There are two philosophies about how to coach a Little League baseball team. One is that you let all kids play in every game, no matter how good or bad they are. After all, it’s just a game and, though it would be nice to win them all, it’s far better to let every player participate and have fun. It also means that there will be no self-esteem issues, since everyone gets to join in.
The other philosophy is that only the players who are more apt to provide a win for the team get to play. Coaches often send in weaker players only if the game has been wrapped up, or if there is no chance of pulling off a win late in the game.
Most coaches, parents, and psychologists would prefer the first philosophy. It’s only a kids’ game and it is far better to have fun with it than to take it too seriously.
But there comes a time, usually in high school, when student athletes must try out for the team, and only the better players are put on the field or the court, because by then, it’s more about the school, the team, and even the game than about individual players. After all, a lot of school pride and recognition comes from having a winning team.
And so it should be with academics.
When Pres. George W. Bush introduced his education policy to Congress back in 2001, the lawmakers passed his proposal, calling it the No Child Left Behind Act. The theory was, and is, that all children deserve an equal education and we must do whatever is necessary to provide that education for them all, regardless of ability or inclination to learn.
It sounds good. It sounds fair. It sounds like the right thing to do, at least on the surface.
But let’s face it; it’s not the right thing. It hasn’t worked and it isn’t working still. It not only has failed to provide equal and quality education for the underachievers and disadvantaged, it has gone a step further and diminished educational opportunities for the average and above-average students.
We must ask ourselves the basic question: Why do we educate our children in the first place? Ultimately, it is hoped that a better education will lead to better opportunities in the future. More education means better jobs and higher earnings.
Those assumptions are borne out by statistics. Students who stay in school and graduate earn more money over a lifetime than those who drop out, on the average. And students who graduate from college have a higher average salary than those who do not attend post-secondary schools.
But a good education is not only for the benefit of the individual. It is also for the good of society. That is why society pays for it. Even adults without children must pay school taxes, because all of society benefits from a well-educated public.
Bush’s No Child Left Behind program forces teachers and administrators to spend so much time, effort, and money trying to squeeze as much education as possible into those students who are not likely to ever contribute much to society that those more likely to learn are cheated.
Let’s face it, some students are going to end up in jail, on drugs, or become a burden on society. Some girls will become welfare mothers and baby factories no matter how much we attempt to rehabilitate them or educate them for the mainstream.
Our educational dollars and efforts would be far better spent helping the average and above average students develop their skills so that they can become productive members of society.
And that’s not to say we forget about the underachievers or those with mental disabilities. Of course we don’t. We do what we can, but we must realize there is only so much we can do without pilfering the resources used to educate the mainstream, those who will benefit most.
Sunday, October 08, 2006
Saturday, October 07, 2006
Cell Phones Important to Kids, Parents
Consider two hypothetical scenarios.
A 12-year-old student gets out of school one afternoon and starts his trek home when he spots two of the school bullies that constantly harass him and other weaker students in his grade. They are on an approach vector and the young man starts to panic.
These bullies are not satisfied with just teasing him. In the past, they have attacked him physically, stolen money from him, and threatened his younger sister. He knows they are big trouble for him.
He remembers the cell phone in his backpack. He pulls it out of the side pocket and immediately dials his mom at home using speed dial. The bullies spot his phone activity and change direction. The mother, just a couple of blocks away in her car, speeds to his location. The young man is safe, thanks to his cell phone.
In a science classroom, a teacher is trying his best to educate the ninth graders in his charge about the periodic table of elements. In the back, a student has his book open and appears to be engaged in the assignment.
The teacher clandestinely strolls back to where the student is seated and spies a cell phone opened in his hands. The student is sending a text message to his girlfriend in social studies class down the hall. Despite appearances, he is completely off task.
School officials in most schools across the country, and here in Johnson County, cite the last scenario as an example of why they have banned cell phones in school. New York City schools have one of the most stringent anti-cell-phone rules in the country, and some parents are on the attack because of it.
Many parents would rather their children be allowed to carry cell phones while at school. While acknowledging that they should not be used during class time, and accepting the dolling out of punishment for such a violation, they claim cell phone possession should not be prohibited outright at school.
Indianapolis Public School bans all cell phones and other electronic devices, such as MP3 players, at school. Children are not supposed to have them in their possession.
Indiana had a state law that allowed for suspension from school for carrying cell phones or pagers. Edinburgh Community School Corp. still has such a policy on its books.
Detroit bans cell phones and the second offense means the student forfeits the phone to the school. Boston has changed its policy to allow cell phones in school, but not the use of them during class. Los Angeles has a similar policy.
In addition to the possibility that students may disrupt class with cell phones, schools point out that they are often stolen. And, some administrators claim that students have gotten by without them for hundreds of years, so there is no need to allow them now.
Humanity once got by just fine without cars or refrigerators, too.
Although cell phones can be misused and used at inappropriate times, the best solution would be to punish the offending behavior, not ban cell phones outright. I am both a parent and a teacher. I can see it from both sides.
I have confiscated cell phones from students trying to play games on them or send text messages during class. I have also seen students pull them out of their pocket merely to check the time. In those cases, I tell them to put them away because they are not allowed.
Cell phones can be life savers. They are one of the best personal security devices ever invented. And for schools to ban them outright simply because some students might misuse them is a sign the schools are out of step with reality and that their policies are anachronistic.
A 12-year-old student gets out of school one afternoon and starts his trek home when he spots two of the school bullies that constantly harass him and other weaker students in his grade. They are on an approach vector and the young man starts to panic.
These bullies are not satisfied with just teasing him. In the past, they have attacked him physically, stolen money from him, and threatened his younger sister. He knows they are big trouble for him.
He remembers the cell phone in his backpack. He pulls it out of the side pocket and immediately dials his mom at home using speed dial. The bullies spot his phone activity and change direction. The mother, just a couple of blocks away in her car, speeds to his location. The young man is safe, thanks to his cell phone.
In a science classroom, a teacher is trying his best to educate the ninth graders in his charge about the periodic table of elements. In the back, a student has his book open and appears to be engaged in the assignment.
The teacher clandestinely strolls back to where the student is seated and spies a cell phone opened in his hands. The student is sending a text message to his girlfriend in social studies class down the hall. Despite appearances, he is completely off task.
School officials in most schools across the country, and here in Johnson County, cite the last scenario as an example of why they have banned cell phones in school. New York City schools have one of the most stringent anti-cell-phone rules in the country, and some parents are on the attack because of it.
Many parents would rather their children be allowed to carry cell phones while at school. While acknowledging that they should not be used during class time, and accepting the dolling out of punishment for such a violation, they claim cell phone possession should not be prohibited outright at school.
Indianapolis Public School bans all cell phones and other electronic devices, such as MP3 players, at school. Children are not supposed to have them in their possession.
Indiana had a state law that allowed for suspension from school for carrying cell phones or pagers. Edinburgh Community School Corp. still has such a policy on its books.
Detroit bans cell phones and the second offense means the student forfeits the phone to the school. Boston has changed its policy to allow cell phones in school, but not the use of them during class. Los Angeles has a similar policy.
In addition to the possibility that students may disrupt class with cell phones, schools point out that they are often stolen. And, some administrators claim that students have gotten by without them for hundreds of years, so there is no need to allow them now.
Humanity once got by just fine without cars or refrigerators, too.
Although cell phones can be misused and used at inappropriate times, the best solution would be to punish the offending behavior, not ban cell phones outright. I am both a parent and a teacher. I can see it from both sides.
I have confiscated cell phones from students trying to play games on them or send text messages during class. I have also seen students pull them out of their pocket merely to check the time. In those cases, I tell them to put them away because they are not allowed.
Cell phones can be life savers. They are one of the best personal security devices ever invented. And for schools to ban them outright simply because some students might misuse them is a sign the schools are out of step with reality and that their policies are anachronistic.
Sunday, October 01, 2006
School Food Not Really So Bad, Maybe
Few things are as maligned on a daily basis as much as school cafeteria food. It doesn’t matter what school or grade level, from first grade through college, cafeteria food is equated with everything from mystery meat to toxic waste.
On one episode of the Simpsons, little Lisa, bleeding heart that she is, decided she was no longer going to eat meat. Upon entering the cafeteria at her school, she asked the serving lady if each item she had on her plate had meat in it. The lady said yes to everything. “Does the bread have meat in it,” she asked. “Yes,” was the reply.
In desperation, Lisa finally asked her, “Is there anything that doesn’t have meat in it?” The grumpy serving line lady quipped, “You might try the meatloaf. It doesn’t have much meat in it.”
From late night talk show hosts to everyday students, cafeteria food is disparaged. Remember when Ronald Reagan wanted to include ketchup as a vegetable? Comedians had a field day with that one.
I, on the other hand, am not nearly so critical. Although I can’t say I am a big fan, I will admit that I have been served up several meals at various school cafeterias that were pretty darn delicious.
One example is the broccoli and cheese side dish they serve once in awhile at the school where I teach. It is one of the few places that cooks broccoli the way I like it, nice and soft.
When I was in first grade at Edinburgh I ate in the cafeteria for the first time. I took one bite of the mixed veggies and almost gagged. I boycotted the place until at least the third grade. After that, I don’t remember the food being so bad.
I especially liked the bread and butter sandwiches. They served them everyday. The serving ladies would always ask, “How many breads?” You could get between one and four sandwich triangles. I always got four.
No matter what else was being served, I could always count on those delicious sandwiches made from bread that was oh-so-soft, spread thinly with softened, but not melted, butter.
In college, we called our cafeteria Saga, because it was run by Saga Food Services. I think they still refer to it as Saga at Franklin College. That’s where my daughter is a junior; she complains often about the cafeteria food.
My biggest complaint, as I recall, was that their chocolate pudding was always lumpy. And I hated their eggplant dish. Other than that, everything was pretty good.
When I was attending school, they served food on real dishes, although plastic. We had to take our plates to the scrapers, students who scraped plates for free lunches.
Today, at my school, there are no real dishes. Everything is disposable, even the trays. Students just throw them away when they’re finished. And every kid gets a free lunch, although it costs me three bucks.
Going from a student in elementary school to high school to college and graduate school and then becoming a teacher, I’ve had to endure, or enjoy, school cafeteria food for most of my life.
One might think I would avoid the commercial cafeterias like MCL or Jonathan Byrd. But I can’t help it; I like what they serve most of the time. If you like your veggies overcooked and mushy and your meat filled with mystery filler, the cafeteria is the place to eat.
On one episode of the Simpsons, little Lisa, bleeding heart that she is, decided she was no longer going to eat meat. Upon entering the cafeteria at her school, she asked the serving lady if each item she had on her plate had meat in it. The lady said yes to everything. “Does the bread have meat in it,” she asked. “Yes,” was the reply.
In desperation, Lisa finally asked her, “Is there anything that doesn’t have meat in it?” The grumpy serving line lady quipped, “You might try the meatloaf. It doesn’t have much meat in it.”
From late night talk show hosts to everyday students, cafeteria food is disparaged. Remember when Ronald Reagan wanted to include ketchup as a vegetable? Comedians had a field day with that one.
I, on the other hand, am not nearly so critical. Although I can’t say I am a big fan, I will admit that I have been served up several meals at various school cafeterias that were pretty darn delicious.
One example is the broccoli and cheese side dish they serve once in awhile at the school where I teach. It is one of the few places that cooks broccoli the way I like it, nice and soft.
When I was in first grade at Edinburgh I ate in the cafeteria for the first time. I took one bite of the mixed veggies and almost gagged. I boycotted the place until at least the third grade. After that, I don’t remember the food being so bad.
I especially liked the bread and butter sandwiches. They served them everyday. The serving ladies would always ask, “How many breads?” You could get between one and four sandwich triangles. I always got four.
No matter what else was being served, I could always count on those delicious sandwiches made from bread that was oh-so-soft, spread thinly with softened, but not melted, butter.
In college, we called our cafeteria Saga, because it was run by Saga Food Services. I think they still refer to it as Saga at Franklin College. That’s where my daughter is a junior; she complains often about the cafeteria food.
My biggest complaint, as I recall, was that their chocolate pudding was always lumpy. And I hated their eggplant dish. Other than that, everything was pretty good.
When I was attending school, they served food on real dishes, although plastic. We had to take our plates to the scrapers, students who scraped plates for free lunches.
Today, at my school, there are no real dishes. Everything is disposable, even the trays. Students just throw them away when they’re finished. And every kid gets a free lunch, although it costs me three bucks.
Going from a student in elementary school to high school to college and graduate school and then becoming a teacher, I’ve had to endure, or enjoy, school cafeteria food for most of my life.
One might think I would avoid the commercial cafeterias like MCL or Jonathan Byrd. But I can’t help it; I like what they serve most of the time. If you like your veggies overcooked and mushy and your meat filled with mystery filler, the cafeteria is the place to eat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)