Out of the five topics that were debated today, I would have to comment on the "busing" debate. I agree that children riding buses may have problems when it comes to racism and discrimination because I was one of those kids in high school. I was also a kid that was not able to have the luxury of riding the bus in middle school. The bus drop off and pick up was a block away and the bus refused to pick me up. So instead of riding the 15 minute bus ride, I had to walk the 45 minute walk to school. I lived in a small town and there were only two middle schools, the closest one was a 45 minute walk. There was no public transportation because the town was so small. My parents left for work way before I was supposed to be at school. So I cannot agree with getting rid of busing. I believe it needs to be up to the school districts to decide how many students are allowed in one school. When I was growing up, I wasn't allowed to go to another school district just because I wanted to. It mattered where I lived and the city limits. I understand the arguments against it but I do not think busing needs to be taken away.
Though it was indeed my charge to be a con to busing and neighborhood schools, I don't agree with my presented standpoint. I do believe that I did not present my point well to the class because the discussion went on a tangent. I was not against busing in general, but busing as a means of intergration and property value purposes. However, when faced with the questions of the class, rather than restating my standpoint, I addressed the questions that were brought forth.
With that being said, one other debate that I would like to comment on is that of evolution vs. creation. Each one of them is a theory and should not be taught in the school system. They both give suggestions of what this thing called life is, but they aren't needed because students understand that they are alive. How they got to this point should be left as a responsibility of the parents. That way the touchy subject of faith, no matter which one, will not be an issue, and should not be an issue when it comes to public education.
Two debate I thought it was good the Bus ride and evolution v. creation. I agreed with Josh that evolution vs. creation should not taught in school because not everybody believe in GOD. I believe in GOD and the bible. I think we should leave it alone so everybody will happy with it in school. I would be on neither side on this debate but I don't disagree with either of them. The bus ride I have a hard time to agreed that school bus should be available for children. I don't like paying too many taxes so I don't think there should be public school bus.Back then, people did not have school bus to get to school, they had either to walk or had their parents ride them to school. I would be on the con side on this debate.
All the debates today were interesting. However, the one that struck the most accord with me was the issue of violence in schools. The con side made a lot of points that made me think that the things that children actually do hear and see could potentially be brought to school with them. Although the pro side came back with the idea that positive things are placed on t.v., much too often the child's attention is directed to the negative. I the facts stated are distrubing. I know after a child goes away from school grounds, there is not much a teacher could do to prevent a child from watching and listening to certain things. Therefore, a teacher should do what they can in the presence of the child, which is promote positive.
Of the debates that we heard today, the one that got my attention the most was the one involving technology in the classroom. I'm all for it! My children (who are about to enter 4th grade)go to what I consider to be a technologically advanced school. In addition to the computers, etc, there is a SmartBoard in every classroom. As a parent & a teacher (I substitute teach) I see everyone benefitting from these tools. I believe the earlier the children are exposed to classroom technology and taught how to properly use it properly, the more likely they will benefit from it and they will be less likely to use it in any type of negative manner. Technology can be a tool where everyone involved can benefit totally.
Even though my debate was on technology in the classroom and that is a subject of interest to me, the debate that I most enjoyed was the one about alternate certification for teachers. I am a student seeking alternative certification in early childhood education. I agree that non-traditional teachers bring a certain amount of life experience to the classroom and in our school there is no short cut to get through earlier. It is disconcerting to think that some states (I believe TX was mentioned)will just put anyone in a classroom with no training as long as they attend a few workshops, classes, etc. It would be interesting to know where TX stands in the standardized testing contest!
The topic that stuck with me the most was the issue about busing students. I think we need to do this type of thing to insure ta all students recieve fair education. think the issues of cultures differences can be best cured by social exposure. i think in te past that all students who have experienced busing may hve many stories to tell be it negative or positive. The more we we expose children to difference the better tey accept difference and eventually not judge people so readily.
The issue that intrigued me the most was the issue on technology. Technology is extremely important for a child to learn. With it being so prevalent in today’s society, children need to be exposed to it early on. Some families are not capable of providing computer in the home, so the school is the only place children can further their knowledge in technology.
I definitely do not feel that technology is a waste of money for schools. There are so many things technology is used for, especially in science, math, and reading. Technology allows classrooms to become interactive. They can use Smart Boards, which is a hands on learning board that children can write on, practice math problem, and it allows the entire class to participate. Just because technology is expensive, its positive outcomes completely outweigh its cost.
The topic that really interested me was the discussion about traditional certification versus alternative certification. Personally, I think that the CSU program for alternative certification is quite adequate to train new teachers. It does not even sound like that much of a fast-track. I have a friend that went through alternative certification, and she teaches at Shaw High School now. She loves it. She says that it was probably the best thing she could have done. However, that being said, not every alternative programs is as extensive as the CSU program. The program in Texas that allows a person to start teaching after only a summer of training sounds ludicrous to me. I think that in general alternative certification programs are great because they allow people to easily switch to teaching later in life. With the great need for teachers in this country, I think that any way we can get QUALIFIED new teachers is a good one. However, the program should be one that actually seeks to qualify teachers not just pass them through.
I like the debate of alternative vs traditional teaching. I am okay with alternative teaching as long as the teacher is teaching the subject he recieved a degree for. If they receive a degree in English, then they should not teach Math. I feel that the more people we can lure into teaching the better. We need teachers, but we need them to be effective also. The Texas program is ridiculus, because an alternative teacher is able to become certified if they just attend a few workshops. The Georgia system is more effective. It requires the attending of a few education classes. I do feel the traditional route is the best route to take, but the shortage requires teachers.
Technology in the classroom was an interesting debate. It is hard to argue against using technology in schools. This is the age of technology and the students will need to know how to use it as an educational tool. Most kids are pretty proficient on computers. They need to be taught how to use them for research. It is an essential skill they will need when they get to high school and college.
The issue that I found most interesting and informative was the debate on traditional teachers versus alternative ones. First of all I had no real idea that the alternative teaching program was an option when becoming a teacher and was surprised to learn that it is was in common use across the country. I do think it was made clear that it is an excellent oppurtunity for many teaching candidates to obtain their certification, but am concerned that it is a bit flawed in some aspects, such as in Texas where just about anyone can get certified as a teacher without much education or work. I initially thought it was a "shortcut" when I first heard of it, but after the debate I realized most of these people do have 4 year degrees and are taking classes to enhance their degree if they have chosen to teach in a diffwerent subject, as I believe they should have to do to be better subject matter experts as a traditional student must be. I do not know if I fully support the program as is, but with some changes, or at least "tightning the requirements" somewhat, again Texas comes to mind, it would be easier to fully support the program in general. If I had a previous degree and had decided to become a teacher, this program would, and is, very helpful and convinient in doing it without going bacjk to school for another four years, which can easily be assumed has detoured many from becoming teachers themselves.
Although I was against alternative educators in class to some degree I'm all for it. A person that may have a degree already and decides that they want to become a educator is fine but I believe that all alternative teaching programs should be create all the same. I believe that alternative teachers could miss out on some valuable information as for as classroom management and how to identify with their students learning abilities, which is very important.
The debate on technology was interesting. Although I am a firm believer in technology in the classroom, Jatasia had a good point that it should not be used in excess. Reading from textbooks is good traditional way of learning that is still used, but computers are just as good as textbooks and it gives students an opportunity to learn technology and resources.
Out of the issues that were debated today the ones on school reform and school financing stood out most. I really didn't have muchchoice but to argue against raising property taxes to help raise funding. I know that it all our responsibility to provide funding for education of our childre. However I often wonder could there be more ways to provide those funds without raising taxes. The government could provide more funding and take away some of the burden from the taxers that are barely able to pay those fees and it could possibly solve some of those issues surround equity versus equality in education.
Well I think I might have skipped a date or something, but for the last debates in class, one issue that stuck out to me was parental involvement. I think that if a student wants to succeed in school he or she will without their parents influence. I say this because, when I was a little girl my father passed away due to a heart attack, and my mother works 12 hour shift days. So I went through school without much of her help because she was always busy, plus she does not speak english very well. Yes she did attend important events such as my graduations from different schools, but as far as school involvement went that was pretty much it. Also, if a parent is always involved it might get to the point where that parent is living a dream through that child. Meaning as the student gets older and needs to start thinking about college and profession, then that parent may choose the school and the profession that he or she may have wanted but never had the opportunity. Rather than letting the student choose, then he or she may be obligated to do something that he or she may not have wanted. Another problem that can arise is lack of independence. If a student is constantly told by their parents to do their homework and to study, ect. when is that child going to learn about initiative and independence? So I think that parental involvement should be minimal, and that teachers should teach their students well and bestow independence upon them.
18 comments:
Out of the five topics that were debated today, I would have to comment on the "busing" debate. I agree that children riding buses may have problems when it comes to racism and discrimination because I was one of those kids in high school. I was also a kid that was not able to have the luxury of riding the bus in middle school. The bus drop off and pick up was a block away and the bus refused to pick me up. So instead of riding the 15 minute bus ride, I had to walk the 45 minute walk to school. I lived in a small town and there were only two middle schools, the closest one was a 45 minute walk. There was no public transportation because the town was so small. My parents left for work way before I was supposed to be at school. So I cannot agree with getting rid of busing. I believe it needs to be up to the school districts to decide how many students are allowed in one school. When I was growing up, I wasn't allowed to go to another school district just because I wanted to. It mattered where I lived and the city limits. I understand the arguments against it but I do not think busing needs to be taken away.
Though it was indeed my charge to be a con to busing and neighborhood schools, I don't agree with my presented standpoint. I do believe that I did not present my point well to the class because the discussion went on a tangent. I was not against busing in general, but busing as a means of intergration and property value purposes. However, when faced with the questions of the class, rather than restating my standpoint, I addressed the questions that were brought forth.
With that being said, one other debate that I would like to comment on is that of evolution vs. creation. Each one of them is a theory and should not be taught in the school system. They both give suggestions of what this thing called life is, but they aren't needed because students understand that they are alive. How they got to this point should be left as a responsibility of the parents. That way the touchy subject of faith, no matter which one, will not be an issue, and should not be an issue when it comes to public education.
Two debate I thought it was good the Bus ride and evolution v. creation. I agreed with Josh that evolution vs. creation should not taught in school because not everybody believe in GOD. I believe in GOD and the bible. I think we should leave it alone so everybody will happy with it in school. I would be on neither side on this debate but I don't disagree with either of them.
The bus ride I have a hard time to agreed that school bus should be available for children. I don't like paying too many taxes so I don't think there should be public school bus.Back then, people did not have school bus to get to school, they had either to walk or had their parents ride them to school. I would be on the con side on this debate.
All the debates today were interesting. However, the one that struck the most accord with me was the issue of violence in schools. The con side made a lot of points that made me think that the things that children actually do hear and see could potentially be brought to school with them. Although the pro side came back with the idea that positive things are placed on t.v., much too often the child's attention is directed to the negative. I the facts stated are distrubing. I know after a child goes away from school grounds, there is not much a teacher could do to prevent a child from watching and listening to certain things. Therefore, a teacher should do what they can in the presence of the child, which is promote positive.
Of the debates that we heard today, the one that got my attention the most was the one involving technology in the classroom. I'm all for it! My children (who are about to enter 4th grade)go to what I consider to be a technologically advanced school. In addition to the computers, etc, there is a SmartBoard in every classroom. As a parent & a teacher (I substitute teach) I see everyone benefitting from these tools. I believe the earlier the children are exposed to classroom technology and taught how to properly use it properly, the more likely they will benefit from it and they will be less likely to use it in any type of negative manner. Technology can be a tool where everyone involved can benefit totally.
Even though my debate was on technology in the classroom and that is a subject of interest to me, the debate that I most enjoyed was the one about alternate certification for teachers. I am a student seeking alternative certification in early childhood education. I agree that non-traditional teachers bring a certain amount of life experience to the classroom and in our school there is no short cut to get through earlier. It is disconcerting to think that some states (I believe TX was mentioned)will just put anyone in a classroom with no training as long as they attend a few workshops, classes, etc. It would be interesting to know where TX stands in the standardized testing contest!
The topic that stuck with me the most was the issue about busing students. I think we need to do this type of thing to insure ta all students recieve fair education. think the issues of cultures differences can be best cured by social exposure. i think in te past that all students who have experienced busing may hve many stories to tell be it negative or positive. The more we we expose children to difference the better tey accept difference and eventually not judge people so readily.
The issue that intrigued me the most was the issue on technology. Technology is extremely important for a child to learn. With it being so prevalent in today’s society, children need to be exposed to it early on. Some families are not capable of providing computer in the home, so the school is the only place children can further their knowledge in technology.
I definitely do not feel that technology is a waste of money for schools. There are so many things technology is used for, especially in science, math, and reading. Technology allows classrooms to become interactive. They can use Smart Boards, which is a hands on learning board that children can write on, practice math problem, and it allows the entire class to participate. Just because technology is expensive, its positive outcomes completely outweigh its cost.
The topic that really interested me was the discussion about traditional certification versus alternative certification. Personally, I think that the CSU program for alternative certification is quite adequate to train new teachers. It does not even sound like that much of a fast-track. I have a friend that went through alternative certification, and she teaches at Shaw High School now. She loves it. She says that it was probably the best thing she could have done. However, that being said, not every alternative programs is as extensive as the CSU program. The program in Texas that allows a person to start teaching after only a summer of training sounds ludicrous to me. I think that in general alternative certification programs are great because they allow people to easily switch to teaching later in life. With the great need for teachers in this country, I think that any way we can get QUALIFIED new teachers is a good one. However, the program should be one that actually seeks to qualify teachers not just pass them through.
I like the debate of alternative vs traditional teaching. I am okay with alternative teaching as long as the teacher is teaching the subject he recieved a degree for. If they receive a degree in English, then they should not teach Math. I feel that the more people we can lure into teaching the better. We need teachers, but we need them to be effective also. The Texas program is ridiculus, because an alternative teacher is able to become certified if they just attend a few workshops. The Georgia system is more effective. It requires the attending of a few education classes. I do feel the traditional route is the best route to take, but the shortage requires teachers.
Technology in the classroom was an interesting debate. It is hard to argue against using technology in schools. This is the age of technology and the students will need to know how to use it as an educational tool. Most kids are pretty proficient on computers. They need to be taught how to use them for research. It is an essential skill they will need when they get to high school and college.
The issue that I found most interesting and informative was the debate on traditional teachers versus alternative ones. First of all I had no real idea that the alternative teaching program was an option when becoming a teacher and was surprised to learn that it is was in common use across the country. I do think it was made clear that it is an excellent oppurtunity for many teaching candidates to obtain their certification, but am concerned that it is a bit flawed in some aspects, such as in Texas where just about anyone can get certified as a teacher without much education or work. I initially thought it was a "shortcut" when I first heard of it, but after the debate I realized most of these people do have 4 year degrees and are taking classes to enhance their degree if they have chosen to teach in a diffwerent subject, as I believe they should have to do to be better subject matter experts as a traditional student must be. I do not know if I fully support the program as is, but with some changes, or at least "tightning the requirements" somewhat, again Texas comes to mind, it would be easier to fully support the program in general. If I had a previous degree and had decided to become a teacher, this program would, and is, very helpful and convinient in doing it without going bacjk to school for another four years, which can easily be assumed has detoured many from becoming teachers themselves.
Although I was against alternative educators in class to some degree I'm all for it. A person that may have a degree already and decides that they want to become a educator is fine but I believe that all alternative teaching programs should be create all the same. I believe that alternative teachers could miss out on some valuable information as for as classroom management and how to identify with their students learning abilities, which is very important.
The debate on technology was interesting. Although I am a firm believer in technology in the classroom, Jatasia had a good point that it should not be used in excess. Reading from textbooks is good traditional way of learning that is still used, but computers are just as good as textbooks and it gives students an opportunity to learn technology and resources.
Out of the issues that were debated today the ones on school reform and school financing stood out most. I really didn't have muchchoice but to argue against raising property taxes to help raise funding. I know that it all our responsibility to provide funding for education of our childre. However I often wonder could there be more ways to provide those funds without raising taxes. The government could provide more funding and take away some of the burden from the taxers that are barely able to pay those fees and it could possibly solve some of those issues surround equity versus equality in education.
Well I think I might have skipped a date or something, but for the last debates in class, one issue that stuck out to me was parental involvement. I think that if a student wants to succeed in school he or she will without their parents influence. I say this because, when I was a little girl my father passed away due to a heart attack, and my mother works 12 hour shift days. So I went through school without much of her help because she was always busy, plus she does not speak english very well. Yes she did attend important events such as my graduations from different schools, but as far as school involvement went that was pretty much it. Also, if a parent is always involved it might get to the point where that parent is living a dream through that child. Meaning as the student gets older and needs to start thinking about college and profession, then that parent may choose the school and the profession that he or she may have wanted but never had the opportunity. Rather than letting the student choose, then he or she may be obligated to do something that he or she may not have wanted. Another problem that can arise is lack of independence. If a student is constantly told by their parents to do their homework and to study, ect. when is that child going to learn about initiative and independence? So I think that parental involvement should be minimal, and that teachers should teach their students well and bestow independence upon them.
Post a Comment