Well the 2 debates that stuck out to me were the excluding p.e. debate and the No Child Left Behind Act. I think that p.e. should be required in schools because i agree with everything that the pro argued. I believe that p.e. is vital especially in elementary years because most kids these days do not get much physical activity. Obesity is a huge problem and I think p.e. can lower the obesity numbers, as well as improve students learning and focusing in the classroom.
The debate on No Child Left Behind I would take the con side because I feel that it is an attempt for the federal government to have control over the state schools. This act mandates that the only way schools will get federal funding is if the enforce the NCLB act. I just feel that it is wrong to hold each student, regardless of disabilities, to the same standard of eductaion. Especially, making the students take a standardized test, I mean is that really what determines how smart a student is? The teachers are under so much stress, thus the students feel this pressure. The teachers are having to "teach to the test" and are failing to teach real life decisions that may be faced after high school.
The elimination of physical education is terrible. We are depriving our children of a well-rounded curriculum. Like the pro side stated, our students are being denied p.e., yet School Board members are making over 100k a year! That is disgusting. A salary that large is just excessive. Maybe the budget cuts should come from their pockets so they will be more concerned with the achievement and wellbeing of our students. Who holds them accountable? This brings up the NCLB act also. Accountability falls solely on the teachers and students, but what about the policy-makers? This act is so flawed. We need some serious change in the education system.
I believe the issue that has the most interest with me was the one concerning religion in the schools. I can completely agree with the idea that a teacher be biased, not always intentially, and can influence a student on the subject of religion because of their own personal beliefs. However, I also can see the importance of not only introducing the topics of various religions, but having students learn about them as they would any other subject in school as long as it is done professionally and not as a sermon type lecture. Having these students become familiar with the various religions, including their own, will help them understand those who do not share their beliefs and to get some answers, even about their own faith, that they did not have before. This understanding will help to end many stereotypes and prejudices that are formed and maintaine through being uneducated on a subject. I also feel that saying the idea of influencing students to certain beliefs is a concern and is happening in many schools right now. The idea of evolution is being taught around the country in science classes and what is the difference in this doctrine that denies a higher power of any faith. Many teachers of the subject beleive science is the answer not religion and to believe in a higher power is ridiculous. How is this way of believing and teaching any different from the idea of influencing students? The teachers "preach" the idea of evolution and denounce religion in the process and I say this is just as wrong and violates student's rights. Classwork and success in these classes are measured in learning evolution, doing research and taking tests on the subject which may be totally contradictory to everything a student may have been taught by his/her family all their life and and would be just as confusing and hard to handle as any class on religious topics. I say religion is being taught in schools exept the idea being taught is that faith is wrong and science is right. Besides, what would happen if students did learn the basic ideas of religious beliefs, regardless of the faith, that include respect one's family, help those around you, and do good things each day. Maybe if students had a chance to learn these values they may actually help them become better people in the future which can only help us all.
Excluding P.E. is a serious issue. I think that P.E. would help decrease obesity in kids. Obesity is a serious thing in the U.S. I agreed with Bridget that the school board members making over 100 K is outrageous! If they take a cut in their budgets then the school can afford all the subjects in school. Why is it fair that teachers make 30-50 K while the school board members make over 100 K a year? It is not fair. Bridget is right that we need to act now about the school board members' salary before it is too late. I agreed that P.E. will rest the kids' brain while they are in class. If they get rid of P.E. I think that the kids will lose interest in school so therefore I agreed we need to keep P.E.
I think that P.E. should be a necessity in schools. I believe that students spend so much time being crammed with information that they need time to relax while still doing good to their bodies. As presented today, it improves test scores as well as helps with childhood obesity. Childhood obesity is a big issue today and as teachers, we need to be concerned with how we can help. Although I am very much for P.E I also think Julie brought up some good points today. If we worked in a school that did not have P.E. it would be our job to help in any way we could. This ties into what she was saying about finding lessons were you can incorporate activity into it. There are many lessons that can be taught through games that make the children "get up and move." I hope P.E become mandatory in schools again, like it used to be.
I didn't know until today that PE wasn't mandatory. I believe it was said that the only state it was mandatory in was Illinois. I think I just assumed it was and I feel that it should be. The very ones, the board members, that make these decisions got their chance to enjoy and reep the benefits of PE, and everyone else should be allowed the same opportunity. PE is a welcome break for both students and teachers and it promotes physical well being. I was quite an athlete in school and I didn't receive those abilities from my parents. I think I picked most of it up at PE and built on it from there. I'm sure there are other students out there that need and welcome this physical guidance.
The case that had the biggest impact on me was the No Child Left Behind case. I think this puts even more pressure on teachers and students to perform on standardized tests. I was shocked to learn that schools who do not meet AYP standards will recieve reduced funding and even more shocked to learn that if a school hasn't met AYP standards in a certain number of years, the entire staff can be replaced. I feel that the state should offer some sort of additional help for those schools that have had trouble meeting requirements. This puts teachers in a position that they have to teach students to pass these tests and probably takes away from creativity in the classroom. I believe the No Child Left Behind Act should be looked at and significantly revised in order to find a suitable way to make this work. I am certainly against this act in its present form.
The debates were very interesting, physical education in school or not stood out for me. Julie made some good points, stating that we can use that extra time to study for tests and money to create more programs or purchase more materials. The one question I wanted to ask was, "Is there's a difference between physical education and recess?" I believe that it is recess is when your free to do anything you want and sometime takes place at the end of the day. Recess is the time to run and jump and let off steam. Physical education is another class that most student don't want to participant in because I know I didn't.
The one debate that is a hot topic with me is the No Child Left Behind Act. The NCLB is designed to improve student's learning and hold teachers more accountable for what the students learn. The government examines the knowledge of the students by using standardized tests. By 2014, every student is supposed to meet the criteria and standards of the act, but I doubt this is possible. I find three major faults with the act: There is an extreme lack of funding by the Fed,the student attendance mandate of AYP cannot be controlled by the school, and the dictation of the curriculum in the classroom. The funding for the act is so bad that the Fed is wanting financial help from the state level, which was not stated in the act when it was enacted. It is not the schools job to make sure kids come to school. It is the parents responsibility, so don't punish the school by decreasing their funding. I really hate that Congress men, who probably have no expierence in teaching, dictate the curriculum of the classroom. We teachers go to college to teach, trust us and let us do our jobs right. Let kids LEARN, not be DRILLED!!!!!!!
The debate that struck the greatest chord with me was the debate about physical education. I personally believe that all the evidence stated for the con side were not valid. There is really no good reason that would satisfy me to say that P.E. should be taken out of schools. With the influx of obesity in this country, we should be doing all that we can to save our children from a sedentary lifestyle. Yes, it is true that parents bear the major responsibility in this regard, but schools are not just institutions of academic rote learning. Part of our jobs as educators is to teach children how to be healthy in their lives. In this regard, I agree with the question Sparkle asked in class about this subject, something to the effect of how could we teach exercise practices in health class when we do not let them practice what they preach during the day?
It seems to me that the only reason a school district would get rid of P.E. is because of money issues. I agree with Bridget on this issue when she says that it is disgusting to think that a school district would say that they cannot hire a P.E. teacher because of money problems while the superintendent or whoever is making $100,000 a year. The people making these huge salaries do not have daily interaction with the students. Therefore, they do not adequately understand what the children need. Why should they be allowed to make the decisions as to what to take away from the children?
One of the issues that was very interesting was that of religion. Religion is very imporant to study, and I'm not talking about Christianity; I am talking about all major religions. They play a big part in most subjects. In literature we find that many have symbolic meanings that pertain to religion, and without knowledge of religion then the true meaning of literature may not always be understood. To study art and history one must have knowledge of religion because many painters painted religious based ideas. Also that cause of many wars were because of religion or some kind of spiritual indifference amongst different cultures. Not only is religion beneficial to help understand academics, but it opens a realm of understanding other cultures and people around the world. The second debate issue that I wanted to comment on is that of physical education. Pysical education is important for an enormous amount of reasons. It helps children understand that staying active is essential for health purposes. It is a stress reliever and relaxes the body and mind. It helps student stay more focused in their studies, and has proved to help test scores (I guess that is why many women do yoga to relax and help jumpstart the day to feel more energized). It could help with the critical issue of obesity that exists in America. For these reasons physical education should not be looked down upon because it is a very important subject.
All of the debates were interesting, however the P.E. was the out that really stuck out the most. I disagree with them out taking p.e. away. In our society now and days they always want to take something away from our kids because of money. The money is there the schools just need to use it wisely. When I was in grade school I went to p.e. every year up to my senior year. To me that was the time I could relax my mind and exercise and take a break from the classroom. If it is taken out of the school it is going to hurt the student, especially the elementary students, because they look foward to that each and everyday. To me it seems like our school board members are not concerned about our kids to me it seems as if it all about the money to them.
The case in reference to the No child left Behind and religion in public schools are the cases I feel most strongly about. I believe that when Bush introduced the No Child left behind Act, he had no idea how it would affect the school systems. I believe it a good idea to have certified teachers to make sure that the teachers are qualified in the subject they are teaching. However this act have caused alot of classes been dropped or dicontinued or teachers have to go back to get degrees or leaving the profession, causing a shortage of teachers in all subjects. BUt they are making it easier for people to get degrees and offering help in paying for their education. I tink the school system would have been fine wtihout this Act.
In refernce to the debate on religion in public school, I believe is a touchy subject. We have adiverse country and it is growing everyday. This mean more different types of religion. I grow up with religion in school but it was different then. We really only heard about baptist or catholic. Now is not the case. So there is baptist, catholi, morman, Jevoha Witness,muslim, just to name a few. So who would decide what religion would be taught or allowed. So it is best to leave it out. Or perhaps just allow a brief moment to allow everyone to pray in what religion they want, this way no one will be offended.
I am in agreeance with will on the choices of issues. The ones that i remember most and that seemed to rouse the most concerns were those of No Child Left Behind and P.E. playing a major or minor role in education. In the case of P.E. I am much like Tracey, I did not know that it was not mandatory as other set curriculum are. I believe that it is a cornerstone to the American Educational system regardless of what level it may be on. It is a mean to allow students to express themselves in a different way (better outside rather than in the classroom).
And in concerns to no child lfet behind, I want it abolished completely. I feel it is simply a way to measure the performance of teachers and a scapegoat for administration and government. A standardized test can rarely if at all show a student's progress in the classroom. All it proves is that a teacher can get his or her students to memorize some things which will be on a test at a later date. As a future educator, I take this as a personal insult, because it places limitations on what can be done in the classroom, what I like to call "life lessons" that could have potentialy been taught.
I have to respond to Robert's comment about evolution. With all due respect, I think there is a difference in proselytizing and teaching the theory of evolution. Newton's theory of gravitation, Einstein's theory of relativity are theories because, like Creationism, they cannot be proven. But the theories have held up over time because they have not been disproved. Evolution is compatible with the fossil record and other scientific facts. Science does not make sense without the theory of Evolution. Darwin, who was himself a Christian, made a point to state that he did not believe his theory was contradictory to Christianity. Creationism, however, is derived from a religion. The theory requires a belief in Christianity.
The debate about taking physical education out of the the schools really impacted me in that our children really need physical education in terms of keeping them healthy I thought, but some believed otherwise. I really believe that students should have some form of physical activity outside of the classroom and outside of the playgrounds. I think in terms of our children being one of the most overweighted in the world should encourage parents to push for the need to keep physical education in the schools and create physical education programs where none exist already.
16 comments:
Well the 2 debates that stuck out to me were the excluding p.e. debate and the No Child Left Behind Act. I think that p.e. should be required in schools because i agree with everything that the pro argued. I believe that p.e. is vital especially in elementary years because most kids these days do not get much physical activity. Obesity is a huge problem and I think p.e. can lower the obesity numbers, as well as improve students learning and focusing in the classroom.
The debate on No Child Left Behind I would take the con side because I feel that it is an attempt for the federal government to have control over the state schools. This act mandates that the only way schools will get federal funding is if the enforce the NCLB act. I just feel that it is wrong to hold each student, regardless of disabilities, to the same standard of eductaion. Especially, making the students take a standardized test, I mean is that really what determines how smart a student is? The teachers are under so much stress, thus the students feel this pressure. The teachers are having to "teach to the test" and are failing to teach real life decisions that may be faced after high school.
The elimination of physical education is terrible. We are depriving our children of a well-rounded curriculum. Like the pro side stated, our students are being denied p.e., yet School Board members are making over 100k a year! That is disgusting. A salary that large is just excessive. Maybe the budget cuts should come from their pockets so they will be more concerned with the achievement and wellbeing of our students. Who holds them accountable? This brings up the NCLB act also. Accountability falls solely on the teachers and students, but what about the policy-makers? This act is so flawed. We need some serious change in the education system.
I believe the issue that has the most interest with me was the one concerning religion in the schools. I can completely agree with the idea that a teacher be biased, not always intentially, and can influence a student on the subject of religion because of their own personal beliefs. However, I also can see the importance of not only introducing the topics of various religions, but having students learn about them as they would any other subject in school as long as it is done professionally and not as a sermon type lecture. Having these students become familiar with the various religions, including their own, will help them understand those who do not share their beliefs and to get some answers, even about their own faith, that they did not have before. This understanding will help to end many stereotypes and prejudices that are formed and maintaine through being uneducated on a subject. I also feel that saying the idea of influencing students to certain beliefs is a concern and is happening in many schools right now. The idea of evolution is being taught around the country in science classes and what is the difference in this doctrine that denies a higher power of any faith. Many teachers of the subject beleive science is the answer not religion and to believe in a higher power is ridiculous. How is this way of believing and teaching any different from the idea of influencing students? The teachers "preach" the idea of evolution and denounce religion in the process and I say this is just as wrong and violates student's rights. Classwork and success in these classes are measured in learning evolution, doing research and taking tests on the subject which may be totally contradictory to everything a student may have been taught by his/her family all their life and and would be just as confusing and hard to handle as any class on religious topics. I say religion is being taught in schools exept the idea being taught is that faith is wrong and science is right. Besides, what would happen if students did learn the basic ideas of religious beliefs, regardless of the faith, that include respect one's family, help those around you, and do good things each day. Maybe if students had a chance to learn these values they may actually help them become better people in the future which can only help us all.
Excluding P.E. is a serious issue. I think that P.E. would help decrease obesity in kids. Obesity is a serious thing in the U.S. I agreed with Bridget that the school board members making over 100 K is outrageous! If they take a cut in their budgets then the school can afford all the subjects in school. Why is it fair that teachers make 30-50 K while the school board members make over 100 K a year? It is not fair. Bridget is right that we need to act now about the school board members' salary before it is too late. I agreed that P.E. will rest the kids' brain while they are in class. If they get rid of P.E. I think that the kids will lose interest in school so therefore I agreed we need to keep P.E.
I think that P.E. should be a necessity in schools. I believe that students spend so much time being crammed with information that they need time to relax while still doing good to their bodies. As presented today, it improves test scores as well as helps with childhood obesity. Childhood obesity is a big issue today and as teachers, we need to be concerned with how we can help. Although I am very much for P.E I also think Julie brought up some good points today. If we worked in a school that did not have P.E. it would be our job to help in any way we could. This ties into what she was saying about finding lessons were you can incorporate activity into it. There are many lessons that can be taught through games that make the children "get up and move." I hope P.E become mandatory in schools again, like it used to be.
I didn't know until today that PE wasn't mandatory. I believe it was said that the only state it was mandatory in was Illinois. I think I just assumed it was and I feel that it should be. The very ones, the board members, that make these decisions got their chance to enjoy and reep the benefits of PE, and everyone else should be allowed the same opportunity. PE is a welcome break for both students and teachers and it promotes physical well being. I was quite an athlete in school and I didn't receive those abilities from my parents. I think I picked most of it up at PE and built on it from there. I'm sure there are other students out there that need and welcome this physical guidance.
The case that had the biggest impact on me was the No Child Left Behind case. I think this puts even more pressure on teachers and students to perform on standardized tests. I was shocked to learn that schools who do not meet AYP standards will recieve reduced funding and even more shocked to learn that if a school hasn't met AYP standards in a certain number of years, the entire staff can be replaced. I feel that the state should offer some sort of additional help for those schools that have had trouble meeting requirements. This puts teachers in a position that they have to teach students to pass these tests and probably takes away from creativity in the classroom. I believe the No Child Left Behind Act should be looked at and significantly revised in order to find a suitable way to make this work. I am certainly against this act in its present form.
The debates were very interesting, physical education in school or not stood out for me. Julie made some good points, stating that we can use that extra time to study for tests and money to create more programs or purchase more materials. The one question I wanted to ask was, "Is there's a difference between physical education and recess?" I believe that it is recess is when your free to do anything you want and sometime takes place at the end of the day. Recess is the time to run and jump and let off steam. Physical education is another class that most student don't want to participant in because I know I didn't.
The one debate that is a hot topic with me is the No Child Left Behind Act. The NCLB is designed to improve student's learning and hold teachers more accountable for what the students learn. The government examines the knowledge of the students by using standardized tests. By 2014, every student is supposed to meet the criteria and standards of the act, but I doubt this is possible. I find three major faults with the act: There is an extreme lack of funding by the Fed,the student attendance mandate of AYP cannot be controlled by the school, and the dictation of the curriculum in the classroom.
The funding for the act is so bad that the Fed is wanting financial help from the state level, which was not stated in the act when it was enacted. It is not the schools job to make sure kids come to school. It is the parents responsibility, so don't punish the school by decreasing their funding. I really hate that Congress men, who probably have no expierence in teaching, dictate the curriculum of the classroom. We teachers go to college to teach, trust us and let us do our jobs right. Let kids LEARN, not be DRILLED!!!!!!!
The debate that struck the greatest chord with me was the debate about physical education. I personally believe that all the evidence stated for the con side were not valid. There is really no good reason that would satisfy me to say that P.E. should be taken out of schools. With the influx of obesity in this country, we should be doing all that we can to save our children from a sedentary lifestyle. Yes, it is true that parents bear the major responsibility in this regard, but schools are not just institutions of academic rote learning. Part of our jobs as educators is to teach children how to be healthy in their lives. In this regard, I agree with the question Sparkle asked in class about this subject, something to the effect of how could we teach exercise practices in health class when we do not let them practice what they preach during the day?
It seems to me that the only reason a school district would get rid of P.E. is because of money issues. I agree with Bridget on this issue when she says that it is disgusting to think that a school district would say that they cannot hire a P.E. teacher because of money problems while the superintendent or whoever is making $100,000 a year. The people making these huge salaries do not have daily interaction with the students. Therefore, they do not adequately understand what the children need. Why should they be allowed to make the decisions as to what to take away from the children?
One of the issues that was very interesting was that of religion. Religion is very imporant to study, and I'm not talking about Christianity; I am talking about all major religions. They play a big part in most subjects. In literature we find that many have symbolic meanings that pertain to religion, and without knowledge of religion then the true meaning of literature may not always be understood. To study art and history one must have knowledge of religion because many painters painted religious based ideas. Also that cause of many wars were because of religion or some kind of spiritual indifference amongst different cultures. Not only is religion beneficial to help understand academics, but it opens a realm of understanding other cultures and people around the world.
The second debate issue that I wanted to comment on is that of physical education. Pysical education is important for an enormous amount of reasons. It helps children understand that staying active is essential for health purposes. It is a stress reliever and relaxes the body and mind. It helps student stay more focused in their studies, and has proved to help test scores (I guess that is why many women do yoga to relax and help jumpstart the day to feel more energized). It could help with the critical issue of obesity that exists in America. For these reasons physical education should not be looked down upon because it is a very important subject.
All of the debates were interesting, however the P.E. was the out that really stuck out the most. I disagree with them out taking p.e. away. In our society now and days they always want to take something away from our kids because of money. The money is there the schools just need to use it wisely. When I was in grade school I went to p.e. every year up to my senior year. To me that was the time I could relax my mind and exercise and take a break from the classroom. If it is taken out of the school it is going to hurt the student, especially the elementary students, because they look foward to that each and everyday. To me it seems like our school board members are not concerned about our kids to me it seems as if it all about the money to them.
The case in reference to the No child left Behind and religion in public schools are the cases I feel most strongly about. I believe that when Bush introduced the No Child left behind Act, he had no idea how it would affect the school systems. I believe it a good idea to have certified teachers to make sure that the teachers are qualified in the subject they are teaching. However this act have caused alot of classes been dropped or dicontinued or teachers have to go back to get degrees or leaving the profession, causing a shortage of teachers in all subjects. BUt they are making it easier for people to get degrees and offering help in paying for their education. I tink the school system would have been fine wtihout this Act.
In refernce to the debate on religion in public school, I believe is a touchy subject. We have adiverse country and it is growing everyday. This mean more different types of religion. I grow up with religion in school but it was different then. We really only heard about baptist or catholic. Now is not the case. So there is baptist, catholi, morman, Jevoha Witness,muslim, just to name a few. So who would decide what religion would be taught or allowed. So it is best to leave it out. Or perhaps just allow a brief moment to allow everyone to pray in what religion they want, this way no one will be offended.
I am in agreeance with will on the choices of issues. The ones that i remember most and that seemed to rouse the most concerns were those of No Child Left Behind and P.E. playing a major or minor role in education. In the case of P.E. I am much like Tracey, I did not know that it was not mandatory as other set curriculum are. I believe that it is a cornerstone to the American Educational system regardless of what level it may be on. It is a mean to allow students to express themselves in a different way (better outside rather than in the classroom).
And in concerns to no child lfet behind, I want it abolished completely. I feel it is simply a way to measure the performance of teachers and a scapegoat for administration and government. A standardized test can rarely if at all show a student's progress in the classroom. All it proves is that a teacher can get his or her students to memorize some things which will be on a test at a later date. As a future educator, I take this as a personal insult, because it places limitations on what can be done in the classroom, what I like to call "life lessons" that could have potentialy been taught.
I have to respond to Robert's comment about evolution. With all due respect, I think there is a difference in proselytizing and teaching the theory of evolution. Newton's theory of gravitation, Einstein's theory of relativity are theories because, like Creationism, they cannot be proven. But the theories have held up over time because they have not been disproved. Evolution is compatible with the fossil record and other scientific facts. Science does not make sense without the theory of Evolution. Darwin, who was himself a Christian, made a point to state that he did not believe his theory was contradictory to Christianity.
Creationism, however, is derived from a religion. The theory requires a belief in Christianity.
The debate about taking physical education out of the the schools really impacted me in that our children really need physical education in terms of keeping them healthy I thought, but some believed otherwise. I really believe that students should have some form of physical activity outside of the classroom and outside of the playgrounds. I think in terms of our children being one of the most overweighted in the world should encourage parents to push for the need to keep physical education in the schools and create physical education programs where none exist already.
Post a Comment