Take a look at any school and you will find a required amount of community service that all students must complete if they wish to graduate. I think that it is a fantastic thing that we have instituted this requirement. Having done this, we have succeeded in finding a way to get our students to involve themselves in their communities and to give back to them. But what about after they have completed this requirement? What is being done to influence our students to continue volunteering and giving back to others after they have graduated?
That is my biggest issue with the mandatory community service: how do we ensure that we have motivated pupils enough to continue giving back after they have completed what we say they must? I feel like it is the same as when we tell students that they must complete a certain number of semesters of a certain subject. After they have reached that point, how do we keep them interested in the topic? Greater action must be taken to make sure that children in our schools do not view giving back to the community as just another required course. They should be learning what it means to volunteer and how much it means to the rest of the community.
We should not be making our students volunteer. Rather we should be enlightening them as to why it is so important to give back and help to improve the environments in which we each live. If we can show them the value of these things, we will be setting down the right path to provide students with the tools necessary to want to pursue a life of giving back and helping others.
Saturday, April 24, 2010
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Who do we want to be?
Here is my question for the educational institutions of this country: Why are you not accepting anyone? What is it about this current class of high-school seniors that you dislike so much? You can only use the "this is the largest pool of applicants ever" excuse so many times.
I can understand the fact that there are only so many spots available at any given institution, but why does its seem that there are none open at any university in the country? There are hundreds of applicants to each school every single year, but fewer and fewer kids are being admitted for the 2010-2011 year. Universities all have a very distinct build, one that has been constructed over a period of decades and is defined by the type of student that attends the establishment. But what happens when schools begin to turn away the very type of student that defines the institution? It it still the same school or has it become something different?
I firmly believe that this completely changes the university. I can sympathize with the fact that there is a need for there to be a drop in the number of admitted students, but do not turn away the kind of student that makes your institution what it has become. That is just not right. That is going against the fundamental foundation of what your institution has come to be, and therefore is not something that should be practiced.
So I will say it one more time: If you have to turn away students, you have to do it. But do not turn away a student that is exactly what your university has come to look for in its students. Because if you do this, what is the purpose of separate universities with distinct identities?
I can understand the fact that there are only so many spots available at any given institution, but why does its seem that there are none open at any university in the country? There are hundreds of applicants to each school every single year, but fewer and fewer kids are being admitted for the 2010-2011 year. Universities all have a very distinct build, one that has been constructed over a period of decades and is defined by the type of student that attends the establishment. But what happens when schools begin to turn away the very type of student that defines the institution? It it still the same school or has it become something different?
I firmly believe that this completely changes the university. I can sympathize with the fact that there is a need for there to be a drop in the number of admitted students, but do not turn away the kind of student that makes your institution what it has become. That is just not right. That is going against the fundamental foundation of what your institution has come to be, and therefore is not something that should be practiced.
So I will say it one more time: If you have to turn away students, you have to do it. But do not turn away a student that is exactly what your university has come to look for in its students. Because if you do this, what is the purpose of separate universities with distinct identities?
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Learn to Manage Your Resources!
Why is it that governing bodies tend to have a knack for mismanaging the resources that they allocate to their members? Sure staying in the technology race is important, but in no way is it worth setting aside resources for this progression when it is not possible to maintain the people necessary to use these assets.
Those of us from the Los Angeles area are aware that Los Angeles Unified School District most definitely has its issues. But this is not to say that they cannot be remedied. Quite the contrary actually; it is most definitely a possibility to fix, not all, but a lot of these problems. So here is my charge to you LAUSD: stop mismanaging your resources, and put your capital where it is needed.
Ok, so the economy is not in good shape, but that is not a reason to cut staff and deprive children of the education that they deserve. Why is the money that goes towards keeping teachers and other staff around instead going towards the purchase of Smart Boards? These resources should not be allocated towards such technological advancement, but rather for maintaining the people necessary to keep schools up and running.
Teachers and other faculty members are not often given the indispensable support that they need from LAUSD, causing them to put in not only the work that they are supposed to be, but also some of what the governing body should be completing. Because of this, some schools, such as the previously mentioned Carthay Center Elementary, are put into such dire positions that staff are not able to have a weekend. Instead of getting to stay at home with their families and have a relaxing two days, their weekends are often spent at school, taking care of things they cannot accomplish during the week because their governing body, LAUSD, has not allocated the proper resources.
It hardly seems fair that we are putting this kind of tax on our city’s educators. They are doing their jobs and not getting paid for it, rather they are donating their efforts. This is being done because it is what is necessary to ensure that the students of the school are able to continue receiving the high caliber education that they had become familiar with.
Now that I have brought up the issue, what can be done to remedy such ridiculous situations? One option, as previously suggested, is to do a better job of allocating resources. LAUSD should not be throwing money at products such as the Smart Board when its member schools can barely maintain a staff of 50 people.
A second possibility, which is a very hot-button issue during such difficult economic times, is to raise taxes. Yes, everybody is strapped when it comes to paying their taxes, but why not throw a little bit more money towards the government? This tax would be specifically for educational purposes and would be funneled back down to LAUSD. Providing the school system with more capital, unfortunately does not mean that it will be allocated properly, and go towards what is truly needed. It would be a necessity to put into place some kind of system that would ensure that this new source of money would go into paying the salaries of the most essential aspect of our schools. The technology is not what must be ensured. Rather, it is the maintenance of the faculty that use such resources that have futures that are in jeopardy.
My question is the following: will the Smart Boards teach our students? Will the computers? The answer is a very simple one: NO! It is a necessity of the education system to have teachers providing students with a vital learning experience. So once again, LAUSD please pay heed to my call. Please stop mismanaging your resources and funnel enough capital to your member schools to really be able to provide the necessary resources, our teachers.
Those of us from the Los Angeles area are aware that Los Angeles Unified School District most definitely has its issues. But this is not to say that they cannot be remedied. Quite the contrary actually; it is most definitely a possibility to fix, not all, but a lot of these problems. So here is my charge to you LAUSD: stop mismanaging your resources, and put your capital where it is needed.
Ok, so the economy is not in good shape, but that is not a reason to cut staff and deprive children of the education that they deserve. Why is the money that goes towards keeping teachers and other staff around instead going towards the purchase of Smart Boards? These resources should not be allocated towards such technological advancement, but rather for maintaining the people necessary to keep schools up and running.
Teachers and other faculty members are not often given the indispensable support that they need from LAUSD, causing them to put in not only the work that they are supposed to be, but also some of what the governing body should be completing. Because of this, some schools, such as the previously mentioned Carthay Center Elementary, are put into such dire positions that staff are not able to have a weekend. Instead of getting to stay at home with their families and have a relaxing two days, their weekends are often spent at school, taking care of things they cannot accomplish during the week because their governing body, LAUSD, has not allocated the proper resources.
It hardly seems fair that we are putting this kind of tax on our city’s educators. They are doing their jobs and not getting paid for it, rather they are donating their efforts. This is being done because it is what is necessary to ensure that the students of the school are able to continue receiving the high caliber education that they had become familiar with.
Now that I have brought up the issue, what can be done to remedy such ridiculous situations? One option, as previously suggested, is to do a better job of allocating resources. LAUSD should not be throwing money at products such as the Smart Board when its member schools can barely maintain a staff of 50 people.
A second possibility, which is a very hot-button issue during such difficult economic times, is to raise taxes. Yes, everybody is strapped when it comes to paying their taxes, but why not throw a little bit more money towards the government? This tax would be specifically for educational purposes and would be funneled back down to LAUSD. Providing the school system with more capital, unfortunately does not mean that it will be allocated properly, and go towards what is truly needed. It would be a necessity to put into place some kind of system that would ensure that this new source of money would go into paying the salaries of the most essential aspect of our schools. The technology is not what must be ensured. Rather, it is the maintenance of the faculty that use such resources that have futures that are in jeopardy.
My question is the following: will the Smart Boards teach our students? Will the computers? The answer is a very simple one: NO! It is a necessity of the education system to have teachers providing students with a vital learning experience. So once again, LAUSD please pay heed to my call. Please stop mismanaging your resources and funnel enough capital to your member schools to really be able to provide the necessary resources, our teachers.
Saturday, April 3, 2010
A Plea to Prioritize
Just like a roller coaster, everyone has enjoyed watching our economy as it has followed its up and down, looping course. Wait, I have that wrong. Nobody has enjoyed watching what has happened to our economy. Even more than not wanting the roller coaster to stay on its current path, there is not a single person, to my knowledge, who has reveled in the budget cuts to which our county’s education system has been subjected.
Yes when one looks at the numbers it can be viably argued that the monetary value of the cuts made has been necessary. But, in my opinion, the government has not prioritized these cuts properly. At a time when everybody is looking towards the future, the State has been incredibly misguided in having chosen the education budget as the one to be cut rather than countless other budgets.
While it may be controversial to make the claim that certain budgets be cut more than others, in the long-run, cutting the education budget less will directly cause there to be less need for larger budgets in other areas. Take for example the projected Health and Human Services budget for California in 2010-2011. Currently there has been approximately $29, 792, 401 allotted to this department. While I firmly believe that it is important to put money towards health services, by putting some of this money into the Department of Education, I believe that the same end can be reached. In having a larger budget to put towards education, California schools will be able to continue employing its teachers and staff. By keeping people on staff, schools will be better able to educate their students on important issues, such as healthy eating and practicing safe sex. Thanks to being able to maintain a staff that can teach the state’s children in such subjects, California will be able to save money when it comes to health services, meaning that less money can be put towards this department.
There is no doubt that during the recent recession everybody has been strapped for money. But those of us living in California are also put in a tough place when our education is forced to take a massive hit because there is not enough money. I can only speak for myself and those I have talked to, but a slight increase in taxes to ensure that there is a future for California’s education system is something that is acceptable. By slightly increasing the amount of taxes paid to the state, thee will be more money that can be divided amongst the individual departmental budgets, in particular education.
The situation has become so dire for some schools, such as Carthay Center Elementary in Los Angeles Unified School District 4, that fundraising has begun within the school in order to be able to pay the salaries of some faculty members. The school needs to raise $20,000 before September 30 in order to be able to keep its librarian on staff. I ask the following to the state of California and those deciding the budget: is it really worth not providing schools with enough money to be able to keep a librarian on staff? Is putting money towards other things worth keeping children from learning to read? To me the answer to both of these questions is incredibly clear: NO!
It is true that during times such as now, when all pockets are feeling lighter, there is no doubt that it is difficult to decide where money should go and how it should be spent. However, as I have stated, it is quite possible to argue for certain aspects of life to be allocated more money than others. By putting more money towards education, California easily will be able to save money in other areas. But the state has to be patient. The state must learn to prioritize which budgets receive how much money. Maybe if we put more money into our education system, the government would have learned better and finally realize how important education is to our present and future.
Yes when one looks at the numbers it can be viably argued that the monetary value of the cuts made has been necessary. But, in my opinion, the government has not prioritized these cuts properly. At a time when everybody is looking towards the future, the State has been incredibly misguided in having chosen the education budget as the one to be cut rather than countless other budgets.
While it may be controversial to make the claim that certain budgets be cut more than others, in the long-run, cutting the education budget less will directly cause there to be less need for larger budgets in other areas. Take for example the projected Health and Human Services budget for California in 2010-2011. Currently there has been approximately $29, 792, 401 allotted to this department. While I firmly believe that it is important to put money towards health services, by putting some of this money into the Department of Education, I believe that the same end can be reached. In having a larger budget to put towards education, California schools will be able to continue employing its teachers and staff. By keeping people on staff, schools will be better able to educate their students on important issues, such as healthy eating and practicing safe sex. Thanks to being able to maintain a staff that can teach the state’s children in such subjects, California will be able to save money when it comes to health services, meaning that less money can be put towards this department.
There is no doubt that during the recent recession everybody has been strapped for money. But those of us living in California are also put in a tough place when our education is forced to take a massive hit because there is not enough money. I can only speak for myself and those I have talked to, but a slight increase in taxes to ensure that there is a future for California’s education system is something that is acceptable. By slightly increasing the amount of taxes paid to the state, thee will be more money that can be divided amongst the individual departmental budgets, in particular education.
The situation has become so dire for some schools, such as Carthay Center Elementary in Los Angeles Unified School District 4, that fundraising has begun within the school in order to be able to pay the salaries of some faculty members. The school needs to raise $20,000 before September 30 in order to be able to keep its librarian on staff. I ask the following to the state of California and those deciding the budget: is it really worth not providing schools with enough money to be able to keep a librarian on staff? Is putting money towards other things worth keeping children from learning to read? To me the answer to both of these questions is incredibly clear: NO!
It is true that during times such as now, when all pockets are feeling lighter, there is no doubt that it is difficult to decide where money should go and how it should be spent. However, as I have stated, it is quite possible to argue for certain aspects of life to be allocated more money than others. By putting more money towards education, California easily will be able to save money in other areas. But the state has to be patient. The state must learn to prioritize which budgets receive how much money. Maybe if we put more money into our education system, the government would have learned better and finally realize how important education is to our present and future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)