Truth as the Ultimate Defense

The Little Prince, written by Antoine de Saint Exupéry, is the story about a little boy’s view of the world, the purpose of human life and the relationships between people. The story presents some remarkably profound and idealistic views on human nature, and it’s something that I’ve treated as my Bible, as my holy text. It’s one of the reasons why I have such a deep respect for children, because I think they are, above all things, honest. Curious, yes. And though strong, it doesn’t parallel their honesty.

When the story about those third graders plotting to hurt their teacher dominated the news for a solid 15 minutes a couple of weeks back, my gut reaction was to blame the teacher. I mean, nine year olds don’t usually strike much fear in my heart. And as the story developed, with details of the plot uncovered, and various weapons and accessories discovered, I still blamed the teacher.

But not entirely. In fact, I don’t actually blame the teacher at all.

Unfortunately, we’ve experienced some pretty devastating events that have occurred on school grounds, the details of which I’d rather not get into. After extensive and thorough research and investigations, there’s been some light shed as to the reasons and motives behind those crimes. But when nine out of twelve students in a third grade class devise a scheme to hurt/kill their teacher, because one girl was scolded for standing on a chair, something is definitely wrong. It’s a situation where I don’t think a definite answer can be found.

And then there was this interview:

Sadly, YouTube didn’t have the interview in its entirety, and the only name we are given is that of the grandmother. Since I don’t think she plays too vital a role in this, I’ll relegate her to the position of non-participatory audience member. The attorney is upset by the fact that this little girl was disciplined in the same manner as the other students who were part of the scheme: the same little girl who admits to knowing about the plan, but not the exact details, yet she knew that the knife would be used to cut the tape. She also claims that her classmates didn’t tell her the details of the plan, but she knew that all they had in mind was to throw pies at the teacher.

Someone once told me that withholding truth is just as critical as telling a lie. (No, it’s not an anonymous source, I just don’t remember who it was who told me.)

Something tells me that this little girl is doing both.

This isn’t the situation where a lawyer needs to be involved. As honest as I had foolishly thought kids were, they are also as impressionable. Hiring a lawyer would just indicate that anything done wrong can be defended. And in teaching that kind of value, would it be a surprise if she ended up the type of person who abandons self-accountability?

I'm curious to know where the teacher is in all of this. You know their truth, now tell us yours.

A final word from that oh-so-wise man, Edward R. Murrow:
Most truths are so naked that people feel sorry for them and cover them up, at least a little bit.


Here's hoping you find it --
Peace out, truth-seekers.

This is Going to be Huge ... at least it better be.

A documentary is currently in the works about the “purgatory” where teachers are held after being accused of various degrees of misconduct. The period of time when teachers are suspended and await a lengthy adjudication process is spent in The Rubber Room.

It’s usually an ordinary office in an off-campus location where the suspended schoolteachers sit and do absolutely nothing, while being paid full salary. There is at least one Rubber Room in each of New York City’s five-boroughs, but since it is difficult to find anyone willing to discuss the issue, the number of teachers housed in these rooms can’t be confirmed.

According to the production company behind this project, Five Boroughs Productions:

Teachers assigned to a Rubber Room can spend months and often years there. Though they continue to collect their full salaries, they are not asked or allowed to perform work of any kind, instead sitting idle day after day. The annual cost of the New York City Department of Education's Rubber Room is estimated to be in excess of $25 million, with some estimates ranging as high as $40 million. In addition, there is a general consensus that this cost is rising steeply with each passing year.

More than just presenting the economic effects of the Rubber Room, the documentary aims to highlight the issues that make the Rubber Room a “controversial topic.” What I’m hoping will result from this documentary is a call for change in the politics of education, including, but transcending, the economic issues. It’s easy for people to see the fact that these suspended teachers are still getting paid salary. What’s difficult to comprehend, and what I hope the documentary goes into further detail, is the notion that these teachers do not feel lucky being disconnected from the world they love. Money, in this sense, has absolutely no value.

Based primarily on the trailer, the documentary (as of now) seems a little jagged, and lacks an overall cohesion. It isn’t until two minutes into the trailer that the issue of the Rubber Room is introduced. What the Rubber Room signifies encompasses what I believe are the reasons for the failure of the public school system. By introducing society to that issue, it makes it more accessible, and thereby easier to attempt to resolve.

Considering I’ve criticized the budget of the New York City Public School System, or lack thereof, as a major factor in its overall collapse and failure, I humbly respect the opinions of the teachers presented at the end of the trailer who refer to the Rubber Room as an “abominable waste.” The trailer ends with the same teacher saying: “What a horrible secret that the Department of Education is keeping from the public.”

Mitchell's vocabulary lesson of the day:
[educate] from the latin educare meaning: "to lead out of." In this context, educators are seen as leaders of students out of the darkness of ignorance and into the light of knowledge.

Hoping that the New York Public School System won't end up being a cyclical confirmation of a continuous crossroads between the blind leading the blind, I'm relying on this documentary to shed some light, and drop some knowledge.

Peace.

Way to go VA

Gene Fishel is a Virginia assistant attorney general who recently gave a presentation to a High School about the dangers of disclosing personal information over the Internet and agreeing to meet “Web acquaintances” in person.

While Texas and Illinois are among other states that have passed Internet safety education laws, Virginia is the only state that mandates public schools to offer Internet safety classes for all grade levels.

Judi Westberg Warren, president of Web Wise Kids, a nonprofit group funded by the federal government and corporations such as Verizon and Symantec to provide schools with no-cost Internet safety lessons for 11-to 16-year olds, said that other states are considering similar legislation. She admits, however, that “such efforts are overdue as the Internet’s technological advances have enabled criminals to reach more victims.”

According to a 2006 study by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children,

13 percent of Internet users ages 10 to 17 had received unwanted sexual solicitations. Four percent of those youths reported being asked for nude or sexually explicit photographs of themselves.

More important than just mandating these Internet safety classes, Virginia has also created initiatives that help schools educate parents on internet safety, such as encouraging families to use filtering software as well as putting their computers in parts of the house where they can be easily seen.

Director of the Virginia Department of Education’s office of education technology, Tammy McGraw, has worked with schools to integrate Internet safety lessons into existing coursework.

MySpace, that social networking abyss,

agreed with 49 states to create a task force to devise ways to protect youngsters from online predators and bullies. Texas opted out because of concern that the program lacks a way to verify users’ ages.

I'm pretty surprised that such programs and initiatives have not already been implemented in schools nationwide. I'm even more surprised by Texas' choice to opt out of the agreement with MySpace to create a task force to instill Internet safety.

What I've come to learn in my old age, is that common sense isn't very common.

Yes, it will be difficult and awkward to teach students about the dangers of Internet safety, just as like it will be difficult and awkward to teach students about the technicalities and dangers of sex -- because they'll think they know everything about it. They are, of course, wrong.

And as our society is relying more and more on the Internet, and all the wonderful things it has to offer, we must also highlight all of the dirty things that lie waiting in its dark corners.

But yeah, way to go Virginia!

Peace.

Maybe There's Something in the Water

Dear Georgia,

What is wrong with your kids? First, it was those little gremlins who attempted to attack their teacher.Now it’s fifth-graders attempting to poison their teacher?

Three fifth-grade girls put two and a half Tylenol pills in their teacher’s tea. Apparently, Dana Fox did something very upsetting to these girls: she rolled her eyes. According to the students, they said Miss Fox was prejudiced against them for being black.

Even more bizarre is, despite the girls being charged with aggravated assault, the fact that they remain in the classroom. They were scheduled to appear in court last week, but the case was delayed. As such, they are attending class with the teacher they attempted to harm.

It may seem silly that the girls used Tylenol in an attempt to poison their teacher, but the intent of harm is clearly present.

I'm not too sure if there is a scientific term for the “trickle-down effect.” Georgia, your laws and regulations are clearly not effective. The ineptitude of the state is blatantly reflected in the ineptitude of these young ladies. How can you let three girls who attempted to poison their teacher remain in the classroom? I commend Miss Fox for staying, but I can only imagine the ambivalent emotions she must be feeling – ambivalent in the sense that she must be angry and disappointed, but at the same time, fearing a repeat incident and hoping for the better. I wonder if she now has to cater her lessons as not to insult these girls again.

Stay strong, Miss Fox. That headache will soon subside.

Sincerely,
Mitchell.

Peace.

When Time Out Just Won't Cut It

Nine third-graders have been caught plotting to attack their teacher. Third-graders. They ranged in age from eight to ten years old. 8, 9 and 10 year olds – mad because the teacher had scolded one of them for standing on a chair. The depth of their planning is unbelievably detailed. Waycross Police Chief Tony Tanner said that

the students apparently planned to knock the teacher unconscious with a crystal paperweight, bind her with the handcuffs and tape and then stab her with the knife.

The plan involved a division of roles, in which the students acted out a specific purpose, in which “one child’s job was to cover the windows so no one could see outside … Another was supposed to clean up after the attack.”

Brilliantly mad.

I think it’s important to note that these children have learning disabilities, including attention deficit disorder, delayed development and hyperactivity. But this can’t be a valid excuse for the horrendous plot. Considering the technicalities of the scheme, it seems apparent that these children knew and understood full-well the purpose of their actions. They may not have a complete grasp of the potential results of their actions, but it’s extremely fortunate that it won’t be tested and realized.

I’ve been, and continue to be, an advocate for students. Which is why I am concerned with the bigger picture: how could it have gotten this far? Where exactly did these homicidal ideations come from? The purported target is a veteran educator who claimed that the children involved weren’t known as troublemakers, and they “were considered pretty good kids.” So what happened? What triggered this rapid diminishing of innocence, which was ultimately replaced by evil? Being scolded is only part of that picture. There has to be an underlying reason as to why these students wanted to harm their teacher.

Despite the horrific potential of the scheme, we can’t forget that these students are children. They are 8, 9 and 10 year olds. Placing them in jail or juvenile facilities won’t be very effective. Discipline in the form of more intensive education should be the way to transform these kids into successful members of society. There needs to be a reform in the education of children with learning disabilities. Ultimately, I don’t think it’s fair to give up on these children so quickly, after one incident – albeit an awful one.

Peace.

I NewsTrust.

I like that the aim of NewsTrust is very direct: helping people find good journalism online. With that, however, arises the question as to what good journalism entails. And an answer is provided, which is the main attraction to NewsTrust. Members of the community not only suggest stories, but also rate them in terms of “core journalistic principles such as fairness, evidence, sourcing and context.” The website does a great job in that the members weed out irrelevant stories by applying the principles used in the rating to determine its worth. The organization of the website makes it user-friendly: more than just highlighting the most significant stories, members also have the option to focus their news search in the specific categories.

At the same time, however, because NewsTrust relies heavily, if not entirely, on the participation of its users for significant news, there’s room for neglect in certain areas. I understand that breaking news can’t happen in every category every day, but I think the news articles posted can be updated more frequently. Moreover, I can't help but to ask who the primary members of the organization are: that is, who is suggesting and rating these stories, and why exactly should I trust their judgment? But as of now, I've only read comments from very intelligent people who not only take the news seriously, but are also concerned with the integrity of journalism.

In terms of aesthetics, the website could use more visual aspects of images or video. I find that I am essentially inundated with text upon first glance, and it’s not very eye-catching.

Lastly, and by no means is this a minor flaw, but the website in itself doesn’t always run very quickly. And with very little images, what exactly is loading that I have to wait for? Damn my impatience.

Peace. & chicken grease?

Take it to the Streets, (pt. deux)

Notice: This blog is by no means advocating underground hip hop artists, nor endorsing any of the presidential candidates. And this is not the path I want to take my blog, but Joell Ortiz is worth listening to.



He is a free agent rapper from Brooklyn (BROOKLYN!) who spits rhymes about the rawness of the ghetto. Unlike other Hip-Hop "artists" -- and that's a term I use loosely -- who glamorize the industry, Ortiz is taking it back to the streets.

And with it, a political agenda:

Joell Ortiz - A Message to Obama | Hip Hop Songs > HipHopDX.com

With mainstream artists like The Blackeyed Peas, Common and Mos Def showing support for Obama, it was only inevitable for the little guys to follow suit. I'm curious to see how much weight the supporters hold in this election. Also, I'm curious to see whether Ortiz's support of Obama will effect his record sales

Especially with the contradicting viewpoints within the Hip-Hop community.

And just like Spitzer ignoring the advice offered by the Streets, we'll see how these lessons affect Obama.

Stay tuned.

Peace.

If You Can't Beat 'em, Cheat.

James Watson is the principal of Washington Irving Middle School in Roslindale who allegedly distributed the MCAS to his school staff a day early. Why isn't this getting more media coverage?

This is the same principal who was told in 2005 by then state education commissioner David P. Driscoll to improve test results in his school. At that point, Washington Irving Middle School had suffered three consecutive years of poor MCAS scores. And this is the second incident involving the questioning of MCAS testing.

Unfortunately, but necessarily, Mr. Watson had to be the sacrificial lamb.

Apparently, his school isn't the only one that cheats. According to the Department of Education, in
2007: 20 teachers were involved in MCAS cheating, while 43 students shared answers or
used cheat-sheets
2006: 15 teachers and 19 students were caught cheating
2005: three teachers were involved.

Is the pattern not obvious enough?

Is no one disheartened by the fact that Gov. Deval Patrick is disappointed because the integrity of the MCAS is being questioned? Why isn't he concerned about the integrity of the teachers, and in this case, the principal? Isn't it understood that their actions make lasting impressions on their students? What values, or lack thereof, are being taught if cheating is condoned?

Boston school superintendent Carol Johnson said that "it isn't clear that they violated anything." Actually, it's quite clear. The school violated the students' potential at excelling. Simple. And isn't that a clear indication that they weren't all too confident in their teaching to test the students without cheating? Or did they honestly not feel their students to be competent enough? Either way, there are no excuses.

I can understand that the principal and the teachers just want the best for their students, that's not something I ever question. But this is not a case in which the ends justify the means. Whose best interest was Mr. Watson really serving? Whose face was he really saving? Would he really be able to place value on the scores?

And yet there's still questioning as to where to place blame.

tsk. tsk.

Peace.

Rejecting Accountability

57-year-old Gene Morrill previously pleaded guilty to 20 charges of molestation- related activities, after his attempt to solicit 13-year-old boys over the internet. In seeking leniency in sentencing, Morrill claims that his actions stem from being molested as a child by this guy:

No lie.

This is also coming from the man identified last year as one of several out-of-state online predators. Despite his claim of abuse from Bigfoot, he was determined to be mentally competent to stand trial and was ordered to serve 20 years in prison.

More disturbing that the crimes he committed is his brazen attempt at justifying them. In addition to being convicted of five counts of "attempting to take indecent liberties with a child, five counts of using electronic equipment to solicit a juvenile..." he was also convicted of "ten counts of reproducing child pornography."

His audacity only parallels the audacity of Arelia Margarita Taveras. Who, you ask? And how? This former attorney dipped into her clients' escrow accounts to finance her gambling habit. In addition to being disbarred, she has lost her apartment her parents' home and owes the IRS $58,000.

In an effort to justify her losses, which she says totals $1 million, Taveras filed a $20-million racketeering lawsuit in Federal Court against six Atlantic City casinos and one in Las Vegas. Her reasoning:

They knew I was going for days without eating or sleeping. I would pass out at the tables. They had a duty of care to me. Nobody in their right mind would gamble for four or five days straight without sleeping.

Open the window and throw out all sense of accountability. What do you get? A clean room full of false promises of second chances. And what happens when people don't claim responsibility for their actions? No one can be held liable for their own failures, and as such, their own lives. Everyone is innocent. At least it would appear that way. There's a disillusionment that runs rampant when such events occur -- an epidemic of failure wildly searching for reason.

In case you didn't know, Ms. Taveras, it is no one's responsibility to take care of you besides yourself. And for someone of your intellect to make such statements makes the situation even more disturbing. Just own up and admit fault, and maybe you won't come off completely incompetent. And with regard to Mr. Morrill, well, I just have no words for you.

On a Much Lighter Note

I’m afraid that my blog has started to become an angry rant about the belief of a particular teacher. So I’m taking a step back and trying to regain my composure and catch my breath. And in doing so, I discovered brilliance:

15 pianos were scattered around Birmingham, England with the words “Play Me, I’m Yours” spray painted on them. The installation, or experiment, was organized by an art collective whose coordinators wanted to “create a sense of unity and wonder in a place where both are in short supply.” Amen to that.

The actual creator of the installation, Luke Jerram, worked with the Fierce arts organization, which is “renowned for getting odd things into odder places.” Jerram’s past experiments included this:

Sky orchestra is an installation consisting of “seven hot air balloons, each with speakers attached, take off at dawn to fly across a city. Each balloon plays a different element of the musical score creating a massive audio landscape.”

More than just waking up a sleepy city at an inappropriate hour, it wakes up the imagination and spirit of those who are fortunate enough to experience it. Of the random piano experiment, Kevin Isaacs, executive producer of Fierce, said:

So many people spend their lives now surrounded by horrible noises, working on screens, watching television, this was a way of having something nice just steal up on them where they would least expect it.

And who can complain about that type of noise being made?

'Til next time.
Peace.

... after anger subsided

After a few days, I've had a chance to reconsider, or at least re-evaluate, my initial reaction to Christina Varghese's comment on teacher merit pay.

In How to Make Better Teachers, Claudia Wallis asks of great teachers, which she admits are rare in numbers:

How do they come by their craft? What qualities and capacities do they possess? Can these abilities be measured? Can they be taught? Perhaps above all: How should excellent teaching be rewarded so that the best teachers -- the most competent, caring and compelling -- remain in a profession known for low pay, low status and soul-crushing bureaucracy?

A few prerequisites were mentioned in the article. Now let's attempt to apply those guidelines to Varghese (based only upon her quote, but I think that's alright).

• A deep knowledge of one's subject: the higher the grade, the more closely student achievement correlates to a teachers expertise in her field. As seen in Ms. Varghese's website, she clearly fits that criteria.
  
  
• On the job practice: two years to master the basics of classroom management and six to seven years to become a fully proficient teacher. As a 10 year veteran, Varghese's got this one in the bag.
  
  
• But probably the most important: an unshakable belief in children's capacity to learn. Margaret Gayle, an expert on gifted education at Duke University, says "anyone without this has no business in the classroom." Despite Varghese's credentials, it may be possible that her passion for her subject doesn't translate into her teaching methods.
  

Professional Compensation, or ProComp, is the merit pay equivalent in Denver. Taylor Betz is similar to Christina Varghese in that htey are both veteran math teachers in struggling schools. Betz, however, "didn't expect performance pay to change anything about how she does her job, but says it has made her more driven." She refuses to let kids fail and promised to bulldoze whatever the problem is and solve it. She says, "I'm not a money grubber. Most teachers aren't. But people in other professions get raises, why shouldn't we?"

I think it's completely understandable that teachers should want more money, because quite frankly, they deserve it. However, teaching is a profession understood to have low pay so it's frustrating to see teachers place greater value on monetary profit than student achievement.
Betz takes an appropriate stance in calling merit pay a "just reward." But that's exactly what it should. Especially considering:

Research suggests that a good teacher is the single most important factor in boosting achievement, more important than class size, the dollars spent per student or the quality of textbooks and materials.

While the money is definitely attractive, it shouldn't govern the teaching methods or taint the understanding that student achievement comes first and foremost.

Failure in its Basic Form

According to the New York Times:

Fewer than half of American teenagers who were asked basic history and literature questions in a phone survey knew when the Civil War was fought, and one in four said Columbus sailed to the New World some time after 1750, not in 1492.

The survey, commissioned by Common Core, asked 33 multiple-choice questions to 1,200 17-year-olds about history and literature drawn from a test administered by the Federal Government in 1986.

Common Core describes itself as a new research organization advocating for more teaching of the liberal arts in public schools, and criticizing President Bush’s No Child Left Behind as having

Impoverished public school curriculums by holding schools accountable for student scores on annual tests in reading and mathematics, but in no other subjects.

While the results are disheartening, it may not be all that surprising – which leads to the Next Question: Can Students be Paid to Excel? If the students surveyed were given the incentive of cash prizes for knowing the right answers, I wonder if there would have been a difference.

This article states:

School districts nationwide have seized on the idea that a key to improving schools is to pay for performance, whether through bonuses for teachers and principals, or rewards like cash prizes for students. New York City, with the largest public school system in the country, is in the forefront of this movement, with more than 200 schools experimenting with one incentive or another. In more than a dozen schools, students, teachers and principals are all eligible for extra money, based on students’ performance on standardized tests.

$500,000 have already been handed out to 5,327 students in 58 schools. Harvard Economist, Roland G. Fryer, who designed the student incentive program, said: “I’m not saying I know this is going to fix everything, but I am saying it’s worth trying. What we need to try to do is start that spark.”

And I believe that that spark is first ignited by teachers. We didn’t expect the teachers to be forgotten, did we? Each teacher can receive a bonus of as much as $3,000 if students show marked improvement on state tests.

Right attitude: “It’s better than a slap in the face. But honestly, I don’t think about it. We’re here every day working and pushing; that’s what we’ve been doing for years. We don’t come into this for the money, and most of us don’t leave it because of the money,” said Ruth Lopez, pictured above.

Wrong attitude: “I tell my students all the time that I can sit in the back and hand them worksheets and get the same amount of money as I do if I stand in front of the class working with high energy the entire time. What’s the motivation there? At least this gives us something to work toward,” said Christina Varghese, the lead math teacher at J.H.S. 123.

Let’s face it: Money makes the world go ‘round. There will be people who become teachers because it’s a noble profession and because they have a firm belief in the endless potential of children -- so thank you, Ms. Lopez. But there will also be people who become teachers for no reason, like Ms. Varghese. Concurrently, however, it is understood that teachers don't make ridiculous amounts of money, so the prospect of becoming a millionaire because of it is unwarranted.

This may come off a little harsh and mean, but I’ll stand by it:

While the success of students reflects the success of teachers, the corollary holds true: The failure of students is contingent upon the failure of the teachers. And quite frankly, Ms. Varghese, if your heart’s not in it, do us all a favor and find something else to do. And with regard to your question about where the motivation lies, riddle me this: You’ve been a math teacher at your school for the last 10 years. Is it safe to assume that before this incentive program, you actually were just sitting in the back of the classroom handing out worksheets? I think it’s a fair assumption that makes a great ass out of just you.

If Common Core continues to advocate more teaching on the liberal arts, and therefore lessening the amount of time dedicated to your subject in an effort to balance the curriculum, who is more in danger of failing?

And something to work toward? What about working toward encouraging your students to excel, or to yearn for something greater than they expect? What about attempting to spark initiative? What about taking pride in knowing that you are a main factor in shaping the minds of your students, thereby determining their path in the future?

How about this: for every question you answer correctly, I'll pay you an apology. But in the meantime, I won't hold my breath.

Peace.

Take it to the Streets

Complex magazine, a publication that focuses on all aspects of men’s lifestyle, blogged on the possibility of Eliot Spitzer remaining in office if he just learned some tips from the streets:

Considering he was the Attorney General of New York and busted up a few hooker and drug rings in his day – giving him intimate knowledge of evidence gathering and building a case – makes him even stupider for getting busted with any cell phone records whatsoever.

The blog goes even further to say that he could have prevented exposure had he watched HBO’s The Wire, in which he would have learned to utilize disposable phones.

Client-9 should have applied some covert common sense and bought himself a bunch of pre-paid throwaways like most responsible drug retailers do … Plus he could have went a step further and only texted, further reducing any identifying trace, since his voice wouldn’t have been captured like a fingerprint.

With that, a list of the “sleek” cell phones were recommended from different carriers that offered pre-paid options, with text-messaging capabilities, of course.

So to any aspiring political agent, or to anyone who is already a member, make sure to consult Complex for tips on getting away with nearly everything.

Or to any aspiring poptart trying to make it into the limelight by any means necessary, at least you'll know the reason for discretion, and the means to bring others into the limelight with you -- whether they like it, or not.

Peace.

edit: I decided to remove the poptitute's (you like?) picture because I didn't want to give her anymore exposure than she is already getting. A link would suffice.

I'm a Vegetarian

On a lighter note, I'm jumping on the Spitzer bandwagon:

But think about it, 1000 Spitzer sandwiches from Eisenberg's Sandwich Shop in New York will equal the amount Spitzer actually spent on hookers.

More than just being exposed, Spitzer has undoubtedly shaken whatever little faith we have left in politicians. And more than just damaging his family, Spitzer will more than likely never serve as a public official again.

According to the New York Times:

Mr. Spitzer becomes the first New York governor to resign since 1973, when Nelson A. Rockefeller stepped down to devote himself to a policy group, and the first to be forced out since William Sulzer was impeached in 1913 over a campaign contribution fraud.

What I love most about my fellow New Yorkers isn't their attitude, rudeness and propensity for intensity in all aspects of life, but their uncanny sense of humor:

Because if there's one thing I've learned as a New Yorker and a college student, it's that when in doubt, drink.

Cheers, Spitzer.

Cultivating Criminals?

Or instead, you could do what 45-year-old Richard Lee is doing: Lee founded Oaksterdam University in a downtown Oakland storefront last fall. He is a marijuana activist and pot-dispensary owner who prepares his students for jobs in California's thriving medical marijuana industry.

In the Globe article, Lee said:

My basic idea is to try to professionalize the industry and have it taken seriously as a real industry, just like beer and distilling hard alcohol.

But there's no comparison between alcohol and marijuana, Mr. Lee. While California was the first of a dozen states to have legalized marijuana use for patients with a doctor's recommendation, all alcohol requires is to be purchased by someone of legal age. Moreover, the disparity in the laws regarding either of the substances indicate the difference in the potential harm. I'm not advocating alcohol, but there's a reason why marijuana is deemed as the gateway drug.

The course costs $200 plus two required textbooks. Students learn how to cultivate and cook cannabis, study different strains and are instructed in the legalities.

While I find the objective of job training as valid, I'm concerned that as students are cultivating weed, Lee himself is cultivating criminals; but the type of criminals who are familiarized with the technicalities of the law, and use it to their advantage.

I don't think there's a filter for any of the negative outcomes that will surely arise from Oaksterdam University. Yes, many of the students will be certified, and have a higher chance of getting a job (a decent one at that considering "bud tenders" make an average annual salary of $50,000), but ALL of the students would be equipped with the knowledge to produce marijuana plants, which is still illegal in many parts of the country, and will have the knowledge to evade the law because of technicalities that they'd learn at Oaksterdam. Furthermore, are there any prerequisites for registering, such as background checks for criminal records?

I don't mean to sound like the uptight do-gooder, but this institution just seems to validate the ways in which the law can be manipulated.

Kinda Makes Me Wonder

Maybe I Was Too Hasty ...

With regard to the question I posed in my last blog, maybe the answer I offered was too absolute.

Of Harvard (and now Yale, Dartmouth and a few other colleges) revamping financial aid for students from families whose income falls within a certain amount (middle to upper-middle class), Bryn Mawr dean of admissions and financial aid Jenny Rickard said:

Harvard has started to redefine the financial aid landscape, and it’s redefined it in a way that is quite beneficial to the wealthiest institutions … It is just a handful of schools that can really respond this way, but it leaves others kind of pulling their hair.

Some officials, in particular at the colleges that don’t have $35 billion in endowments, say there will now be pressure to provide more aid to wealthy high achievers, thereby reducing the amount available to poorer students. They also predict that the number of low-income applications would decline. Dr. Donald E. Heller, the Director of the Center for the Study of Higher Education at Pennsylvania State University, said that those applications would just get “crowded out.”

I smell fear.

Fear that universities would have to use more of their endowments just to try to compete with the Ivy Leagues (only an average of 5 percent of the endowment is used by schools for scholarship and financial aid annually). Senior Republican on the State Finance Committee, Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, has recently suggested that colleges be required to spend more of their endowments as a condition of keeping their tax-exempt status. Concurrently, a bill was approved by the House Education and Labor Committee that would “seek to shame, by listing publicly, those colleges that raise tuition significantly faster than their peers.”

But at least that fear incites action. Maybe not from the schools as of yet, but the government (yes – our government) is taking heed:

New York State Senator Kenneth P. Lavalle head of the Senate Higher Education Committee, plans on introducing legislation that would provide enough state aid to limit to 10 percent the amount of income that a middle-class family would have to pay for college. Governor Eliot Spitzer of New York has also recently proposed selling part of the state’s lottery business in order to create a $4 billion endowment for public universities (which is still less than the $5.7 billion growth in Harvard’s endowment just last year – and would be distributed to more students)

Dr. Robert J. Birgeneau, Chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley, proposes that in order for other schools to compete and attract students, they must build a larger endowment.

Easy enough? Or maybe schools should appropriate more than 5 percent of their endowments to financial aid. Now that was easy.

Oh, and by the way, Northeastern's report card grade for last year ... please pay attention to the failures:

Follow that Trend! We Can't Afford Not to ...

These Ivy League universities represent a few of the wealthiest education institutions in the world. It’s about time they start utilizing their assets, and do exactly what they are revered for: being trailblazers in the academic frontier.

It all started with Harvard. But doesn’t it always?

Harvard University announced in December 2007 a plan that would extensively increase financial aid to students from families whose annual income range from $120,000 to $180,000. To those students, university annual cost would be limited to about 10 percent of their families’ income (a maximum cost being $18,000).

However, let us not forget that an admitted student from a family earning $60,000 or less attends the university virtually free of charge.

Only weeks after Harvard announced its plan to increase financial aid, Yale unveiled a plan of its own. The changes, expected to be put in effect in the fall, would increase spending of university endowments by $24 million, to more than $80 million. In addition, Yale said it would limit the increase in tuition, room and board to 2.2 percent. The increases have been more than double that percentage in the last five years.

Richard C. Levin, president of Yale, said that on average, students who receive financial aid will see their charges drop in half.

Dartmouth College, though probably having the smallest bank account in comparison to other Ivy League institutions, is also doing its part. The college announced that starting in the fall, students from families with incomes below $75,000 will receive free tuition. Furthermore, loans will be replaced with scholarships. James Wright, the college president, said:

“The college has long been committed to helping superbly qualified students attend Dartmouth, regardless of their financial means, and financial aid has been a personal priority of mine for many years …Building on our more than threefold increase in financial aid since 1998, I am pleased that we could make this further enhancement to our financial aid program as we seek to keep Dartmouth affordable and to enroll the most talented students from around the world.”

And he ain’t lying. In 1998, financial aid cost Dartmouth 24.5 million. Last year, the cost was a staggering $61 million.

So where does that leave the rest of the academic population? You know, the students who come from families that fit the economic criteria, but not the academic? Are their options that of attending a state school for its affordability, or amass a debt by attending a private university, whose endowments pale in comparison? (ahem, Northeastern).

To my understanding, yes.

In the Absence of Logic ...

In President Bush’s State of the Union, addressed late last month, he proposed a new program called Pell Grants for Kids. Essentially, $300 million in tax dollars would be allotted to low-income parents to help send their children to private or religious schools.

A similar federally financed “scholarship” is already in existence in Washington. Initiated in 2003, it has provided more than $14 million a year for low-income students to attend private and religious schools.

Of the proposed program, Senator Edward M. Kennedy said:

“The president didn’t commit the resources to expand education opportunity … Instead, on top of a $70 billion shortfall in funding for his own education reforms, he again proposed to siphon scarce resources from our public schools to create new voucher programs.”

While I see the program as an honorable attempt at giving low-income children better education opportunities, it validates the inefficiency and downright failure of public schools. With that, why not use the $300 millio to distribute to public schools across the nation? – thereby benefitting more than just a few.

Even though it may advance a select fortunate few, the program would inevitably leave too many behind, proving also the failure of another Bush initiative.

Refreshing

Amidst the doubts in the effectiveness of teachers, one shines bright. Possibly too bright. And possibly making others look even worse than they already do.

Carmelo Piazza, part-teacher, part-clown, fully-inspirational, congratulations! To incite nearly 150 people out of bed as early as 4:25 a.m. just to sign their kids up for one of your eight one-week Science classes, is definitely a feat worth acknowledging.

Maybe I'll end up writing a feature on you. I just won't start at 4 a.m.

Problems #2 and 3 of Too Many

This article was actually posted the same day as the New York Testing Teachers article, but I've failed to post this blog timely. Again, I rely on paper, so I apologize for the lateness.

While everyone, and I mean everyone, can agree on the dismal state of the economy, I find it extremely difficult to swallow that schools are not getting -- and more importantly, won't be getting -- the aid they so desperately need; as highlighted in the proposed plan to test teacher efficiency in order to find the culprit for student failure. New York Governor Eliot Spitzer unveiled a budget that did not reflect expectations. Although the proposed budget "does not give the city's schools less money than before ... it gives them less than the expected $530 million in additional aid for school operations."

Of the lower aid increase, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver said: "Clearly it could have been a lot worse."

Right. They could propose a different purpose for the funds, which of course, they did. Paul Francis, director of operations for the governor, said the administration also planned changes in the way aid is disbursed, with less tied to accountability goals like reducing class sizes.

Because overcrowded schools show no disadvantages to students?

Where do the nearly 4,000 students of Richmond Hill High School stack up? In temporary classrooms where the teachers hold umbrellas against leaky roofs, and must endure a daily routine in which the first lunch period starts at 8:59 a.m.? It's incredible how people expect these students to excel and succeed under such conditions.

... then again, I went to school in Brooklyn.

I'm Trying ..

Greetings! I apologize for the long wait in-between blogs. But I must confess something: I'd rather have a pen and paper.

(And yes, I just heard a few of you sigh)

Maybe it's the fact that I'm just so accustomed to handwriting everything before I actually type it out that I find this entire experiment/activity somewhat difficult. It could also be the fact that I like to actually have my words in my hands -- it makes the whole process of writing that much more personal. I'm not technologically-challenged by any means, I just prefer the archaic method of writing. But as you can see, a change is necessary. I'm tired of having the floor of my studio apartment covered by dailies and other publications. So instead of handwriting, then typing, I'm going to eliminate the middle man. Let's see how this develops.

Stay tuned.

One (of many) Problems ...

New York to test its teachers. My initial reaction to the New York Times article, New York Measuring Teachers by Test Scores,was: Yes! Test the teachers on their efficiency, measure the effective of their methods. Let's reconsider the notion that the problem(s) lie solely on, and because of, the students. Let's blame the teachers for the mistakes of the students. It's just easier that way. Down with the tyrant!

The experiment involves 2,500 teachers in 140 schools, and was designed to measure student performance and improvement. But are teaching methods and student performance directly correlated? Does it account for mitigating factors such as race, class, economic standing and opportunity? The article states:

Many education experts say that until teacher quality improves in urban schools, student performance is likely to stagnate and the achievement gap between white and minority students will never be closed.

Obviously.

Sharing my skepticism was the president of the United Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten, who stated that the data could not be used to show the contributions of an individual teacher. She states further: "Any real educator can know within five minutes of walking into a classroom if a teacher is effective."

While I may agree wholeheartedly in teacher evaluations, I must ask whether school officials are evaluating in the most optimal way. The experiment is based upon comparing standardized test scores over a period of time. (I won't even begin to write about the errors in standardized testing). My proposal: Why not ask the students for their opinion? Not in the yearly, number-based evaluations contingent primarily upon the ease of the course (for most students), but a more frequent, say, monthly, personalized feedback. After all, the students are the ones who are asked to perform. Why not ask the ones directly involved?

My other concern was deputy school chancellor Chris Cerf's offering of the possibility to make individual teacher ratings public. While it may act as the spark for inspiration, as well as the constant reminder of the consequences of failure, there is absolutely no need for it. It forcefully strips educators of their dignity and confidence. The notion would only pose a threat for harm to teacher effectiveness, in turn harming student performance.

Attention: Hypebeasts !

With the upcoming re-release of Air Jordan sneakers, aptly named the Air Jordan Countdown pack, how high are the expectations? As sneakerheads drool and anticipate the return of the once-magnificent, ever-present Jordan brand, will the product live up to it's hype?

The pack, with an expected release date of January 19, comes with a $310 price tag. The bundle will include the Air Jordan 10 and the Air Jordan 13.

According to sneakerhead.com:

"Air Jordan shoes have consistently been among the best selling basketball shoes since their creation in 1985. The Jordan brand is a household name and people of all ages and social strata line up eagerly for the release of the latest model."

Does the eagerness remain intact?