I'm definitely biased considering that I'm entering the field of education - of course I want better pay :) Perhaps some of you can shed some light on this subject with your own opinions. What do you think? Are teachers underpaid or not?
According to the NEA, the average teacher in a K-12 environment makes 28,553$ annually (Colorado is actually lower than the national average by the way), and according to the United States Department of Labor, a teacher makes 30,377$ on average every year. Here's a list (provided by the US Dept. of Labor) of other professions and what they make on an average annual basis:
Dentist 110,160$
Lawyer 78,170$
Nuclear Engineer 71,310$
Physical Therapist 56,600$
Computer Systems Analyst 52,180$
Gov. Security Officer 48,090$
Psychologist 48,050$
Construction Worker 47,610$
Librarian 38,470$
Technical Writer 36,480$
Funeral Direcctor 35,040$
Postal Worker 34,840$
Fire Fighter 31,170$
Plumber 30,720$
Teacher (K-12) 30,377$
Retail Sales Worker 29,570$
News Reporter 26,470$
Home Appliance Repairman 26,010$
Bus Driver 23,070$
Vending Machine Repair 23,040$
Music Instrument Repair 23,010$
Dancer 21,430$
Personal Guard 16,240$
Janitor 15,340$
Cook / Chef 13,440$
Obviously there are a lot more jobs out there than I've listed here, but I was just trying to get a sample from a variety of salary ranges. What this shows me is that teachers aren't necessarily in the pits for pay (considering they have summers off and have pretty good health benefits), but they aren't much better than the bus drivers and vending machine repair people of the world. To put it in context, your average retail sales associate at JC Pennies or Macys is making just as much as a K-12 school teacher. Also, look at some of the jobs that pay better than a K-12 teacher: funeral direcctor, construction worker, postal worker, plumber, LIBRARIAN! Seriously...ask any K-12 school teacher if they'd rather be a librarian based on monetary value and they'd say 'yes'. However, perhaps this is where the attitude comes in that teachers don't do it for the pay. To a certain extent, perhaps they understand there are much better paying jobs that are A LOT easier to do, but they love working with kids and they won't choose anything else. I personally feel teachers are grossly underpaid considering what they have to deal with and the amount of time they spend with other people's children (on average - if you discount sleep - a child spends more time around educators than their own parents), but I'm definitely biased considering that I'm entering the field of education - of course I want better pay :) Perhaps some of you can shed some light on this subject with your own opinions. What do you think? Are teachers underpaid or not?
Friday, February 22, 2008
Miracle on Education Avenue
Last week, a miracle happened. No, nobody found the cure for cancer, Jesus didn't return, and Bush is still the President. Something else happened. I was student teaching at Lincoln Junior High School and a much welcomed ghost from my past reappeared. His name is Darrell Speer and he was a science teacher of mine back when I was in high school at Rocky Mountain. I hadn't spoken to him for a few years and lost contact with him when his email stopped working. I googled him, I looked him up in the phone book, and I even asked around, but no luck. I feared the worst of course, considering his age, but to my surprise, he's still around and still teaching (as a sub for PSD). He's a remarkable man and in a way, he saved my life. He took me in when no one else would, he saw the potential in me as a student, and he was willing to be my friend in life. It didn't matter if I didn't understand a lick of chemistry or an ounce of physics, he passed me anyway. He told me it didn't matter, the formulas were just formulas and the science was just science, even if I got it wrong. He told me the only thing that mattered was what I had in my heart. In today's world, teachers are grossly underpaid, and terribly unappreciated for as much impact as they have on tomorrow's world. Teachers are the most important role models a child will have as they grow into an adult. They shape children, they inspire children, they care for children, and unfortunately, they're mostly forgotten by the powers that be in our decadent society. If it weren't for teachers like Darrell Speer, the world would be a much darker place. Thank you Mr. Speer, and I hope every0ne who reads this will take a moment to remember some of their best teachers and just how much of an impact they had on their lives while they were growing up. When people ask me why I want to be a teacher, there's a variety of reasons, but if I could personify all of my reasons, they would best be described by Darrell Speer.
Monday, February 18, 2008
2007 Movie Grade Guide
While this post won't be intellectually stimulating or related to my education class which shares this blog space, it will act as a substitute for my missing Coloradoan editor and the annual "Movie Grade Guide" that I always put together. For those of you who are unfamiliar, I write movie reviews for the local newspaper (archived online) and grade them on an A-F system. Every year around Oscar time, I put out my grades for the previous 365 days. Last year, I blasted the movie industry and ranted about the lack of "good" movies and the terrible abundance of rehashes and special effects shows. This is no doubt related to the Writer's Guild Strike and the studios attitude towards writers in general - don't get me started on that. So what did we see in 2007? Transformers, another Die Hard, an addition to the Rambo series, another Jack Sparrow tale, another Spider-man, another Jason Bourne movie, a return for the Ninja Turtles, Ghost Rider, and a two hour escapade into the town of Springfield. Hmm. Rehashes and special effects shows? 2007 was an even worse year for the movie industry than 2006 - something I thought was nearly impossible. But again, when you don't have writers - sorry, good writers - this is what happens. Honestly, I almost forgot the Academy Awards were going to air this weekend until I saw an ad for them during LOST. To me, the movie industry is in trouble, BIG trouble. Box office sales have been falling since 2003, and 07's numbers are down more than ever while TV ratings are sky-rocketing with the continuing desire for reality shows, and the video game industry is surprisngly the fastest growing medium out there now that Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are in full swing with next generation software (this doesn't factor in the PC gaming world which is relatively healthy as well). My point is, not as many people are going to the movies anymore. The studios will blame the technology and availability issue, saying people find ways to watch their products with a variety of methods, not just the silver screen. While there may be an element of truth to that argument, I think the CEO's running the movie business need to look at it for what it is - people aren't going to the movie theater because the movies - generally - suck. Fact of the matter is, if a studio puts out a "good" film, people will see it, and they'll pay the ten bucks or whatever it is nowadays to see it in a theater. With that being said, let's move on to my actual grade guide for 2007 (from worst to first):
"Ghost Rider" Grade: F (45%)
The worst movie I've seen in years - if not forever. When people ask what my worst movies of all-time are, I tell them it's hard because you have things like "Napolean Dynamite", "Dude Where's Your Car", "Dungeons and Dragons", and "Day After Tomorrow" that come right to mind, but "Ghost Rider" may be worse than any of those. I can't believe I'm about to write this - for God's sake, slap some sense into me - but I'd probably rather watch any of the aforementioned films on my list of worst movies than "Ghost Rider".
"Grindhouse" Grade: F (50%)
Here's another terrible movie - but wait! It's a double-feature so you get twice the suckage. The first film is a mindless zombie-fest while the second film features Kurt Russell trying to run over women with his 'death-proof' car. Luckily I didn't spend any money to see this one.
"Shooter" Grade: F (55%)
What's up with all of the 'F' movies this year? Am I really becoming a tough, cynical, and bitter critic, or what? By the way, don't waste your time watching this junk.
"Vaccancy" Grade: D (65%)
"Rescue Dawn" Grade: D+ (67%)
How long can Christian Bale run for? Oh yeah, two and a half hours.
"3:10 to Yuma" Grade: D+ (69.9%)
Sorry Dad, but it was a little too chessy for me.
"Transformers" Grade: C- (70%)
'I AM OPTIMUS PRIME!' right...
"Spider-man 3" Grade: C- (72%)
They turned a decent story into a special effects show, what a shame.
"Pirates of the Caribbean 3" Grade: C- (73%)
I did like the Johnny Depp scene where he's stuck with the rock creatures.
"The Hoax" Grade: C (74%)
The real hoax was how they got me to pay to watch it.
"Next" Grade: C (74.1%)
"Live Free or Die Hard" Grade: C (74.2%)
The first Die Hard is still great, but this comes in second as far as the series goes for me. Not sure why everybody liked the third one so much, I thought it was like watching a made-for-tv movie personally.
"The Simpsons Movie" Grade: C (74.3%)
It just didn't have a Simpsonesque feel to me. Bart flashing everybody? Seriosuly...
"Hot Fuzz" Grade: C (75%)
This was actually an 'A' movie until the end where it degrades into a zombie-fest - although the grocery store scene with zombies throwing pineapples at the protagonists cracked me up pretty good.
"The Golden Compass" Grade: C (75.1%)
"Elizabeth: The Golden Age" Grade: C+ (77%)
A very intriguing film. There was just too much confusion in parts for it to really blossom. Definitely worth a rent if you're into the Queen Elizabeth historical time period.
"Ratatouille" Grade: B- (80%)
Probably the worst Pixar movie I've seen, although it is still 'cute' and well done. It's very creative - that's what I love about Pixar, no matter what world they take on, they bring it to life so well withmemorable characters and stories.
"I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry" Grade: B- (81%)
This may surprise some of you - considering I generally don't like comedies; especially Adam Sandler comedies - but I laughed out loud at this one. If it's getting a 'B' or better on my list and it's a comedy, check it out.
"American Gangster" Grade: B- (82.2%)
I was really looking forward to this one, but it kind of fell on its face. It's still a decent movie, but it's definitely not the 'A'-list material I was hoping for.
"Ocean's Thirteen" Grade: B (85%)
I really wanted to hate this movie, but as much as I tried, I couldn't. It's clever, funny, and entertaining. It's definitely the best of the 'Ocean' series.
"Charlie Wilson's War" Grade: B+ (86.9%)
Another movie that was supposed to be an Oscar contender, but fell short. It has a lot of good messages in it, but I wish the filmmakers would have had a much clearer stance and representation of what really happened during the Cold War instead of briefly touching upon it. This could've been a great movie, but instead it ended up just good.
"The Bourne Ultimatum" Grade: B+ (87%)
For an action-thriller, this is an awesome film. I really really enjoyed it and it would have easily made my 'A' list if it wasn't for the cop-out ending.
"TMNT" Grade: B+ (89%)
Yes. The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles are back and yes, I gave a kids movie a high 'B'. Of course I was a ninja turtle fan growing up so I'm biased, but for all of you fellow turtle freaks, this is my favorite turtles movie even though it doesn't have the Shredder in it.
"The Kingdom" Grade: A- (90%)
A very powerful film, and the first mentioned 'A' list movie in my guide. The ending is a little sloppy, but everything else makes up for it.
"Atonement" Grade: A- (90.1%)
Originally, I wasn't going to put this on my 'A' list, but the more I thought about it, the more it grew on me. It's a wonderful film, my only beef with it is that the film-makers try to make you believe it's based on a real story and the only way to know that it's not is by reading the credits after the film.
"Cloverfield" Grade: A- (91%)
I was also very hesitant to put this on my 'A' list because it absolutely wouldn't be a very good film if you were seeing it for the second time, or if you knew anything about the film before you saw it. If you know nothing about it, check it out and enjoy - it's intense.
"Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" Grade: A (94%)
As many of you know, the Harry Potter series is up and down, hit or miss with me. Sorcerer's Stone got a 'B' in my book, Chamber of Secrets got a 'C', Prisoner of Azkaban got an 'A', and the Goblet of Fire got a 'D-'. Phoenix is my favorite thus far in the series because it is a little more mature without losing th creativity.
"300" Grade: A (95%)
I'm already into anything that relates to mythology, but this film is simply stunning. The story isn't necesarily great, but the film is probably the most artistic and beautiful film I've seen in a long time. The creativity, camera work, and editing makes the imagination explode.
CO-MOVIES OF THE YEAR
"Sicko" Grade: A+ (97%)
Yes, it's a Michael Moore film, and yes, I really liked all of Michael Moore's previous films where others have not. But to be fair, Mr. Moore isn't such a dominating personality in this documentary about the health care system in the United States. The information he gathers and the perspective he captures is simply astounding. As he says in the beginning of the film, it's not a documentary about the people who don't have health care, it's a documentary about the people who do have health care. If you're scratching your head about how that could possibly be life-changing - yes, life-changing - then go rent it. It's my movie of the year not only because it makes you think, it's real. It's the world we live in and it's messed up.
"No Country for Old Men" Grade: A+ (97%)
I was told to see this movie by several people, and for one reason or another, I never made it to the theater until it was re-released because of its large amount of Oscar nominations. I must say, this is a truly great film. The writing is amazing, and if you don't have your thinking cap on, you'll be confused and you won't get much out of it. So don't go into it expecting a popcorn action thriller or anything like that. To fully appreciate this movie, engage with the dialogue and really pay attention to every detail because it all ties back to the major themes of the script. I highly recommend it.
Overall:
A's = 7
B's = 7
C's = 10
D's = 3
F's = 3
07 Movies I still need to see:
"Michael Clayton"
"Into the Wild"
So as the Academy Awards approach, I'm really pulling for Michael Moore to win Best Documentary with "Sicko", and the Coen brothers to win Best Picture & Best Original Screenplay for "No Country for Old Men". As far as the Best Actor / Actress awards go, I really could care less. Three 'F's is a lot, even by my standards, so hopefully 2008 will bring some better material, although you won't really see any post-writer's strike movies until late 2009 at the earliest (which is bad news).
"Ghost Rider" Grade: F (45%)
The worst movie I've seen in years - if not forever. When people ask what my worst movies of all-time are, I tell them it's hard because you have things like "Napolean Dynamite", "Dude Where's Your Car", "Dungeons and Dragons", and "Day After Tomorrow" that come right to mind, but "Ghost Rider" may be worse than any of those. I can't believe I'm about to write this - for God's sake, slap some sense into me - but I'd probably rather watch any of the aforementioned films on my list of worst movies than "Ghost Rider".
"Grindhouse" Grade: F (50%)
Here's another terrible movie - but wait! It's a double-feature so you get twice the suckage. The first film is a mindless zombie-fest while the second film features Kurt Russell trying to run over women with his 'death-proof' car. Luckily I didn't spend any money to see this one.
"Shooter" Grade: F (55%)
What's up with all of the 'F' movies this year? Am I really becoming a tough, cynical, and bitter critic, or what? By the way, don't waste your time watching this junk.
"Vaccancy" Grade: D (65%)
"Rescue Dawn" Grade: D+ (67%)
How long can Christian Bale run for? Oh yeah, two and a half hours.
"3:10 to Yuma" Grade: D+ (69.9%)
Sorry Dad, but it was a little too chessy for me.
"Transformers" Grade: C- (70%)
'I AM OPTIMUS PRIME!' right...
"Spider-man 3" Grade: C- (72%)
They turned a decent story into a special effects show, what a shame.
"Pirates of the Caribbean 3" Grade: C- (73%)
I did like the Johnny Depp scene where he's stuck with the rock creatures.
"The Hoax" Grade: C (74%)
The real hoax was how they got me to pay to watch it.
"Next" Grade: C (74.1%)
"Live Free or Die Hard" Grade: C (74.2%)
The first Die Hard is still great, but this comes in second as far as the series goes for me. Not sure why everybody liked the third one so much, I thought it was like watching a made-for-tv movie personally.
"The Simpsons Movie" Grade: C (74.3%)
It just didn't have a Simpsonesque feel to me. Bart flashing everybody? Seriosuly...
"Hot Fuzz" Grade: C (75%)
This was actually an 'A' movie until the end where it degrades into a zombie-fest - although the grocery store scene with zombies throwing pineapples at the protagonists cracked me up pretty good.
"The Golden Compass" Grade: C (75.1%)
"Elizabeth: The Golden Age" Grade: C+ (77%)
A very intriguing film. There was just too much confusion in parts for it to really blossom. Definitely worth a rent if you're into the Queen Elizabeth historical time period.
"Ratatouille" Grade: B- (80%)
Probably the worst Pixar movie I've seen, although it is still 'cute' and well done. It's very creative - that's what I love about Pixar, no matter what world they take on, they bring it to life so well withmemorable characters and stories.
"I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry" Grade: B- (81%)
This may surprise some of you - considering I generally don't like comedies; especially Adam Sandler comedies - but I laughed out loud at this one. If it's getting a 'B' or better on my list and it's a comedy, check it out.
"American Gangster" Grade: B- (82.2%)
I was really looking forward to this one, but it kind of fell on its face. It's still a decent movie, but it's definitely not the 'A'-list material I was hoping for.
"Ocean's Thirteen" Grade: B (85%)
I really wanted to hate this movie, but as much as I tried, I couldn't. It's clever, funny, and entertaining. It's definitely the best of the 'Ocean' series.
"Charlie Wilson's War" Grade: B+ (86.9%)
Another movie that was supposed to be an Oscar contender, but fell short. It has a lot of good messages in it, but I wish the filmmakers would have had a much clearer stance and representation of what really happened during the Cold War instead of briefly touching upon it. This could've been a great movie, but instead it ended up just good.
"The Bourne Ultimatum" Grade: B+ (87%)
For an action-thriller, this is an awesome film. I really really enjoyed it and it would have easily made my 'A' list if it wasn't for the cop-out ending.
"TMNT" Grade: B+ (89%)
Yes. The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles are back and yes, I gave a kids movie a high 'B'. Of course I was a ninja turtle fan growing up so I'm biased, but for all of you fellow turtle freaks, this is my favorite turtles movie even though it doesn't have the Shredder in it.
"The Kingdom" Grade: A- (90%)
A very powerful film, and the first mentioned 'A' list movie in my guide. The ending is a little sloppy, but everything else makes up for it.
"Atonement" Grade: A- (90.1%)
Originally, I wasn't going to put this on my 'A' list, but the more I thought about it, the more it grew on me. It's a wonderful film, my only beef with it is that the film-makers try to make you believe it's based on a real story and the only way to know that it's not is by reading the credits after the film.
"Cloverfield" Grade: A- (91%)
I was also very hesitant to put this on my 'A' list because it absolutely wouldn't be a very good film if you were seeing it for the second time, or if you knew anything about the film before you saw it. If you know nothing about it, check it out and enjoy - it's intense.
"Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix" Grade: A (94%)
As many of you know, the Harry Potter series is up and down, hit or miss with me. Sorcerer's Stone got a 'B' in my book, Chamber of Secrets got a 'C', Prisoner of Azkaban got an 'A', and the Goblet of Fire got a 'D-'. Phoenix is my favorite thus far in the series because it is a little more mature without losing th creativity.
"300" Grade: A (95%)
I'm already into anything that relates to mythology, but this film is simply stunning. The story isn't necesarily great, but the film is probably the most artistic and beautiful film I've seen in a long time. The creativity, camera work, and editing makes the imagination explode.
CO-MOVIES OF THE YEAR
"Sicko" Grade: A+ (97%)
Yes, it's a Michael Moore film, and yes, I really liked all of Michael Moore's previous films where others have not. But to be fair, Mr. Moore isn't such a dominating personality in this documentary about the health care system in the United States. The information he gathers and the perspective he captures is simply astounding. As he says in the beginning of the film, it's not a documentary about the people who don't have health care, it's a documentary about the people who do have health care. If you're scratching your head about how that could possibly be life-changing - yes, life-changing - then go rent it. It's my movie of the year not only because it makes you think, it's real. It's the world we live in and it's messed up.
"No Country for Old Men" Grade: A+ (97%)
I was told to see this movie by several people, and for one reason or another, I never made it to the theater until it was re-released because of its large amount of Oscar nominations. I must say, this is a truly great film. The writing is amazing, and if you don't have your thinking cap on, you'll be confused and you won't get much out of it. So don't go into it expecting a popcorn action thriller or anything like that. To fully appreciate this movie, engage with the dialogue and really pay attention to every detail because it all ties back to the major themes of the script. I highly recommend it.
Overall:
A's = 7
B's = 7
C's = 10
D's = 3
F's = 3
07 Movies I still need to see:
"Michael Clayton"
"Into the Wild"
So as the Academy Awards approach, I'm really pulling for Michael Moore to win Best Documentary with "Sicko", and the Coen brothers to win Best Picture & Best Original Screenplay for "No Country for Old Men". As far as the Best Actor / Actress awards go, I really could care less. Three 'F's is a lot, even by my standards, so hopefully 2008 will bring some better material, although you won't really see any post-writer's strike movies until late 2009 at the earliest (which is bad news).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)