I am a freelance writer living and working in Troy, NY. On Monday our president will be visiting my town and discussing issues facing our country. I have bee writing a series on health care reform to give voice to the American experience. It is a four part series published in Our Time Press, a small multi-cultural newspaper in Brooklyn, NY. To see further stories and their grassroots journalism, please see www.ourtimepress.com. The first three parts of the series are below because part four is running next week. I invite you to share and discuss because NEVER has an issue been more important to our future. Thanks, Kimberlee
Part 1: The Road to Health Care Reform: Understanding Obama’s Public Option.Many years have passed since the Clinton Administration failed to promote a universal health care approach to a system direly in need of revamping. After decades of proposal and defeat, it is clear the American health care system is broken. Instead the health care system as many Americans know and understand it has been allowed to continue promoting an ineffective, out-dated business model where profit supersedes the needs of patients. What has been forgotten: the average American family. Out of all western nations, we pay the highest out of pocket costs for health care. What should be an inalienable right has become a privilege and a luxury many worry will be in jeopardy. Now the Obama administration falls under scrutiny for living up to a campaign promise of tackling the health care issue. While many consider Obama a socialist for facing social issues head on and many do not agree with his methods, others respect his focus upon the concerns of everyday Americans. There is so much bad press about the Health Care Reform Bill of 2009 but still many admire his tenacity. Still there is much confusion; misconception about what the reform entails and how such an undertaking, while ambitious can be made possible. Many remain doubtful and question how a ‘public’ option will not mean an invasion of privacy. One silver lining: As the controversy continues, at least people are talking regardless of political affiliation, statehood or economic status. Fact one: this issue of health care reform is complex, emotional and fiscal. While the existing system remains broken, should it not be fixed but instead replaced? Why not start over with a different blue print? Below I will explore the complexity of this issue where so much is at stake for every American and the human right to quality care. There are two separate issues at hand here that many consider only one. There is the issue of insurance and the issue of quality health care. They seem to become one and the same. While each American should have the right to affordable health care and insurance that covers every need, at what cost? How is it possible Obama’s proposal can meet all the needs of every American when we are so diverse in ideology? The way the current system is set up burdens every American but primarily the lower working class. It impacts many living paycheck to pay check and families struggling with economic blight. Most people will agree unless you have a secure job with excellent benefits, this issue of reform impacts your family. Still the main issue is how the existing system is set up. The broken health care path puts the power in the hands of insurance companies. Why is it as Americans, we are the only western nation where this happens, where the insurance company has power over health care decisions? What do insurance companies know about health care? Many conservatives also know the system cannot continue as-is but disagree that a public option is the answer. They believe it will end the public’s ability of making a ‘consumer’ choice of which plan to buy. They want people to have a choice at a reasonable cost where health care is not in the hands of the insurance company but the patient and his or her doctor. Why does this sound like a piped dream? Because this idealistic view also sounds a like PPO and how many average working class families can afford that type of coverage? Another obstacle facing reform from a national perspective is the notion of state policy making. Each individual state has the option of creating and providing a state funded health care program in conjunction with participating insurance companies. This carries forward the archaic system except it puts the power in the hands of the state government to decide which citizen is qualified and meets the state guidelines. Many state programs at this time fail to insure every citizen especially those that make too much money to qualify for Medicaid but also do not make enough money to afford the state funded program. It is quite a Catch-22. On top of the state issue, many Americans fear the concept of socialized medicine. They have visions of an extra long line at Motor Vehicles. While socialized medicine works in countries like Denmark and France, those countries populations fail to be an adequate model. Other countries like the United Kingdom are finding the National Health System or NHS has not grown with modern times or the needs of the population and many citizens there also purchase supplemental insurance to see the best of doctors. When discussing health care reform, there are many perplexing elements at work and many to consider for the whole of the nation. As much as every American should be treated equally, many Americans see them selves within the class system. Should status be a factor? The conservatives do not think the upper class should bear the financial burden of such reform. In other words, someone should pay for the reform but if they have anything to say, it will not be the upper class? Since the middle class has all but disappeared, who does this leave, the already burdened working class and the poor? How does Obama’s proposed reform cover these issues for the sake of every American? Below is a summary of highlights putting into layman’s terms, the over thousand pages long of proposed legislation. The Reform Bill wants to take what works right in the present system and merge these characteristics into the new system. Most Americans are concerned with the first two elements of the reform: Coverage and Affordability. The other issues explained (Shared Responsibility, Controlling Costs, Prevention and WellnessWorkforce Investments) seem to focus upon how the reform will be carried out with regard to infrastructure and creating protected consumerism of health care and insurance. Here it is thought by creating a stronger network of providers for prevention and service at the community level, this will allow the new system to eliminate fraudulent and redundant activity, implement a paperless system and promote knowledge sharing. This in turn promotes job creation but also sets into place options for company owners, (mostly small business owners will benefit more) but it also implements a standard for accountability and responsibility toward health care quality by taking it out of the hands of the insurance company and spreading the responsibility between individual, employer, and government agencies. It is believed here, this has fallen under the most criticism because many think this also opens up the arena to inappropriate information sharing or issues of privacy. While September 11, 2001 has changed the notion of privacy for everyone in this country, it should be noted that existing HIPPA laws would stay intact to protect health privacy of every citizen. Finally to summarise Coverage and Affordability, to address what is on the mind of every citizen; what is the ‘public’ option and how does it impact my life? In spirit of providing health coverage for every American, the public option allows every American the ‘option’ of enrolling in the government heath care benefit program. In other words, the same medical benefit each American government employee receives as part of his or her benefit package will also be an option for every American. As many are misinformed and believe the public option to be an improved version of Medicaid, it is not. After speaking with a number of federally employed people, both military and other sectors, it seems this is very good insurance coverage, on par with a private PPO. However, it is my understanding that this is just one option of many being presented as a part of the Health Insurance Exchange. What this aims to do with work in conjunction with private insurance companies, the government, individuals and employers. This exchange is meant to oversee consumer protection and fair prices allowing every family coverage. Finally this bill allows every American the guarantee of coverage despite pre-existing conditions that may have disqualified or limited many in the past. Obama’s plan is wonderful in theory but can it be put into practice as the new health care system? Will it die because of too much bureaucratic red tape? Will the American people continue to be raped by insurance companies? The private insurance companies are not going down without a fight. They will protect the money making machine at all costs. Quite frankly, it is a matter of replacing the whole industry and this will take stronger legislation and solid, voiced leadership starting at community participatory level. Part of the issue with the Obama message and plan for reform is that people are so used to ineffective communication from previous administrations that they do not know how to handle such a debate. Every American must voice his or her story. Without this mob scene, any change will remain ineffective.
Part 2: The Road to Health Care Reform: The Human Right To Quality Care This issue of health care reform in recent weeks has become so politically charged and divided. I believe this divide represents a great disparity between the ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’. Many people worry the reform in the wrong hands cannot possibly work but also will lead to many falling through the cracks. For one, issues of elder care as our population ages needs to be addressed. Still there is a matter of cost. Conservatives believe the reform will tax us too much (at least 50%) but also give the government power over who lives and who dies. There will be the forgotten. Still have the conservatives put a face on health care reform? Do they know how reform may bring about a change so grand, no one can possibly understand its impact? It has never been tested at this level and we will never know unless we try. Meanwhile young working families struggle to put food on the table and purchase ‘Back to School’ supplies. Many worry about their jobs and the rising cost of gasoline. Also many are living the nightmare of a broken system that does not value the right to quality health care and makes access to such care frustrating and tedious. So this week before I put a face to health care reform, I ask the following question: When did health care stop being a human right? Why are there no options in the existing system for the poor and working classes? What is wrong with the option of having a choice instead of being forced into sub-par insurance coverage like the High-Deductible plans many working class Americans are offered? Affordable coverage means taking the risk you will never be chronically ill but what about those who fall into a large demographic of people with pre-existing conditions? Many conservatives state that Health saving accounts or HSAs can work. I don’t think they understand. Most Americans do not have savings, nor do they have the income to save and some even struggle to eat. Many working families are surviving just above the poverty level. Conservatives believe that charities can aid in the health care dilemma by filling in the gaps of private insurance. Do they not know that many charities are already over burdened? Many do not think the system is broken and nor do they think health care is a right for all Americans because it is not addressed in the Constitution. Still do not the building blocks for American government and law come from the tenants of Judeo-Christian belief systems? Does this not mean we must as a society take care of each other, especially those less fortunate and do good deeds? Still I believe life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the essence of our forefathers’ message, suggest the right to good health. Access to health care should be an inalienable right, a fundamental value for this nation to embrace. Instead many people disagree that health care coverage is indeed a right but instead a choice. For many, they believe it comes down to an option like any other insurance. You choose to insure your car, your life, why not your health? Point taken: Many believe health care should stay out of the hands of government. Health care and the choices it represents should be in the hands of families or in other words, the consumers. Rev. Sophia DeWitt, Director of Health, Housing and Senior Services Ministries, Fresno Interdenominational Refugee Ministries (FIRM, Inc.) expresses her concern over the attitude toward health care as being a privilege. “From a faith perspective I would say it is immoral because it denies human dignity to so many, rations care based on income and costs lives-- and yet our political system is totally incapable of solving the problem.” Our existing systems do not want health care in the hands of people but rather big, moneymaking corporations. Still the liberal view also has drawbacks to the reform because it seems too socialist. Regardless, the chances of the reform passing are small because the legislation lacks the language to define who will benefit from such reform. Truly this issue is not about fancy words or which side of the political coin is right; it is about families torn apart everyday by real life altering health care decisions and a system that does not focus upon those who really need quality care. These people are out there, each with a different story of how the current health care system has failed them. They may be your neighbors or even a family member. Picture this: You have been sitting in a hospital emergency room for three and a half hours with a sick child running a fever, a child with a history of infection to his central line. The situation: You have no private health insurance coverage because you are a single mother taking care of two disabled children and therefore are unable to work. You are at the mercy of government health care programs like Medicaid. Imagine also: You have been evicted from your apartment because your landlord does not like the fact there is constant stream of health care professionals coming in and out of your home to take care of your son, who is deathly ill. To further the nightmare: You are now on a waiting list to travel to Boston for further testing of your son’s gastrointestinal tract. Mind you, the doctors have taken a tissue biopsy sample twelve weeks ago. They said the sample was sent to Germany; you have not received any results. Still you wait to go to Boston and your son in the mean time has repeated infection after infection affecting his ability to maintain a healthy weight. When he should be playing and enjoying the sunshine, he must sit in his ‘chair’ to receive the nourishment and medical treatment he needs to stay alive. And still you wait for Boston. Next you were told there may be a problem getting to Boston because you have a car, an old hand me down clunker. Owning a car disqualifies you from free medical transportation via government guidelines for income. Unless he is in the hospital, you must find your own transportation. Your brother has agreed to drive to Boston but now you’ve found out that the Ronald McDonald House, where you have stayed in Albany, the Boston chapter only caters to parents of cancer patients. Where will you stay in Boston where the less expensive motel is $150 a night? This is Sarah and Sheldon Wagner’s story. Sarah Wagner of North Creek, NY has a chronically ill son named Sheldon, who without every day medical care would die. Sheldon will be four years on October 8th and he has been hospitalized eighteen times this year for numerous infections including staph. He has been sick since birth. The doctors do not know exactly what is wrong with Sheldon, just that he has trouble eating normally. He has a central line, which feeds him and provides regular medications to his circulatory system. This central line has been problematic because it is prone to infection but Sarah has been told without this device, he would die. Sarah asks Sheldon, “Are you my wonder boy, my Gadget boy?” because without the innovation of medicine Sheldon would not be here. His gadget needs constant medical attention from daily caregivers. While the year is not over, it is not unusual for Sarah to drive nearly two hours from her home in the Adirondacks to Albany, NY so that Sheldon can receive the best of pediatric care at Albany Medical Center. In June, while most children were enjoying summer with an ice cream cone or riding bikes in the park, Sheldon was in isolation from visitors and the outside world so that he did not catch any more contagions. Many times Sarah has traveled in the middle of the night to hospital with her mother or brother for reliable transportation but mostly moral support. This situation has become her life. For the sake of Sheldon’s health care, she has sacrificed her own well-being. This situation has presented a strain emotionally and financially upon her family. While Sarah receives public assistance, she is unable work as Sheldon’s primary parent. With the support of her family and continued treatment, Sheldon is able to be home until they leave for Boston on September 13th. Sheldon has an endearing spirit, a radiant soul that touches all who visit. His laughter is infectious and he’s got the talent for numbers. He could be a future NASA rocket scientist. Sheldon never questions the treatment, sometimes he is frustrated but he always has a smile for you. Never is it, “Why did this happen to us” or “Why is my little boy so sick?” but really Sarah is more concerned with “What can I do to help my son get better?” Like any parent in the same circumstances, she must trust the knowledge of Sheldon’s doctors but mostly she must play by the rules of Medicaid. It seems this creates a whole new meaning to red tape and redundancy. She has had to make some drastic decisions, alone, for Sheldon’s sake but many have been at the mercy of the Medicaid system and what that system has been willing to provide for Sheldon. She must ask questions and make sure all of Sheldon’s needs are met. If this means calling the doctor’s service at four in the morning, she does it. Still this whole situation comes back to the waiting list for the Boston visit. If Sheldon was the son of a doctor, lawyer, senator or even a celebrity, do you think he would have to wait? While Sarah may not fully understand the health care reform, she understands that there must a better way to ensure that every person in America receives quality care and is treated equally. When asked if a pubic option might help someone like herself or Sheldon, she agrees that just talking about health care is the catalyst for change. “The first step is admitting there is even a problem,” she says.
Part 3: Health Care Reform: Who is an American? By Kimberlee Currans-LetoIt’s that time of year again. Dreaded by children of all ages across the country. The slow gradual progression from long summer days to even shorter hours of daylight is upon us. The time of year when school bus yellow makes a come back, family members dash out the door, carpools are arranged and Friday nights are spent cheering for high school football heroes blessed with amazing coordination. Kids and families are back in the swing of things, getting used to all that homework again and making last minute peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. Pretty soon every stoop on the block will have a pumpkin and climbing rose bushes will be replaced with hardy mums. Say goodbye to summer. But as we reflect upon another season passing, there is also excitement, a feeling of opportunity as a pall of doubt slowly dissipates and the economy recovers from a year ago. This country remains poised on the cusp of change. The new administration has set a tone that it is not afraid to tackle the tough issues like health care reform. Last November citizens made history electing the first African American president, Barack Obama and not in my lifetime have I ever seen so many people interacting in the process of politics. Obama made his campaign and now his administration about people and the needs of American people. It is this grassroots strategy that continues to resonate a new level of participation. No longer is the president just the most powerful man in the world, leader of the free world but he is also just a man. This defines Obama’s appeal to so many that still believes “yes we can”. While some worry he will falter under bipartisan pressure, others back Obama’s position on health care reform and look to a future where every American is treated equal, fairly and this continues the movement started on the campaign trail. Much of the future starts with access to affordable health insurance and quality health care for all Americans. While the issue of health care reform has created an impassioned debate with the potential to overwhelm dinner conversation and possibly divide families, there remains a weak link in the reform that many conservatives believe will lead to a failed bill. What we know: Many cannot see eye to eye on the status of the current system. Broken or unbroken, ineffective moneymaking machine or providing quality care, it is anyone’s guess. One thing for sure, until it is your child, your parent, your own life in the balance, or your lack of money, this issue remains impersonal. Many people still do not know exactly what the public option is but also on the other hand many believe; could it get any worse? The issue with reform’s ideology: It is very difficult to envision a one thousand page document, a multitude of theories, definitions and complicated legal ease being put into practice on such a grand scale. This is reform could take years to implement as we transition from the old to the new system. This reform has the potential to protect our infrastructure. I am not talking about roads, bridges, canals, airports railroads, or even the Internet but I am talking about people. The infrastructure is made of people; the working class that make so many lives comfortable. I am talking about the bus drivers, the trash collectors, waitresses, short order cooks, cleaners, and mechanics, even the cashiers at Wal-Mart. These are the people that make our country possible. So then why are they short changed quality health care? Two things have gone wrong with the reform so far. First it has been rushed and therefore hastily written to a point few can understand it without a law degree. How is that fair to the infrastructure? For something so monumental, what is the rush? Campaign promise or not, such a broken system took years, if not decades to build, a solution cannot happen overnight. The sad truth for over 47 million Americans who remain uninsured and possibly ill, this is the one time as a society we desperately need instant gratification or a magic wand in solving this problem.Second, many have been quick to judge and look to negative attributes of why reform will not work. The main concern is how the reform is worded. The language is evasive and generalized. As with most legal ease and even statues, tied and true laws of this land, this language is open for interpretation by those who practice it, lawmakers. Such open definitions can lead any law to chaos. While the language of the reform bill starts by saying “To provide affordable, quality health care for all Americans and reduce the growth in health care spending, and for other purposes” (H.R. 3200, 111th Congress, 1st session) one cannot help but wonder what the bill means by “all Americans”? Shouldn’t “all Americans” be replaced with all legal citizens or better yet, all tax paying citizens? If you pay taxes, you qualify for the public option because this seems most fair, right?Still this issue has been a major point of contention many conservatives consider to be the weak link that opens the door to socialism, even Marxism. Conservatives enjoy their politics in black and white; the gray areas of uncertainty bother them. This bill bothers them because they believe it opens the door for non-resident aliens to be entitled to our health care system, a system they describe as the best in the world. The reform language uses the word beneficiary but does not state the criteria for establishing who a beneficiary will be. All Americans could include legal resident aliens, right? On page 170, it does state non-resident aliens will not be allowed to partake of the benefit. What do we do about the non-resident aliens already taking advantage of the best health care system in the world? What about people with green cards? Never in the bill does it state the type of identification process a beneficiary will have to complete in order to get approved for the public option. Besides many forms of identification can be forged, bought and sold for the right amount money. Conservatives worry this reform will encourage further identity theft to include not just bank or credit cards but also health insurance coverage. While the above are legitimate concerns every American should consider as we wait holding our breath on such a crucial issue, I cannot help but think about weighing out the options. Yes there are many negatives to the reform but on the flipside, there are also positive impacts for so many individuals and families that I cannot deny the potential seen in Obama’s vision. Part of what bothers me most is that the current system is killing people, making children and families suffer unnecessarily. So many have shared devastating stories of having to make life changing decisions based on either lack of coverage and affordability this directly contributes to weakening the infrastructure. We need to take care of the core before thinking of anything else. No longer should families have to be faced with losing their child because of being on a waiting list or being refused insurance due to a preexisting condition. There must be a way to unveil the true American experience to those unable or unwilling to see exactly what is taking place around them. It is my belief that health care reform is just the first piece in the puzzle of creating a new America one voice, one story at a time.
Larry K. Fleming, Ed.D.
Superintendent of Schools
Lincolnshire-Prairie View School District 103
Administration Offices
1370 Riverwoods Road
Lincolnshire, IL 60069
Dear Superintendent Fleming,
Because I felt it was my parental obligation, I tried to explain to my son why he won’t be hearing President Obama speak to his class this Tuesday and I found myself at a loss for words. No matter how I tried to explain “why” to him, being as objective and sensitive as I could, it just felt wrong. That in itself should be a litmus test of not only this, but any action: Can you explain it to a child and feel good about yourself? I would think that a school district, more than anyone else would have realized that their actions are unexplainable to a child and therefore probably not the correct judgment to make.
I don’t envy you and other school administrators being put in the middle of a political debate. Not the debate about the speech President Obama will give to school children, but being put in the middle of the more fundamental debate, between those who “like” and “do not like” President Obama. Because that’s what this controversy of President Obama’s speech to school children is really about. Not about the speech itself. The contents of the speech are not even known, so how could it be about the speech? It’s about the mere fact that President Obama is going to give a speech to schoolchildren. Most everyone, especially well educated people as yourself, understand, from the synopsis given by the White House, that the speech is well intentioned at best and innocuous at worst. I do not believe any rational individual actually believes the speech is an attempt to “indoctrinate our children” as has been incredulously stated by some mainstream politicians and media, or that the speech is “something you’d expect to see in North Korea or in Saddam Hussein’s Iraq”, which Oklahoma Republican State Senator Steve Russell actually said. What this is really about, is an indication of the polarization of our society and probably more likely about racism, hatred, fear and paranoia.
But political ideology is not supposed to be your fight. Educational decisions should not be made because opponents or proponents of a particular ideology apply pressure to a school district. But unfortunately, that is exactly what is happening by school district 103 caving in to what can only be considered “mob politics”, thus taking marching orders from the squeakiest wheels. Never before have I heard of the President of the United States effectively being censored by a school district. I didn’t see any such censorship when Ronald Reagan or George H.W. Bush spoke to schoolchildren, or whenever any President, or for that matter any politician or community spokesperson came to speak at a school. And that’s all this really is, the President is coming to speak at your school, except in this case, he’s speaking virtually and not live.
If President Obama had chosen Sprague or Stevenson School in district 103 to speak at live, would your office have refused him as well? Denied his request to give a speech to encourage our children to stay in school? I doubt it. Then why is the “virtual presence” of our President being denied? Because we live in the Internet age when the President can visit schools all at once and “indoctrinate them?” That can’t be it either, because politicians broadcasting speeches from schools (from kindergarten to commencements) have been going on since the advent of radio and no such school district censorship that I’m aware of has ever existed before. So why are we asking this president to drink from another water fountain?
The mission statement of district 103 is “to provide innovative learning experiences which empower each student to excel and make a difference in a diverse and interconnected world.” Are we empowering each student to excel and to make a difference in a diverse and interconnected world by caving to political pressure and denying them access to an historical event such as this, when the first black president in the history of the United States is going to make his first speech to our country’s children?
The mission statement of Sprague says,“Sprague School is dedicated to the development of lifelong learners. We encourage creativity through experimentation, problem solving, and reflection, while acknowledging and welcoming individual differences. We foster collaboration among staff, parents, and children to create an environment that is best for our students.”
Are we “welcoming individual differences” or are we censoring them by this action of not allowing our children to see this speech? Is this any different then when school districts and libraries around our country tried (and succeeded) in banning books such as Catch-22 and even Gone With the Wind?
Randi Weingarten, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, this last Friday, defended Obama's plan to address students. He said "The bottom line is we need the president of the United States of America to use his bully pulpit to talk to kids about the importance of education and to help inspire kids,"
If President Obama was using his “bully pulpit” to preach doctrine, as Ronald Reagan did in 1988 when during that speech to school children he actually incredulously preached about the importance of cutting taxes, then I’d have a problem with President Obama’s speech. But that is not what this speech is proposed to be about. And that’s the other point of all of this. District 103, as I have indicated above, has made an opinion about not carrying this speech before they even know it’s content. Is that a lesson we want our children to learn, to judge books by their cover?
And we actually even have a very good idea of what will be said in President Obama’s speech so we don’t have to judge a book by it’s cover. When one reads the official notice that came from the White House, it’s simply impossible to reconcile those words with the paranoia about this speech. The White House’s official letter to educators said, “ During this special address, the president will speak directly to the nation's children and youth about persisting and succeeding in school. The president will challenge students to work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning. The U.S. Department of Education invites students of all ages, teachers, and administrators to participate in this historic moment by watching the president deliver the address, which will be broadcast live on the White House Web site (http://www.whitehouse.gov/live/) and on C-SPAN at 12:00 p.m., ET. We also encourage educators to use this moment to help students get focused and inspired to begin the new academic year. The Department of Education offers educators a menu of classroom activities—created by its teachers-in-residence, the Teaching Ambassador Fellows—to help engage students in the address and stimulate classroom discussions about the importance of education.
Some call all of this paranoia “Obamaphobia”, the irrational fear, which some say stems from a black man running our country. If that’s what is really at the root of all of this hatred, what are we teaching our children by intentionally or unintentionally supporting such behavior? There are those in our society that openly don’t believe that Barack Obama is legitimately the President of the United States, trying to delegitimize him by being disrespectful, by questioning the location of his birth against all logic and proof and by many other means. I’m not sure if the roots of that are racism, or other hatred, or actual belief, but anyone who believes in this country, knows that education is the only route up to success. President Obama, with all he has to do, I truly believe, is simply trying to make a difference in our country and in our world by attempting to inspire our children to stay in school and work hard. When one simply listens to that stated goal and then reflects on the controversy surrounding such a well intentioned and innocent news moment, it’s simply hard to believe this nonsensical debate even exists. But we live in the world of the Internet and the 24-hour news cycle where minutia rises to the level of importance. The difference here is that school districts are reacting to the chatter rather than rising above it.
When one looks at this from other viewpoints, from simply the viewpoint of respect, the district’s censorship of this speech doesn’t pass muster. If a local firehouse wanted fireman to give a speech about virtually anything, the district would welcome the visit. Schools respect what fireman stand for, they save lives. Where is the respect for the President of the United Sates? What are we teaching our children about our country and about respect for authority or simply stature? Politicians do not deserve deference to the point of submission simply because of their title, for sure, but respect is a different matter altogether and the district’s actions are simply disrespectful to anyone, let alone the President of the United States.
To me, there is an irony and a contradiction in the way we treat other forms of respect for our nation, in our nation’s schools.
Illinois law mandates that “The Pledge of Allegiance shall be recited each school day by pupils in elementary and secondary educational institutions supported or maintained in whole or in part by public funds. 105 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/27-3 (2005). The statute says each student must recite the Pledge each day — with no exception for those who do not wish to do so. However, in a federal lawsuit that was filed, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the statute did not violate the students’ rights, so long as students were free not to participate in the recitation of the Pledge. Sherman v. Community Consol. School Dist. 21 of Wheeling Tp., 980 F.2d 437 (7th Cir. 1992).”
The State of Illinois mandates the pledge of allegiance but also allows children to not say it if they choose. District 103, as an entity representing all children of our district, has made a unilateral decision that no school child should listen to the President’s speech. How does that reconcile with the mandate to take part in the pledge of allegiance, but also the freedom to dissent? Because he is the President of the United States, shouldn’t listening to the President’s speech on Tuesday be the default, just like general respect for our flag is? We teach that. But because this is a great nation, if one doesn’t want to listen to the President, they can do that. They can do what those against this speech are espousing, they can stay home from school or simply not attend the event and the school can honor and respect that as well. But why does the district get to restrict all children from hearing this speech and by doing so, take a political stand? Carrying the speech is taking much less of a political stand because that is the norm, that is precedent. District 103’s decision to censor the speech is unprecedented. On the night of 9/11, I was at Stevenson High School as they broadcast George W. Bush’s speech to the nation. Why did the school not censor that? Why did they carry it at Stevenson? Because it was the President speaking about an historic newsworthy event. While this speech is far less critical or dramatic, it’s still historic and newsworthy. It isn’t only news if it’s bad news. So why is the district not carrying good historic news?
The answer again must be pressure. That’s why this speech is not being carried. When mainstream media label this speech as “brainwashing, ala Hitler Youth”, when commentators such as Glen Beck say this is more evidence of the "indoctrination of your children” it’s clear that they are then influencing those who I’m sure wrote you angry letters. Fox commentator Malkin linked the President’s Tuesday speech, prior to hearing it, with "Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers' pedagogical philosophy.” She went on to say that “The left has always used kids as guinea pigs and as junior lobbyists for their social liberal agenda.” Given these incredibly broad, distorted remarks fueled by hatred, how could the district not give the impression of agreeing with these fringe attitudes by bowing to pressure from a particular segment of our society?
President George H.W. Bush delivered a nationally televised speech to students from a Washington D.C. school in the fall of 1991, encouraging them to say no to drugs and work hard.
All that is different in President Obama’s speech is that it’s President Obama.
There is a known tactic in the world of social opinion called FAD: fear, uncertainty and doubt. The idea is to plant the seeds of fear and it will propagate. District 103 is an unwitting partner in that mission and for that I’m very sad. Charles Saylors, president of the national Parent Teacher Association, felt that same emotion when he said the uproar over Obama's speech is "sad." He went on to say, "The president of the United States, regardless of political affiliation, should be able to have a presentation and have a pep talk, if you will, to America's students," he told CNN.
I’m an ardent supporter of school district 103 and have been for 20 years. My eldest child is a doctoral student and my youngest is two, all have been or are slated to be in school district 103, because I’ve always been proud of the quality of education provided. But today, I’m less proud.
At its broadest, the district’s decision smacks of an era in our history when “un-American activities” were defined as liking a particular ideology that other’s didn’t, in this case, oddly, the as of yet unspoken words of our President. It’s even odd to describe.
I leave to the end of this response, the specific reasons given in the district’s letter as to why they are not allowing our students to see the President’s speech as it is given:
The district’s letter says,
“The airing of this speech has already become a very politically charged topic in the press”
That should be irrelevant.
The district’s letter goes on to say,
“and a significant concern for many of our parents.”
Not to me and I would believe, not to many people. The letter offers no specifics as to how many people have contacted their offices one way or the other. It simply says “many.” If “many” parents believed that a fireman shouldn’t speak at school, would or should that affect the district having the fireman speak? I would think not.
“The U.S. Department of Education has sent out suggested classroom activities and promoted a student video contest with $1,000 prizes”
The district’s letter doesn’t at all quote the substance of the proposed speech; it simply gives this one random (rather parenthetical) comment, which does not even explain what the speech’s intentions are, to inspire children about their schooling.
The district’s letter then says,
“We have a responsibility as educators to determine what information will be included in our curriculum.”
Fair enough, the district creates curricula. But the district determined in this case “what information will be included” and they felt that it should not include a speech from the President of the United States, which clearly is simply about inspiring school children to excel. I take great exception with that. I think this sort of speech is exactly what should be included in my child’s curricula, inspiration about staying in school. And I think even more importantly the words are important if they are the words of the elected leader of our country. I would feel no different if it was George W. Bush speaking. I would defend, to death, as the oft- quoted phrase says, his right to say it even if I disapproved of it.
The district’s letter then concludes,
“Since we have not had an opportunity to review the text of President Obama’s speech to determine age appropriateness, ties to our curriculum, and usefulness as an instructional tool, we will not be showing President Obama’s speech in classrooms on September 8.”
The district has “not had an opportunity to review the text” and yet they are making a decision about it? Based on what? That it’s coming from Brack Obama? What sense does that make?
Additionally the district will have an opportunity to review the text on Monday, so why not wait till then? Because it’s a holiday? I don’t think any teacher at school would accept from a student that they didn’t do homework because it was given over the holidays.
The district then makes claims that they can’t determine if this will tie to curriculum or be useful “as an instructional tool.” Is it really practical to think that a sitting president can be involved with each school district’s curricula mapping which took place years ago and then create speeches that coordinate? This is a news event, simply meant to inspire children. It’s a well-intentioned Department of Education initiative no different then “Just Say No to Drugs” (which incidentally most all school districts endorsed even though it’s naïve statement was considered ineffectual).
The district letter then caps the above statement in bold, saying that the district will not be showing President Obama’s speech. In bold? To be clear or to be forceful?
The letter then says,
“We will record the speech for teachers so that they have an opportunity to review the content to determine potential usefulness of the speech, or portions of it, as an educational tool.”
That phrase feels like the familiar words of censors through the ages.
And the letter concludes,
“This approach will also give you, as a parent, the opportunity to make the decision on whether or not to have your child view the speech with you at home.”
The wording makes it seem as though the letter is talking about our decision for our child to view something controversial. Out of context, one would think the subject matter is sex or drugs. But instead, the subject matter is the President of the United States attempting to inspire our children to love school.
I’m completely perplexed about this entire matter and why district 103 would even give those that pressure them the time of day, let alone, allow them to dictate school policy.
I respectfully ask that you reverse your decision and simply state that “it is not the school district’s policy to be involved in or take political sides” and since this is an “approved event from the federal Department of Education” you will air it. One could even add, “if any parent has a personal objection, their child is not at all forced to watch the event and may leave or not attend school.”
Best Regards,
Steve Sulkin
This was received from my local school district. See next post for my response.
1370 Riverwoods Road • Lincolnshire, Il 60069
847/295-4030 • FAX 847/295-9196
http://www.district103.k12.il.us
September 4, 2009
Dear Parents and Guardians,
As you may know, President Obama plans to present a White House address
directly to children on September 8, 2009, at 11:00 a.m. Central Standard Time, which
is during our regular school day. The airing of this speech has already become a very
politically charged topic in the press and a significant concern for many of our parents.
The U.S. Department of Education has sent out suggested classroom activities and
promoted a student video contest with $1,000 prizes.
We have a responsibility as educators to determine what information will be
included in our curriculum. Since we have not had an opportunity to review the text of
President Obama’s speech to determine age appropriateness, ties to our curriculum,
and usefulness as an instructional tool, we will not be showing President Obama’s
speech in classrooms on September 8. We will record the speech for teachers so
that they have an opportunity to review the content to determine potential usefulness of
the speech, or portions of it, as an educational tool.
This approach will also give you, as a parent, the opportunity to make the
decision on whether or not to have your child view the speech with you at home.
Sincerely,
Larry Fleming, Ed.D.
Superintendent
It would make a huge difference in terms of health care outcomes if chidren simply got consistent care. By that I mean the same physician or medical professional followed them for several years at a time. Even if their records were contained in the same office and available to the medical professional over time, the quality of their health would rise.
A single multi-vitamin given to a child on a daily basis would make a very big difference in terms of healthcare outcomes. If a school nurse handed out vitamins once a day, it would be greatly improve the health of our nation's children, especially in the poorest sectors of the country. The cost would be minimal, and the administration would be simple too. We should think more about low tech, low cost and high yeild solutions to health care problems.
What could your school do?
I urge all parents to read and maintain a copy of this quick reference guide:
http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/ResourceServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=3876
Candice E. Cox, LMSW
Volunteer Program Director
Geez, is it just me or is something really wrong with this picture? Here in VA, preschool/daycare fees run a minimum of $200/week and those are the "just okay" or sometimes "not so good" ones. Couples can't even afford it, let alone single moms! We continue to see more couples making a decision that one person stays at home with the kids while the other works. Well, maybe that's a financial solution BUT what if they then divorce - sucks for the one who stayed at home!! Then, what if you are a single mother and like me, pay $1,020 a month for my 3 year old??? Exactly where does my savings come from when I have to shed out something like that in order to work? And oh, I make good money, compared to many others. My car note, mortgage/rent, electric, gas, cable, and all these other bills, and oh!! Healthcare?? Well, I have coverage through my employer and these days, that means nothing!!! I still $440/month for me and my daughter and that's through my employer! How are we to survive??
With the growing rates of children conceived using sperm banks, as well as cases of mothers not knowing who the child's father was, let alone who their own father (the grandfather) was, should Father's Day be discontinued to avoid hurting the feeling of the children?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090619132652AAYIzvc
PLEASE COPY AND SEND THIS TO EVERYBODY
IF I HAD A BILLION DOLLARS I,D BUY CNN AND FORCE THEM TO READ THIS OVER THE AIR
HAVE WE ALL FORGOTEN THAT GANGSTER RAP WAS EMBRACED BY THE MEDIA, AND IN TURN EMBRACED BY OUR CHILDREN, THEN ACCEPTED AS A TREND .THEN OK'ED BY PARENTS. LOOKED UP TO AND PROMOTED AS STARS, GLORIFIED AS BEING A WAY OF LIFE THAT MANY YOUTH TRY TO BE LIKE. WITH CLOTHING TO MATCH, MARKETED AND SOLD. BOUGHT BY PARENTS WHO WANT THEIR KIDS TO KEEP UP WITH THE LATEST TRENDS IN CLOTHING,, BECAUSE THEY ARE BEING PRESSURED BY THEIR KIDS WHO WANT TO BE LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE...MUSIC PLAYED ON THE RADIO ,TV, MTV, MUSIC AWARDS ETC. NOW ITS MANIFESTING IN MANY BLACK CHILDREN LIVING OUT THIS FAD IN REALITY, AND EVERYBODIES WONDERING WHAT HAPPENED, AND ASKING THE POLICE TO SAVE US FROM OURSELVES... ARE WE THAT SCREWED UP AS A SOCIETY ?
NEED I SAY ANY MORE... WHY ARE ALL THESE SO CALLED EDUCATED PEOPLE SCRATCHING THEIR HEADS AND SAYING DUUH ...I DONT KNOW WHY THIS IS HAPPENING..START FROM THE BEGINNING ..UNDUE THE FAD THAT HAS MANIFESTED THIS REACTION
THE POLICE CANT SOLVE THIS PROBLEM ITS AN ENVIRNMENTAL ISSUE.
YES LARRY KING LIFE IS CAUSE AND EFFECT!
SORRY GANGSTER RAPPERS WE DONT WANT YOUR PRODUCT!
A FEW OF YOU HAVE MADE MILLIONS BUT MANY OF YOUR FOLLOWERS ARE LEFT AT DEAD ENDS.
First of all im a nieghbor, of the mother of Blair Holt.We grew up together in the same nieborhood. I am not a perfect person . No one is. BUTThier are too many of our children being killed by other children. Why does this happen? It happens because many of our children have been infuenced by a fad culture that has glorified and lagitimized a gang culture, which has had a very destructive effect on our niebohoods here in Chicago and many other places in the U.S. Do you know how hard it is for a child to go against a popular trend with most of thier peers. In order to survive most parents are at work.Even if they wanted to, they would have to risk thier jobs to stay at home or devote enough time and energy to offset the influence of popular culture.These trends are established and reinforced by companies who make a lot of money creating and selling the latest trend.The parents of these young kids who are in gangs, have missed the oportunity to stop thier children from growing up accepting a destructive trend that makes money for a few and leaves the victoms lifes in turmoil. with hate in thier hearts, and the lack of respect for anothers life. Parents are Too busy at work, in poverty, fathers not there, gangs took over, I did the best I could, can no longer be an excuse. Me, you, us, them, we,the parents are the only ones that can stop this circle of violence. Check your children when they are young and they wont grow up killing other children. Watch what they are being influenced by. Watch who they are being influenced by. Know who the friends are they hang with. use your influence, to influence thier friends and other children. Know what your child is up to and who they are hanging with when they are not at home Dont let children raise children. Work together as a group when they are young, sacrifice if you have too, because the next child that is killed might be your own,killed by your nieghbors child. Or youll be explaining why your child killed someone else.Stop depending on the police or govt. to do our jobs after the fact.We as parents are always responsible for how our children turn out.
BUT WHAT IF ITS AN ENVIRNMENTAL ISSUE?.
OUR ENVIRNMENT INCLUDES THE MEDIA TV, RADIO, MARKETING, FASHOIN ETC.
THANKSSCORPI2000
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-52245#
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-254315#
http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-221708#
http://www.myspace.com/scorpi2000radicalroots
A study ordered under the Clinton Administration, and conducted by the US Depy of Health & Human Services was to demostrate that non-custodial fathers did not care to be involved with their children. The study titled, "Survue of Absentee Parents" was to be a fifty state study. After just five states were done, preliminary results were reported that 60% of non-custodial father filed enforcement actions wuth the courts to see their children within six months of receiving their visitation orders. But, within five years, ended up losing all contact with the children.
As a result of these preliminary results, funding for the remainder of the study was withdrawn. (See the letter at the end of the preliminary results report)
"I salute the commitment to fatherhood evidenced by Jeffery Johnson and the other organizers of the 2009 National Rally for Responsible Fatherhood, and I salute Obama for his involvement. However, there’s an obvious omission both in the rally and the article: many fathers, including African-American dads, are not able to play a meaningful role in their children’s lives because of the children’s mothers’ interference and the indifference and/or hostility of the family law system."
Today it was disclosed 1 in 50 children, in America, live in a homeless family!
There’s “No” easy solution to this problem; children cannot be taken away from there parents and we as fellow citizens cannot easily provide homes for these families. So what’s the solution?
As I see there is no short term fix; homelessness as a whole as been avoided for almost the past thirty years by us, the American people, and at all levels of government providing only token service at best to take care (soup kitchens, old clothing and limited, space available shelter) of the homeless, but “not” to solve the problem(s) of what creates homelessness.
However, as I do see it, there is a long term solution, which complements, but extends our recently passed Stimulus Package in congress last month. After World War II our federal government provided funding for a number of nation wide housing projects to accommodate lower income family’s homes to temporally live in; until America’s economy recovered from the war effort and industry could re-gear to produce consumer related goods. A side benefit of this aforementioned program was creating jobs for returning veterans from the European and Pacific theaters of action, which it successfully accomplished.
Today, the housing industry is suffering, thus the lack of “new housing starts”, placing many of our skilled tradesmen out of work (perhaps even homeless); so the question begs to be asked “why couldn’t an extension sum of money be included in the existing Stimulus Package for Federally Funded Housing?”
By now it should be intuitively obvious I’m more or less a Democratic, “left leaning” liberal, which to some means I believe in and support unlimited “welfare assistance”, which is not the case at all. This “government housing”, I’m suggesting, must have enforceable, stick limitations for the tenants caring to reside in these proposed dwellings, suggested are a few:
I’m sure there are additional limitations and conditions to consider, before commencing on such an extreme and expensive program, both these are what comes to mind, which are important to me. In other words, stated simply, this is not another endless free ride for those who are content to exist on welfare or produce offspring to gain free to low cost housing for life.
I’m not going to invoke a session of preaching within this posting, but experience should have taught us that these homeless kids, growing up on our city streets have one alternative to turn to, which is “gangs, hence crime”; causing an ever worsening condition for our society. With 1 out of 100 Americans serving prison time, I certainly don’t feel my tax payer dollars should be spent on additional confinement facilities or the expansion of existing prisons.
Below is the article which promoted this posting appearing in TIME and entitled: “Report Says 1 in 50 U.S. Kids Are Homeless”, authored by Steven Gray.
Homeless
Report Says 1 in 50 U.S. Kids Are Homeless By Steven Gray / Chicago Tuesday, Mar. 10, 2009
Even before the financial and home foreclosure crisis hit full stride, the number of homeless children in America had reached an alarming level. The National Center on Family Homelessness released a report today that estimates that one in every 50 American children was homeless between 2005 and 2006. That totals roughly 1.5 million kids. While the center provided no previous statistic to compare against that figure, a study conducted with different measures published in 2000 put the total at 1.35 million children living in homelessness each year. The numbers are likely to get worse as the economy continues to decline. “We know the numbers are going to skyrocket,” says Ellen Bassuk, president of the Newton, Mass.-based Center and an associate professor of psychiatry at the Harvard Medical School.
Indeed, a quick survey of the country provides lots of evidence to support those fears. Chicago public school officials report the number of its 405,000 students deemed homeless soared to 11,143 last month from 9,182 in February 2006. School officials in Hillsborough County, Fla., which includes Tampa, have so far counted some 1,700 homeless students — and expect the figure to eclipse last year’s 2,020. Meanwhile, the surge in homeless families has overwhelmed Massachusetts’ shelters, forcing state officials to book motel rooms for the displaced. In January, some 4,600 homeless children were reported in the state’s shelters and motels, up from 3,411 from roughly one year earlier. (See one family’s struggle against homelessness.)
According to the new report, the states with the highest number of homeless children in the period studied were Texas (337,105), California (292,624), Louisiana (204,053), Georgia (58,397) and Florida (49,886). The states reporting the smallest populations of homeless children: Wyoming (169), Rhode Island (797), Vermont (1,174), North Dakota (1,181), and South Dakota (1,545). However, the report also ranks the states according to parameters that go beyond their share of homeless children, factoring in, among other things, incidence of such health conditions as asthma and tooth decay. With that framework, Connecticut, New Hampshire, Hawaii, Rhode Island and North Dakota were rated among states that dealt best with the problem overall. At the bottom of the list: Texas, Georgia, Arkansas, New Mexico and Louisiana.
Families with children comprise roughly one-third of the nation’s homeless population. Poverty continues to be a core reason for the crisis, though the aftermath of Hurrican Katrina combined to swell the numbers in Louisiana, Texas and Georgia. Since the 1980s, single mothers have accounted for an increasing share of the homeless population, partly because of increased divorced rates, gender and wage disparities, and the shrinking supply of affordable housing. Officials believe that the current home foreclosure crisis will be adding a new demographic to these statistics: middle-class blacks and Latinos. “It’s families that were living pretty independently, doing pretty well. And, through just one event, it was, like, a domino effect — if one part of the puzzle breaks off, then everything breaks off,” says Michael Levine, who coordinates social work programs for Hillsborough, Fla.’s 206,000-student school system. (See Cleveland’s woes amid the current foreclosure crisis.)
The nation’s states and cities are awaiting an infusion of $1.5 billion from President Obama’s stimulus package devoted to homelessness prevention programs. Those programs will provide short-term rental and mortgage assistance, as well as security deposits and utility bills. A decade ago, the Department of Housing and Urban Development spent barely $1 billion on all of its homeless programs each year.
Still, measuring homelessness is tricky, partly because of varying definitions of what constitutes homelessness. It is especially difficult to gauge homelessness among children, since many teenagers are reluctant to identify themselves as such, and evade formal counts by living independently on the streets or in vacant apartments with friends. This is compounded by the scarcity of housing options for children over age 12, particularly boys, who are typically barred from entering shelters with their mothers. So any gauge merely offers a glimpse at the problem’s severity. The report’s researchers based their analysis on a broad definition of homelessness that included, for instance, children living in shelters, on the streets, or with other relatives, a practice known as “doubling up.” The findings are no less startling: Roughly three-quarters of homeless children are of elementary school age, and 42% are below age six.
The consequences of homelessness are profound. Homeless children are twice as likely as other children to be “retained,” or held back, one academic year, or to be suspended or, ultimately, to drop out of school altogether. School districts across the country report a growing share of students who are “highly mobile” — who move multiple times within a school year. With each move, experts say, such students are at risk of falling some six months behind, or more, in their studies. Roughly one-quarter of homeless children have witnessed violence. It isn’t surprising, then, that nearly half of such children suffer from anxiety and depression.
It’s the narrative that Trisha Parker, 19, is hoping to avoid for her infant son. Parker can’t live with her mother, who receives federal housing assistance, and neither can she live with her grandmother in the Chicago suburbs much longer. Parker says she completed training to be a medical technician, but couldn’t find work in the field. She was recently hired as a security guard, earning $11 an hour. But that’s hardly enough to afford even a $600 a month studio apartment. Larger units are beyond her reach. “They want the first and last month’s security deposit” which is, she figures, about $2,000, maybe $2,500. “It really is a lot.”
Complementing this story is a YouTube video regarding a program in Massachusetts, Horizons for Homeless Children, which is a good example of what can be done for the less fortunate children in today’s America.
Horizons for Homeless Children Programs
This is a 3.5 minute piece that features Massachusetts-based Horizons for Homeless Children and the programs/services it offers to homeless children and families. For more information, visit www.horizonsforhomelesschildren.org. Special thanks to all involved in the production of this video, including Redtree Productions, Jay Williams, Richard Klug, Soundtrack Boston, Alex Lasarenko at Tonal Sound and Mary Richardson. Thanks also to all of the children, families, volunteers and HHC staff who helped share the story.
This is a 3.5 minute piece that features Massachusetts-based Horizons for Homeless Children and the programs/services it offers to homeless children and families. For more information, visit www.horizonsforhomelesschildren.org.
Special thanks to all involved in the production of this video, including Redtree Productions, Jay Williams, Richard Klug, Soundtrack Boston, Alex Lasarenko at Tonal Sound and Mary Richardson. Thanks also to all of the children, families, volunteers and HHC staff who helped share the story.
Update 13 Mar 09:
A Tent City Near You? Tell Us About It Arthur Delaney Huffington Post
There are reports of tent cities popping up across the country as unemployment rises in a worsening economy. The biggest and highest-profile shantytown is in Sacramento, where hundreds of newly-homeless tent residents are cooking soup in old coffee cans. We want to know where else this is happening. HuffPost readers: Is there a tent city near you? Have you noticed a newly-formed community of people living together in improvised housing in a public space? Email us! Send any information you’ve got (or pictures) to submissions+homeless@huffingtonpost.com. Sacramento’s KCRA reported this week that city officials plan to shut the tent city down:
There are reports of tent cities popping up across the country as unemployment rises in a worsening economy. The biggest and highest-profile shantytown is in Sacramento, where hundreds of newly-homeless tent residents are cooking soup in old coffee cans.
We want to know where else this is happening.
HuffPost readers: Is there a tent city near you? Have you noticed a newly-formed community of people living together in improvised housing in a public space? Email us! Send any information you’ve got (or pictures) to submissions+homeless@huffingtonpost.com.
Sacramento’s KCRA reported this week that city officials plan to shut the tent city down:
Sacramento’s ‘Tent City’ To Be Closed
Campers in a large tent city at the north end of downtown Sacramento will be told to leave the property with their belongings within a few weeks, assistant city manager Cassandra Jennings said Wednesday.
Additional postings regarding this topic and others may be found here:
I am a parent of three children who have or do go to public schools in the county in which we live. I homeschooled all of them for several years, also, each for a differing amount of time. And I am now a substitute teacher and have taught at all three levels: elementary, middle, and high school. My children are currently labeled as gifted, but it is not only their welfare that concerns me. It is my belief that the No Child Left Behind rules are causing more suffering than help.
In class the other day, I was talking with a collaborative special education teacher of 25 years, who was telling me her experience firsthand at how the system is underserving children at all levels. Under the "old" system, children with special needs on the lower end were grouped into their own classes, which allowed for teachers to get to know the students on a more personal basis and thus cater more effectively to their needs. Usually, classes were smaller, which is a huge factor in a teacher's ability to communicate more to each student.
Now, with children of all levels lumped together, the teachers must go more slowly and work harder to accomodate the learning of the slower children, while also maintianing a challenging pace to accomodate smarter students. For all of its theoretical goodness, this approach usually does not work, and in my mind is not effective for either slower or faster students. It causes the smarter kids to get bored at the pace, and does not give them enough challenge to accomodate their higher abilities to process information. It quells their curiosity and causes behavior problems. At the same time, the slower kids are struggling to keep up at the "moderate pace" and are being lost in the process. Even collaborative teaching doesn't help. It is inefficient.
What the slower kids need is a teacher who knows them and has the time to spend individually to help them work up to a higher potential, instead of just squeaking by. The smarter kids need not to be hampered by slow, thin, repetitive lessons that leave them just as behind for their ability levles as the slower kids are for theirs. Regular classroom teachers need not to be dealing with a classroom of mixed abilities: gifted, slow, behavior disorder, etc. But instead, teachers need to specialize in these skills and build their classes around their teaching strengths. Students of like abilities will learn better in a classroom organized around their levels, drawing from the natural support and competition of others like them.
It is my belief that NCLB is actually doing the opposite of what was intended, and that it is imperative that we quickly assess and re-organize our current methods, or all our children will suffer. In fact, they already are.
April Keating
115 Shawnee Dr.
Buckhannon, WV 26201
HI
Im Margaret a single mom who needs help. I believe this is a way for us to work together. I am seeking help within my community to open a new business. A new way to do something, because its time to do something new. Check me out, email me, get to know me. I have plan an opening party at Preisdent park located in Wheaton, May 2, 1 to 4pm. I am hoping to get familys to join me as i share this day with my community. I hope you can help me out. I hope to be a good example in this time where all things are hard to do.
Daniel Zamlen - Endangered Missing - Minnesota
Nathaly Alonzo 12 - Abducted - Delaware
Joshua David Avara 11 - Abducted - Texas
Sandra Cantu 8 - FOUND DECEASED
JACK CONNOLLY 7 - FOUND DECEASED - KILLED BY NON-CUSTODIAL FATHER WITH VIOLENT HISTORY - NO SUPERVISED VISITATION
DUNCAN CONNOLLY 9 - FOUND DECEASED - KILLED BY NON-CUSTODIAL FATHER WITH VIOLENT HISTORY - NO SUPERVISED VISITATION
BRITTANY WELLS 17 - SUSPECTED RUNAWAY - NORTH DAKOTA
Rochelle Denise Battle 16 - MISSING - MARYLAND
ALLYSON CORRALES 4 - ENDANGERED MISSING - MISSOURI
Mariah Sparks - MISSING CHILD - ALABAMA
Amber Leeanne Dubois - Endangered Missing - California
Haleigh Cummings - Endangered Missing - Florida
Tierny Perry 16 - Endangered Runaway - Florida
Adji "Ji Ji" Desir - Endangered Missing - Florida
SAMANTHA CHER HOWELL 15 - ENDANGERED RUNAWAY - NEW MEXICO
Jeff Renaud - Missing - Ontario
Crystal Ann Fox - Missing - California
Mystic Dawn Salazar - Missing - Colorado
Omar Qutaiba Mahoud - Abducted - New Mexico
Nadia Mahmoud - Abducted - New Mexico
Pebbles Jace - Missing Endangered - California
Max-Gian (Max-Jon) Alcalde 7 - Missing - Idaho
Ashley Nicole Lopez 18 - Endangered Runaway - New Mexico
Wendy Rameriz-Beristain - Endangered Missing - Florida
Marlene Torales - Endangered Missing - California
Claudia Vanessa Yat - Endangered Missing - California
Tangena Hussain 2 - Endangered Missing - Michigan
Jaliek "Jay" Rainwalker 12 - Endangered Missing - New York
Elian Amilcar Majano 2 - Endangered - Texas
Benjamin “Ben” Melvin Roseland - Missing - Iowa
Yasmin Acree - Missing - Illinois
Amy Fitzapatrick - Missing - Spain
Adrian Gonzalez 7 - Endangered Missing - Florida
Neida Rodriguez-Gonzalez 3 - Endangered Missing - Florida
Thor Danielsson Wang 1 - Endangered Missing - California
AMBER ADELIA BITTINGER 15 - ENDANGERED RUNAWAY - NEW MEXICO
Latoya Fleming 6 - Endangered Missing - New York
JOANNA CANO 15 & ANGEL 6 mo. - "PERSON OF INTEREST" WANTED FOR 1ST DEGREE MURDER - NORTH CAROLINA
XYLONIA BEGAY - MISSING - NEW MEXICO
MADELEINE MCCANN 4 - MISSING - INTERNATIONAL
Tabitha Tudor 18 - Endangered Missing - Tennessee
Kyle Fleischmann - Missing - North Carolina
Justin Gaines - Missing - Georgia
Donna Jou - Missing - California
Jason Michael Rourk - Missing - Georgia
Jennifer Keese - Missing - Florida
Mark Degner - Missing - Florida
Brian Hayes - Missing - Florida
Maura Murray - Missing - New Hampshire
Tabitha Tudors - Missing - Tennessee
Branson Perry - Missing - Missouri
Suzanne "Suzy" Gloria Lyall - Missing - New York
Karen Wilson - Missing - New York
Michael Mayfield - Endangered Missing - Texas
Pamela Mayfield - Endangered Missing - Texas
POWWOW aeaa Earth Kids Project 7Nature-UsagiThe North Face x Oak-to-all-relations What is Powwow-aeaa Earth Kids Movement
SPIRIT / NATURE / TECHNOLOGYEarth is one big family, made up of 6.8 billion human beings and 30 million kinds of living species. What can we do to save the beautiful earth for our kids in the future? Spirit, Nature and Technology, the three in harmony is what we need as we dive into the mid-21st century. To obtain this balance, we need to go beyond the differences in religion, race and ideaology, and get out of the materialistic way of living. Each of us needs to start relating directly to the world in our own way and remember to dream. Powwow is a Native American ceremony of dance and music. aeaa stands for Asia, Europe, Africa, and America. It is an important message that kids from around the world hand in hand, start to act together to save the earth for children yet to be born. The seven nature Usagi reck, hiki, ras, yang, divan, song, and haman are fighting for our earth, to shift our way of living to a more sustainable way. Powwow-aeaa Earth Kids Project is an art movement, children and grown-ups - by thinking and expressing ideas about the earth - get connected to the earth through art, creating a movement. 7 nature usagi collection is made with the idea of Reuse-Reduce-Recycleand five percent of its profit will be donated to the KIDS EARTH FUND.
Powwow aeaa Earth Kids Project 7 Nature-Usagi Official Site
http://www.goldwin.co.jp/tnf/powwow/
image movie
http://www.oak-to-all-relations.com/overview/40year_prom.html
Piloting by Oak-to-all-relations /Natalija Ribovic &Toru Fujita music by Live Bacon Support Unit-Iceland
more infohttp://www.oak-to-all-relations.com
