Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well, it seems to me from what the White House has released today that the President has re-worked the lesson plan component and is making it available online. That gives parents a chance to review it.
If you want your child to see the broadcast and it is not being shown at his/her school, CSPAN is running it afterwards. If you want to view the broadcast live, CNN has been announcing that they are going to carry it.
Well, it seems to me from what the White House has released today that the President has re-worked the lesson plan component and is making it available online. That gives parents a chance to review it.
If you want your child to see the broadcast and it is not being shown at his/her school, CSPAN is running it afterwards. If you want to view the broadcast live, CNN has been announcing that they are going to carry it.
I don't think the President was ever involved with the lesson plan component. It was the Department of Education, specifically the Teaching Ambassadors Fellows. It has been available online for awhile. I reviewed it on Saturday (might have on Friday, not sure).
Paragraph from ed.gov, below which are links to the lesson plans:
"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."
I don't think the President was ever involved with the lesson plan component. It was the Department of Education, specifically the Teaching Ambassadors Fellows. It has been available online for awhile. I reviewed it on Saturday (might have on Friday, not sure).
Paragraph from ed.gov, below which are links to the lesson plans:
"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."
You may very well be right. I had read the original material - have not read the new material. It seemed from what CNN said that concerns parents might have voiced have been addressed. I think most parents would appreciate the President's responsiveness.
I would say it makes it very clear that the President is not concerned about helping successful kids excel . . . he is only concerned with those who are failing. He is doing exactly what he said he would do - "help level the playing field" for those who are NOT successful. That seems pretty divisive to me. Where is the initiative and concern to create more challenging programs so our kids can compete internationally? He is only addressing the drop out rate - get more kids through high school. How about challenging programs for the kids who are not lagging behind and failing? We spend more $$$ on at risk children than we do the ones who excel! Now, where is the EQUITY in that?
I'm a bit perplexed at the way you're viewing this as if Obama is throwing successful kids under the bus, but if you're genuinely concerned about enhancing the success of kids that are already doing well, start by voicing your opposition to NCLB. And even so, what Obama is saying (or going to say) applies to kids already doing well; he's simply reinforcing the habits they already possess. The things you mention are things that should be done on the local level by school administration; you can't address schoolchildren with things like that.
And it seems that you have something against education doing what it's designed to do, and that is give as many children equal opportunities to succeed as possible, i.e. level the playing field. I'm extremely puzzled by that stance. It would almost seem as though you wouldn't mind seeing an official caste system take shape here in the U.S.
I'm a bit perplexed at the way you're viewing this as if Obama is throwing successful kids under the bus, but if you're genuinely concerned about enhancing the success of kids that are already doing well, start by voicing your opposition to NCLB. And even so, what Obama is saying (or going to say) applies to kids already doing well; he's simply reinforcing the habits they already possess. The things you mention are things that should be done on the local level by school administration; you can't address schoolchildren with things like that.
And it seems that you have something against education doing what it's designed to do, and that is give as many children equal opportunities to succeed as possible, i.e. level the playing field. I'm extremely puzzled by that stance. It would almost seem as though you wouldn't mind seeing a caste system take shape here in the U.S.
Actually, I was just playing devil's advocate - and also (as I mentioned in an earlier post) I had heard other parents discussing this - from both sides - and these are the thoughts I heard bandied about.
I find it all very interesting - both sides of how folks have reacted.
I feel our public education system is broken - much like the healthcare system. We pour dollars into the mechanism, but it doesn't seem we are getting the performance we should expect.
I don't know that I have any answers . . . but I have thought about it a lot.
I do know that we spend more resources on children who are not succeeding than we do on kids who are. Even our state lottery money going to education goes to at-risk children more than any other group. I am not saying that it isn't needed! I am merely pointing that out as something to think about - as with the high drop out rate - are we being successful with our efforts?
I feel that Federal Mandates have NOT created a system of equality where No Child is Left Behind. I feel teachers are often put in the position of teaching to the lowest common denominator in the class, spending disproportionate amounts of time trying to get children up to speed, while the kids who are already excelling are not challenged enough. This is my own personal observation (as a parent and as a teacher in the past) and also what I hear from other parents and teachers. Teachers are underpaid - yet expected to render miraculous results. It is just a tough situation all the way around. Yes, we want all children to succeed - but couldn't we be using some other methodologies to achieve this? Tutoring? Intensive material management? Just some thoughts - I surely do not presume to have all the answers.
I want ALL children to succeed. Further, I want all children to get not only a high school diploma, but have access to higher education so they can have a career and a fulfilling life.
I would love to write more, but don't want to get off track with this being about Obama's speech to school children . . . so let me say that I am glad that the White House took parents' concerns into account, even if I felt calling these parents' concerns part of the "silly season" was insulting. I think it is smart that the President shows he cares what parents think - after all - that is a big component to a child's success and achievement in school - parental involvement.
My school is showing it, but parents may write a note opting their child out.
Personally, I think all kids should see it. So many kids do not care about their education because their parents don't either. It could be a wake-up call for some.
Get over it, he's the president and he can talk to the kids if he wants. And you can keep your kids home. Stop crying , you can try to steal another election in 3 more years.
Classic. Someone is still bitter about 2000.
And this comment comes after a little community organizer-nothing comes out of nowhere with his army of Acorn crooks and swindles the presidency on a campaign of lies, a campaign that relied totally on platitudes of nothingness while relying 100% on charisma and 0% on discussing the issues.
We are now witnessing what an empty suit this joke of a man is as his ratings go down the toilet and he loses control of everything. And everyone who voted for him got duped. Plain and simple.
Well, at least the dems can prove to us that they can indeed find a bigger loser than Jimmy Carter.
Oh, by the way, I've read the speech. Its not a big deal. A few lines in it that I don't like but whatever. And of course its been watered down dramatically from what it originally was supposed to be. And, of course, I think this was all planned by Obama to distract from other issues.
And my kid has been programmed to say, if asked what she thought of Obama, that he is "yucky" and "we don't like him at our house."
I think the vitriol poured into discourse about this and other matters, and people's insistence on being "right", are starting to accomplish what the 9/11 terrorists set out to do: divide and destroy this country. It's not what the President is doing or not doing, it's the hatred being spewed around so freely.
It's hard for me to give credence to people's views whose only goal seems to be to tear down our President... but maybe that's my part to do in this, to find common ground, to focus on what I can do to make this country better, not where I disagree so strongly.
Something Laura Bush is hoping happens as well, it looks like. It was so nice to hear a rational voice in all this.
Well, at least the dems can prove to us that they can indeed find a bigger loser than Jimmy Carter.
If the nation had stuck with the programs that Jimmy Carter put in place we would all be better off now. Namely alternative energy, limiting oil imports to 1977 levels, investment in eductation, consumer protections, job protections, etc etc. Jimmy Carter made two mistakes during his presidency that got him demonized by revisionists for the next 30 years.
First he asked Americans to make due with less.
He refused to start a war with Iran
Beyond that, he did more for Americans at the person level than any other president that has come since from both parties. He encouraged people to go to school and become educated and get involved in their country.
In any case however, i assume from your comments that the real reason you are against Obama's speech to the kids, is that you are just against Obama. That is your right, nobody suggests otherwise, If you feel that Sarah Palin and John McCain would be a better example for the children here in Charlotte, nobody says you can't feel that way either.
However this is a simple message, you can read it yourself, for kids to stay in school. Given the statistics that I posted earlier, that 2 in 5 or more of new adults in in Mecklenburg are not getting a minimum education, I would think the solutions to that issue should transcend domestic national politics.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
