Educate to Innovate!

So, I am so excited to hear that someone is finally praising scientists and engineers like athletes and movie stars. Science can be cool, and President Obama recognizes this.

White House Begins Campaign to Promote Science and Math Education
President Obama made a statement about this new campaign:

If you win the N.C.A.A. championship, you come to the White House,” he said. “Well, if you’re a young person and you’ve produced the best experiment or design, the best hardware or software, you ought to be recognized for that achievement, too.

“Scientists and engineers ought to stand side by side with athletes and entertainers as role models, and here at the White House, we’re going to lead by example. We’re going to show young people how cool science can be.”

I am so excited to see "Educate to Innovate" begin. Science societies are promising to volunteer and work with students in the classroom, leading up to a National Lab day in May. Change can not take place over night, and these programs may not necessarily solve all of our education woes, but I think programs like this, that get students more excited about academics can never be bad.

Because President Obama is so popular, especially among the younger generation, kids are likely to listen to him when he speaks. He is taking his back to school speech one step farther with this campaign.

I may not necessarily agree with all of President Obama's policies, but this one I can certainly say, that I think this is a great idea, and will hopefully get many students more interested in science and math.

tuition blog update.

So, i thought i would do a brief follow up of my previous blog on tuition increases.

This article pretty much says everything I wish I had said first.


Though we are in a recession, and many people are being severely hurt by tuition increases, our educations are becoming better.

"Over the 1967 to 2007 period, the average annual growth rate of tuition paid was 6 percent at the most selective colleges, but the growth rate in their resources was 13 percent and the growth rate in their subsidies was 25 percent!"

In response to the comments about USC spending their money on beautification, I think that it is a necessary expense. Though, I do not know to what extent the school uses its money on beautification projects, i know that many people are drawn to the university because of its campus. It is a beautiful campus and many people would not be willing to attend if the campus mirrored the neighborhood that it sits in.

Also, many students complain that they do not feel safe in the area, and when USC spends the money to try to improve the area, they complain that their tuition is being wasted on frivolous things like purchasing more property, etc. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

You pay for quality, and that is what we are receiving attending USC. A quality education, at a price that reflects as such. I am still a firm believer that in the end, the price is worth it.

"Race to the Top" or "Race to the Flop?"

Last Thursday, U.S. Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan released the final application for the Race to the Top fund, a revision of the proposal released by the Department of Education in July. Race to the Top is a federal grant that will award pieces of more than $4 billion to states who “have led the way in reform and will show the way for the rest of the country to follow,” says Duncan. Though, in theory, it is good to allow states to spread their figurative wings in creating their own reform, it is a bad idea to turn reform into a competition. Instead of calling this a “Race to the Top,” the Department of Education should reconsider and call it “Another Bad Attempt to Reform Education.”

This $4.35 billion dollars is an unprecedented amount of federal sponsored money for reform, especially education, which is too often put on the back burner. Since there is this huge amount of money to be spent on education, it is imperative that all states get at least a portion of the money. Instead of turning it into a contest, where the top performing states get the most money, it should be divided up amongst the states based on population. The larger states should get a bigger cut of the four billing dollars. However, the government wants states to use this money to implement change, and just handing them the money will in effect, keep them from doing just that.

It is important that at least some of the money is conditional to keep states from using it without actually making any changes to their systems. I would propose the same type of competition for at least a portion of the money, but there should be a base amount given to every state to give them a jump start in changing their education systems. With at least a small portion of money, states will be better able to do the necessary research and start up programs for reform. Then, once every state has had an equal opportunity to get programs going, the rest of the monies can be rewarded based on the quality and effectiveness of said reforms.

If the government insists upon making this a competition, it should at least begin with a level playing field. Not every state has the means to start up programs without initial financial help. The way I see things going right now, is that the larger, more financially stable states will be able to provide the best reform programs and will receive the most “Race to the Top” funding, while states who need the money more will be unable to really participate. It is a vicious cycle. The states without enough education funding will not receive any of this money, and things will not change, while the big states with more money are just going to get more money.

Though I am excited to see our government finally instituting education reforms (the last time anything major was done was in 2001 with the No Child Left Behind Act, and we all know how well that worked out), I just wish that they would make a few changes first. Let’s give every state a chance to make some change, and finally fix our evident problem with education. Now that this program has already been started, I am excited to see if it actually works. I am guessing that we are going to see rich education states just get richer, without actually seeing very noticeable change. But, there are always surprises.

you cant put a price tag on a college education

As a college degrees become more sought after, universities are able to charge higher prices in order to obtain them. On November 1, 2009, the Chronicle of Higher Education released the newest list of colleges and universities in the United States that have exceeded costs of $50,000.(see the list by clicking here) This year the list has 58 schools that exceed that price mark- last year there were only 5! As a college degrees become more sought after, universities are able to charge higher prices in order to obtain them. Sarah Lawrence College tops this list with costs exceeding $53k, while my own School, USC is number 32 on the list with estimated costs at around $50,500.

I know that the schools on this list are all private institutions that do not receive funding from their states, which is why their tuition is significantly greater than most state schools, but the students do not complain about their high tuition as much as all the students going to state schools in California. With all the recent economic turmoil and budget cuts in California, there has been tuition increases at the University of California schools, as well as the California State University schools. There have been protests and rally's about these recent tuition increases, which reached around 10% at the beginning of summer.



Students need to realize that you can not put a price on your education. A college education offers you so much more in life experience than just the degree alone. In college you make professional connections that will help you to get a job later in life, and create invaluable friendships. Most of the lasting friends people make in life are during their years in college, and you can not put a price on them. If you were to ask any student at one of the colleges on the 50k list, they would tell you the same things I just wrote, which is why they do not mind paying a little extra for their tuition (not to mention, these are some of the highest ranked universities in the nation). Not all of the schools on the list are top tier schools though, yet students still have no problem paying the high prices to attend.



I know that it sucks to have to pay a little extra for tuition, but the fee increases do not outweigh the experience in college. In fact, there are fee increases every year anyways, just not as significant. I just with that instead of complaining about tuition, these students would just embrace the college experience and they will be able to see that it it worth the price. The experiences they have will last a lifetime.

Indie film brings up a lot of controversial issues

I am not a big indie film buff, but saw this movie for a class I am taking. From my knowledge, indie films are basically any film that is not made by a studio- regardless of how much it costs to make. The film "The New Twenty" cost about 500k dollars.

When I sat down to watch “The New Twenty,” the only thing I knew about the film was the title. I went into the screening with a completely open mind, and had no idea what I was getting myself into. This film, about five best friends living in New York City, was written and directed by Chris Mason Johnson. It was produced in 2009, and filmed in New York City. “The New Twenty” follows the lives of five late- twenties people who have been best friends in college. It shows the ups, and downs of their friendship, and their ultimate separating of ways. The movie is set in the year 2006, just seven years after the five characters all graduated from college. There are two gay men, one woman, the alpha male, and a heroine addict. The alpha male, and the woman announce their engagement, at the beginning of the film, and for the next seventy minutes or so, we are shown a glimpse of each of the characters lives, at that moment in time. We watch two men fall in love, another man desperately seeking companionship, the self destruction of another character through his drug dependency, and a couple break up.

In this film, Chris Mason Johnson is trying to make several, very subtle, yet loud statements about a lot of different issues. The most noticeable to me was that he wanted to show how people, no matter how good of friends, will ultimately separate. Be it through time, or other circumstances, all friendships are probably going to end. The film shows how one circumstance, one person, can change an entire dynamic between friends. A lot of mainstream films and television shows depict friendships that last through unthinkable events. In reality, people change, grow apart, and I think that Johnson really shows this well in “The New Twenty.”

I feel like casting and character development played an extremely important role in telling this story. There was a very diverse cast which consisted of the not- so- typical “Hollywood” type actors. The characters seemed very real. They were not extremely good looking, and were very believable in this setting. The ensemble consisted of a brother and sister, Tony and Julie, who are Asian American, Felix, Andrew, and Ben. Ben and Tony are both gay, while Felix and Andrew are straight. Johnson wanted to show that gay men and straight men can be friends, without any awkward jokes, or typical “gay man falls in love with straight friend” type situations happening. This was another one of the subtle issues he touched on in “The New Twenty.” There is such a huge stigma in society today that gay and straight men can not possibly have a normal friendship, and Johnson wanted to show that this is not true.

Johnson also wanted to bring to the screen a gay relationship, especially because it is so rare in the mainstream. Of course it is definitely becoming more common and more accepted, it is still way underrepresented. The gay topic is very relevant in today’s society with all of the hype surrounding Proposition 8 and gay marriage. He doesn’t really bring any of these issues into the movie, but by having a gay couple, and gay characters in the film, he is definitely making a statement about it. He seems to just want to show that gay people are normal, and love just like everyone else.

For a nanosecond, the film mentions the disease almost always associated with gay men- HIV. There is a brief second where Tony is confronted with the news that his boyfriend is positive, and must decide how important he is. He freaks out for a minute, but then comes to the realization that his feelings are stronger than the disease, and they work out their issues. Despite the fact that his boyfriend Robert has tested positive, he is healthy, and Tony deals with it. The film comes back to this topic just a few times throughout the movie, but it is downplayed compared to many of the other things going on.

One of the other issues brought up in this film was the use of heroine. One of the characters, Felix, clearly has a problem with the drug, but none of the other characters want to admit it. Because he does not “shoot up” he does not necessarily have a problem. There is a scene where two of the characters are talking to another friend, and she calls Felix an addict. They both become very defensive and say that he is not an addict, and does not have a problem with the drug. It is this same night that he overdoses, and almost dies. A lot of people who have friends that use this drug do not believe they have a problem because they are not injecting it. The only people who are addicts use needles; everyone else uses the drug for recreational purposes. This film draws a new light on the subject, a subject that I knew literally nothing about before watching.

Through the intertwining stories of these five characters, we can see how circumstances changed the way they viewed each other and their friendships. While stressing this main issue, Johnson was able to tackle a lot of smaller issues. He then tied them all together to show just how people who are very different can coexist and become friends. I really enjoyed the cast selection, and felt that the actors did a good job portraying each of their different characters. I loved the diversity of the cast, both ethnically, and socially, and how Johnson seemed to blend them so well. The characters were very believable as friends, and I didn’t necessarily feel like I was watching a movie. I felt more like I was a fly on the wall of these people’s lives and watching in real time. Because it was an indie film and none of the actors were big stars, I was able to really let myself get into the movie, which does not happen as often in mainstream films.

I liked how the film showed something so real, and did not try to change anything. I liked how real the film felt, and I really enjoyed the New York setting. The film feels extremely New York, and if it had been set somewhere like Los Angeles, it would be completely different. I think that Johnson was able to really bring up a lot of very relevant issues, without throwing them at you head on. I like the subtlety of the movie, and how it made very heavy issues a little lighter, without actually taking away from them. Not to mention, the film had an amazing soundtrack. Overall, I would recommend this film to a friend.


please visit thenewtwentymovie.com to view the film credits and trailer

Marching band is Physical Education

I recently read that in many school districts across California, it has been determined that classes such as marching band, JROTC, cheer, and others, no longer qualify for physical education credit as it is outlined by the National Association for Sport & Physical Education (NASPE). However, classes like marching band may better fulfill these standards than regular physical education courses.

It is absurd to believe that marching band does not fulfill every one of the six standards outlined by NASPE. According to the National Organization for Music Education (MENC), members of marching band participate in warm-up calisthenics, endurance training, and marching for miles. Not to mention that some students carry instruments weighing over twenty pounds!

Although I never played in the marching band, I have two older brothers who were heavily involved in the band. I used to watch them perform on the weekends, and in one Saturday they would perform a thirteen minute routine, and march several miles in a parade. Not to mention the numerous hours of practice they would have each week to prepare for these events. My older brothers would come home from practice, and events exhausted.

Not only does marching band give students the opportunity to participate in this high level of physical activity, it also allows for leadership. Both of my older brothers became section leaders and one was even given the role of assistant drum major. But even on top of all the hard work and dedication that marching band requires, there was still plenty of time for fun. These students become a family, and if you were to ask any student who participated in the program, they would more than likely tell you that marching band was the highlight of their high school career.

Now, thanks to NASPE, and the physical education teachers who are pushing to eliminate this, and other similar programs, from receiving PE credit, these programs are in jeopardy. However, there is now legislation in Sacramento that will allow these classes to continue to be substituted for PE credit. If passed, assembly bill AB351, co- authored by Assembly Members Mary Salas and Fiona Ma, will allow students enrolled in marching band, JROTC, cheer, and other similar courses to be exempt from taking physical education courses. Because these courses are academically challenging, physically demanding and provide important leadership skills, they should qualify for PE credit.

This bill has already been approved by the California Assembly Committee on Education, and is to be heard by the state assembly in the near future. The San Diego Unified School District grants its support for this bill, and I think that it is important for others to join in their support as well. If this bill does not pass, it is possible that these enriching activities may no longer be enjoyed by students. We all need to band together, to help this bill get passed, for the sake of these programs, and the students who participate in them.

http://www.aahperd.org/naspe/template.cfm?template=publications-nationalstandards.html

http://ab351.org/

http://www.menc.org/v/band/does-marching-band-physical-education

my high school experience.. sort of.

I know that it is all too often that high school is referred to as a prison for teenagers, but I am still going to roll with that same analogy. If you walk onto any random high school campus in Los Angeles, or some other surrounding area, you are going to feel like you literally just stepped into the gates of a state penitentiary. Often times the school will be surrounded by gates and in some cases, students have to walk through metal detectors to even get inside. Are we serious? Is that really what it has come down to? Thanks to all of those special individuals who thought it would be exciting to play "Call of Duty Seven: High School War" in real life at their school. Anyways, I digress. Short from the orange jumpsuits, high school students are treated like cattle as they are ushered from class to class without even enough time to use the restroom in between. My experience from high school went like this:

7:09am- arrive at school
7:10am- bell rings, better hurry to class
7:15am- late bell rings, class is started
8:22am- first period ends, better start running
8:27am- late bell, second period starts
....
the classes went like this through four periods until lunch. now, notice the mere five minute break in between classes- this was supposed to be enough time for students to cross the entire campus AND use the restroom and do whatever they needed to before their next class starts. unfortunately, at my high school there was only like one bathroom with maybe 3 stalls on the entire campus open (they had to close all the other ones due to vandalism- thanks wannabe gangsters who are probably the reason for the prison-like state of high schools).

10:30am- bell rings, fourth period starts
10:47am- raise my hand me:"may i use the restroom?" teacher: "no, you should have done that before class" me:"there was a line out the door, i would have been late to class" teacher: "should have hurried faster to get there before there was a line" me:"i am going to pee all over the floor if you dont let me go, it is an emergency" teacher: "fine, go" (ok, now this scenario is a little exaggerated, i never actually threatened to pee on the floor, or anything like this, but it definitely was irritating) NOTE: I am pretty sure that inmates get to use the restroom whenever they want.
11:35am- bell rings, LUNCHTIME YAY!
...ok, so not really yay. lunch time was only like 25 minutes long and you had to stand under some tree to keep away from the swarm of seagulls who came at lunch to pick at all the garbage most kids were to lazy to throw in the garbage can that was sitting right next to them- anyways the tree was to keep you from getting pooped on- which didnt always work. i never actually got the poo on me, but i had a couple of friends who did, and it was hilarious. sucked to be them though. anyways- lunch was not that exciting and the food sucked.

**I feel like this story is also necessary to show how stupid the discipline system is in high schools. Let me set this up for you, It was like one month before graduation in my senior year of high school, i am a straight A student, and had never in my life needed any kind of disciplinary action. So i am walking back to class one day after lunch and i get stopped by one of the mom's who thinks she has an important job because she has a whistle and gets to scream at high school kids. She tells me i am in violation of the dress code because there is a hole in the knees of my jeans, which, i know is kinda lame, but everyone was wearing them. So anyways I am like busting up laughing because that is the most retarded thing i have ever heard of in my life, plus there was like at least 5 other girls standing around that i could see wearing jeans that were ripped in places that let their whole asses hang out, yet i was in trouble because there was a hole in my jeans. whatever, so i get taken to the office and they tell me i have two options- i can call my mom for a change of clothes (yea right, my mom is not going to come down and bring me some clothes) and two- i can go sit in detention for the rest of the day. i flip out! they are going to make me sit in detention and miss my ap physics class and lit class because i have holes in my jeans? THERE IS A PROBLEM HERE! so anyways, they got mad at me when i tried to tell them i am a straight A student and can't miss these classes- but they make me sit in detention anyways- while some idiot who is sitting out by the baseball field smoking weed gets to go to his under water basket weaving class. REALLY?

anyways, enough of my tirade about the indolence of the disciplinarians in high schools.

After lunch the day usually went pretty quickly and we all got to go home at like 2:15pm.

Now back to the prisoner part. We are all wearing orange jumpsuits and they decided it would be easier to assign us numbers instead of calling us by our names- its just easier that way. from day one in class all we hear about is the standardized tests at the end of the year and making sure everyone is up to the proper standards. no actual teaching is done. there is no personal touch from the teachers- just straight reading from books of standards. who really gives a flying shit about these tests anyways? certainly not the kids taking them, and why? they dont affect us in any way possible- why should we care? by the time the repercussions of low test scores come around, we will all be graduated, that is, those of us who dont decide to drop out to have our illegitimate child of become a gangster. THANK YOU MR.BUSH and NO Child Left Behind! Let's just keep teaching kids stupid standards, instead of something they will actually use. LOVE THE STATUS QUO!

The moral of this story is, let's make a change. Let's stop giving students numbers and give them names. Encourage them to succeed. Don't take away programs that allow them to develop their talents and passions. These programs keep them focused and motivated. Show them that they can do whatever they want. Teachers, If you take an interest in a student, they will automatically be more respectful and reverent of you. Let's make a change on the smallest levels, and then it can grow to much larger scale.

**I am not sure where I was actually going with this totally random escapade on high schools, but thanks for reading!

***Also, these stories come solely from my high school experience and I in no way claim that every high school is this way.

standardizing standardized tests might be a step in the right direction..

In light of the economical crisis in the United States, and our ever increasing concern with health care reform and the War in Iraq, I think it is safe to say that education reform has been sort of put on the back burner, so to speak. Though it may not be as prominent a problem, I feel that it deserves just as much, if not more consideration than some of these other problems we are focusing on. Education is the future, and with the current education system in the United States, I just don’t feel like we have a very bright future. With budget cuts and increasing tuition costs, American students are feeling seemingly troubled.

There is no way that we can solve all of educations problems at once, so right now I want to focus on just one issue. I think that the main education policy we need to take a look at is the “No Child Left Behind” Act of 2001. My main concern with this act is how adequately, or inadequately, it is measuring student achievement through its mandated standardized testing. Can individual states do the same thing on their own, perhaps more effectively? I know that ridding our schools of standardized tests is not going to be an option, so what lawmakers need to find is a system that is most cost efficient and effective. The federal government either needs to come up with a way to have national standardized test, or it needs to take a step back, and let the states figure out what works best for their schools in order to optimize success. Student success should be the most important thing on the agenda for any lawmaker, state or federal, but unfortunately, politics gets in the way.

The “No Child Left Behind” Act (NCLB) was originally proposed by President George W. Bush immediately after taking office. Senator Ted Kennedy was one of the bill’s major sponsors and it was passed by the House of Representatives on May 23, 2001, by the Senate on June 14, 2001, and signed into law January 8, 2002. For the purpose of this essay, I want to only look at the section of this act that deals with standardized testing, not necessarily the aspects about federal funding in schools. NCLB emphasizes standardized testing (all students take the same test under the same conditions) to measure improvements in reading, math and the sciences. The scores are used to determine if the school has taught the students well. If schools do not make Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), as it is outlined in NCLB , several years in a row, plans are made and implemented for restructuring of the school and government take- over.

Proponents for NCLB claim that the legislation encourages accountability in public schools by giving parents greater access to educational options for their children. They argue that through standardized testing and mandated school report cards, the achievement gap is being closed. When I say achievement gap, I am referring to the apparent level of disparity between students of minorities, and students coming from a lower socio-economical status in comparison to their white counterparts. By setting the same standards for all students regardless of their race or class, NCLB is seemingly a step towards accomplishing this goal. In addition, Schools must make their annual report cards available, so that parents can see the AYP rates and decide if they want to keep their children in their school, or switch them to another school in their district, with perhaps better improvement rates. NCLB is supposed to close the education gap by creating common expectations for all students.

The problem with NCLB is that there is not a nationwide standardized test. States are left to create these standardized tests at their own discretion. This poses the problem that a state may create a test with lowered standards to make it appear that their students are excelling. Missouri is one known state that has lowered its standards since the law was put into effect. Standardized tests also create teachers who “teach to the test.” Instead of focusing on teaching students skills that they will be able to apply to a broader range of disciplines, teachers teach what they think will be on the tests. For example, in a math class, a teacher who anticipates straight addition problems like 2+2=4, she may not feel inclined to teach the same subject in an applied manner, (i.e. word problems). This puts students at a disadvantage for both the test, and for real life. Teachers may incorrectly assume what materials will be tested, as well as cheat students out of the applied knowledge that they are going to need once they arrive in the so called “real world.”

Furthermore, standardized tests are not taken seriously by students. Even though students should be taking the tests to the best of their abilities, in order to attain the most accurate score, many students simply do not care about the tests. Because students are hammered with tests from the time they are in elementary school, by the time they reach high school, they are just annoyed with them. I know that when I was in high school, it seemed that everything revolved around the tests. Perhaps this is because I attended a Title I school (a Title I school is one that usually has a high concentration of minority students in areas of seemingly high poverty rates. The funding for these schools is based on test scores as well as daily student attendance), and most of our funding was determined by our scores on these exams. However, when a test does not have an immediate effect on a student’s GPA, or graduation status (with the California High School Exit Exam as the exception to this), many students deem them a waste of time.

Now, set aside these seemingly huge problems with standardized tests, and we are still left with a flawed system. Of course NCLB was born of purely good intentions; it is not being executed properly. If the government could figure out a way to reform NCLB, and create a nationwide set of standards and testing, there would be much more accurate results. However, because we are in tough economic times, education reform is not on anybody’s high priority list. So I think that it would be better for the federal government to just take a step back and allow individual states the freedom to put in place their own types of education reform. Many states already had systems of standardized testing before NCLB, and I think that right now, it might be the most effective route to take. Take California for example, in 1988, California voter passed Proposition 98.

Proposition 98, which is also referred to as the "Classroom Instructional Improvement and Accountability Act," implemented a system of standardized testing that would help lawmakers create the budget for education. Proposition 98 made it necessary for all schools to publish the results of their yearly standardized tests in what is called their School Accountability Report Card (SARC). Every school in California was required to make this information available to whoever wanted it. The SARC includes information about student achievement and progress toward meeting reading, writing, arithmetic, and other academic goals. This also shows progress towards reducing drop out rates, among other things including teacher statistics, basic cleanliness of the school, etc. These SARCs seem to be providing even more valuable information that NCLB reports do. Why is it that California had this plan in place over ten years before NCLB?

One of the major reasons why I feel that Prop 98 is better than NCLB is the fact that there is a model SARC that all schools are trying to achieve. All schools are working to a model success rate. NCLB does not offer any type of nationwide model that schools should be trying to work for. Granted, Prop 98 still poses the same problems with standardized testing as NCLB, however, the standard model helps schools to have a goal and something to work towards. Of course there are still consequences for schools having poor SARCs, which include monetary issues. Most of the state funding for schools is based on SARC reports; however this issue is much too large to really get in to in the means of this paper.

In a perfect world, we would be able to eliminate standardized testing all together and just be able to trust that our teachers are doing their jobs in preparing students for their futures. We would love to see zero percent drop out rates and all of our students receive some kind of higher education, whether it is at a university, community college, or trade type school. However, we know that the likelihood of this happening is very slim, but we can all work together to achieving this goal in the future. What other options would policy makers have as a sort of substitute to standardized testing?

I wish that there was a simple answer to this question. There isn’t. I don’t think it would be possible, or even effective to completely eliminate standardized tests. I think that maybe a step in the right direction would be to consolidate these tests. Instead of testing students every single year, I think it would be better to have a system that randomly selecting different grade levels, or have tests every other year, or every few years as sort of progress checks on students in each grade level. This way, students would not get completely tired of having to take these tests every year, and instead of focusing on teaching to the tests, teachers would have more flexibility to teach more important things. With biennial or even triennial standardized tests, lawmakers could still monitor the progress and achievement of students. I feel a policy similar to this would be much more significant, especially in younger children, k-8th grade.

Once students reach high school age, I think that there should be just one test similar to that of the California High School Exit Exam. In a student’s sophomore year in high school, he or she will take one final exam before graduation. If they do not pass this test, based on the standard level of knowledge one should have attained by that point, they will have several more chances to pass before graduating. By allowing students multiple attempts at the exam will help to keep the exam fair, and will uphold a certain level of accountability on teachers. If a student is not able to pass on the first time around, then obviously they are in need of more teacher assistance. If significant percentages of students are not passing the first time they take the exam, then more measures can be taken to examine teachers and figure out why students are not passing. This exam will also allow that students are prepared for graduation and possess a certain level of knowledge that will be important in either their careers or in continuing their education.

Though I am still opposed to the idea of standardized testing, I feel that it is seemingly necessary to uphold certain accountability on behalf of teachers and students alike. Until we can figure out a better way to do this, standardized testing is here to stay, hopefully in a more efficient cost- effective way. Who knows, perhaps some day I will be able to come up with a better solution to this problem and change it, but for right now, the above mentioned reform is all I can come up with. I just know that something needs to be done, even though we have so many other issues to deal with. Education is the most powerful tool, or weapon, a country has and I think that America needs to not let it go wayside. If we tackle this problem now, in the future, we will have more educated citizens and ultimately better decision makers.

Links that I found particularly useful:
http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/beginning.html
http://www.politicalbase.com/issues/no-child-left-behind-act/12/
http://www.subnet.nga.org/educlear/achievement/
http://cbs2chicago.com/politics/No.Child.Left.2.278792.html
http://www.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/index.htmlA
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/hs/
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/sa/questions.asp
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/ac/sa/prop98.asp
http://www.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/modachieve-summary.html
http://www.edsource.org/sys_edsystem.html

Caitlin

So, doing some research for a paper and came across a contest on Eduwomk.com rename the No Child Left Behind Act. Some of the proposed are pretty funny. Check it out, http://www.eduwonk.com/2009/02/a-contest-name-that-law.html

So far my favorite is "Double Back Around To Pick Up The Children We Left Behind Act"

Bring on the moodiness, i mean the Santa Ana.

Well, it’s that time of year again. Time for the Santa Ana’s to blow. Pretty soon, you will hear about the Santa Ana almost every other week in the weather report. Just last week, on the first day of autumn, the Santa Ana Winds were back. As a native to Southern California, these winds are pretty much the norm. As soon as fall comes, so do the winds. You can try to describe the Santa Ana to someone who hasn’t experienced it, but it is so hard. It is such a different feeling than other winds.

The Santa Ana Winds are a downward sloping wind. Down Slope Winds are given a name wherever they occur in a region, and the Santa Ana winds occur in Southern California,

To the east of Los Angeles are the Santa Ana Mountains and the Santa Ana canyon, which the Santa Ana winds are named for. When a wind blows from the east towards the ocean, they are down slope winds coming off of the Santa Ana Mountains. These winds are hot and dry as they move downward towards the ocean.

This same article talks a little bit about how these winds are formed, and why they are so dry. I personally hate the winds because it is so hard to get around in them. It is very scary to drive in winds with gusts reaching 100mph sometimes. Now that is a very extreme case of the winds, but I know that they do get that fast. Usually the winds blow around 40mph and have to be at least 29mph to even be labeled as a Santa Ana.

If you drive up I- 15 right before the Cajon Pass near Foothill, while the Santa Ana is blowing, I guarantee you will see a truck or two overturned by the wind. I have seen it myself more times than I can count, and I rarely drive that way. There are often times trees uprooted by the wind and power lines blown over. That’s the scary thing about the Santa Ana, it is a wind that can destroy things so deeply rooted in the ground. With power lines being blown over, no wonder there are so many wildfires in Southern California at the end of the summer, early fall when the Santa Ana’s are blowing strong.

overturned truck

uprooted tree

Typically, the Southern California Wildfire season and the Santa Ana are synonymous. The two go hand in hand. The dry hot conditions of the atmosphere during these winds can cause a small wildfire to quickly spread.

fire during the wind

I do also want to mention a little bit about how the wind can affect your mood. These downward sloping winds produce a large amount of positive ions in the air, which can cause your nerves to be on end. Many have come to refer to these winds are “ill winds.”

You might be thinking these are just winds like any other wind. Not true, something different happens with a Santa Ana wind. Something happens to the air and atmosphere in a down sloping wind.

In her essay, “The Santa Ana”, Joan Didion talks about how the wind causes strange behaviors in people. She talks about how the positive ions in the air cause people to have bad moods, and other weird behaviors. I never really believed it until I did more research on the subject and found that it was true.

In a 1974 study conducted by the Swiss Meteorological Institute have shown that these ill winds cause physical problems such as headaches, dizziness, eye twitching, nausea, fatigue, saline disorders, water retention, respiratory problems, asthma, slower reaction time and host of other even more serious problems. Mental disorders caused by the increase in positive ions are nervousness, emotional unbalance, easily irritated, apathy, listlessness, insecurity, anxious and depression.

Well, what does this mean for students? If the Santa Ana is blowing strong outside, the last thing you are going to want to do it sit in a classroom. You are already going to be having problems with your allergies because of all the dust in the air. Then the positive ions are going to cause you to feel tired and irritable. The last thing you are going to want to do is sit in class and listen to lectures all day on things you couldn’t care less about. This is bad for students in southern California because the winds blow so often in the fall. We are pretty much used to it by now, and it is nice to finally be able to explain the moodiness that comes with the wind. I wish that when I was in high school I could have blamed some of my poor test scores on the wind. I feel like if more people knew that there was a scientific explanation for the lousy way they feel during the wind, people would blame the wind for a lot more things. It is science after all.



Note: Just as I was getting ready to post this, the weather report came on, and we can expect the Santa Ana will be blowing by Thursday. It is not going to last for too long, but it is going to be somewhat strong.

exit exam......fail.

In the midst of this economic crisis, there have been significant funding cuts for state programs across the board, but education has been hit extremely hard. Most Cal State and UC schools have already been hit by this with fee hikes, which, I could go on for days about. But this blog isn’t really about that. It’s more about a big waste of state money on something that could easily be eliminated, sort of.

I read this article the other day in the Sacramento Bee, which is not a paper I regularly read, I mean, I am a native Southern Californian, after all. I just happened to stumble upon it one day whilst looking through various articles online. How I found the article is beside the point. The article is about the California High School Exit Exam, and why it pretty much fails.

Gerard Bracey says in his article:

“High school exit examinations don't work, and in some cases, they backfire. States don't gather information on the effects of the test because the political risk is too great. Imagine voters' outrage if a study found that a state had spent hundreds of millions on a test that did no good. “

I pretty much agree with him on that one. Being one of the first classes in California to actually have to pass the test in order to graduate, I thought it was kind of a joke. Nobody that I knew took the test even remotely serious, because let’s face it, we all probably could have passed the test in like 6th grade. Now that is somewhat of an exaggeration, they say that the English language arts section tests you at a tenth grade level, while the math section tests you at an eighth grade level. But really, if we were being tested at such low grade levels anyways, what is the reason for kids not passing?

Bracey mentions a study done at Stanford University about the effects of the CAHSEE no students. Their research found that students who placed in the bottom 25% of the test as tenth graders were more likely to drop out of high school. Now of course there were more findings, which are definitely interesting and should be looked into, if you’re interested.

But what this means to me is basically, the kids who couldn’t pass and dropped out/ couldn’t graduate are the same kids who would have probably dropped out regardless of whether or not they took the test. There really is no reason for anybody who deserves a high school diploma to not pass the test- and what it comes down to it whether or not the kid actually wants to graduate. I don’t think anybody goes into high school just with the intent to drop out, but there are certainly those who take their education a little more seriously than others.

Here is something else I found interesting

"Another group of researchers at the University of Minnesota tried to determine if state high school exit examinations made the diploma more meaningful to employers. The answer was a resounding "No." It didn't matter if the exit exam was relatively easy or tough. The Minnesota team concluded, "These examinations must be seen as a colossal waste of education and human resources, harmful to those whose educational attainments are curtailed by failing them and of little use to those who pass them."

Now, why on earth are we wasting money on this test when the benefits are almost nonexistent? If passing the test gives no added benefit to the student, and the students who don’t pass probably wouldn’t have graduated anyways, why do we continue to waste these students time, and frankly, our money that we desperately need right now. I think there is a much better use for those millions of dollars that are being spent each year on the CAHSEE. Hey, maybe those Cal State kids and UC kids could stop bitching about their fee hikes? Just an idea.

This is not about education..

Well, I know that my blog claims to be about education and policy, and this post is clearly not about that. However, I felt it necessary to begin with a post about public intellectuals and how they are revered. Stephan Mack makes some interesting points in his article, “The ‘Decline’ of Public Intellectuals?”

So, is there any way of conceptualizing something called the public intellectual that is consistent with democratic values? Of course there is, but it needs to begin with a shift from “categories and class” to “function.” That is, our notions of the public intellectual need to focus less on who or what a public intellectual is—and by extension, the qualifications for getting and keeping the title. Instead, we need to be more concerned with the work public intellectuals must do, irrespective of who happens to be doing it.

Now, I am in no way claiming to be any kind of expert on the things I am going to be writing about, and I would like to emphasize that in no way am I trying to present myself as a public intellectual. Most people coined as public intellectuals are surrounded by controversy. They are the kind of people we love to hate, and I think to an extent, their work is driven by that. If the Fox news network was to give me a late night talk show, I think that I would be just as big of a jackass as some of their current hosts ,*cough* Bill O’ Reilly *cough*- it’s good for the ratings. Now, whether or not you agree with O’ Reilly’s work and opinions, there is no doubt that he is an authoritative public intellectual.

His schooling credentials alone give him credit enough to pretty much say whatever he wants, however he wants. He has a Bachelor’s degree in History from Marist College, a Master's in Broadcast Journalism from Boston University and another Master's Degree in Public Administration from Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. In addition to just his schooling, he has vast experience in journalism, print and broadcast, publishing weekly columns, and of course his late night cable TV talk show (on Fox), “The O’ Reilly Factor.” It is these qualifications that show us how he was able to get the title, and I think that maybe it his attitude and his work that allow him to keep his title.

Two recent books exploring Lenin’s deportation of intellectuals from Bolshevik Russia raise an ironic question about the supposed impotence of public intellectuals in America, that special class of academics and philosophically oriented writers who go outside their own disciplines to comment on social and political issues.

Do I even need to say why O’ Reilly fits into this category? I think not. He seems to fall a little out of this definition though, because he is more of a full time public intellectual. His show, “The O’ Reilly Factor,” is pretty much his commentary on politics and current news. His weekly columns also fall into this same category. However, he earned this status as almost a permanent public intellectual, because he spent many years as a news caster and journalism. O’ Reilly is a very controversial figure on the air today. There are even websites dedicated to how he sucks, (oreilly-sucks.com), but even if you think he is a complete idiot, you can’t really argue the fact that he has earned his title of “public intellectual”.