The great melting pot, or the great stink pot?

We had to define diversity and talk about diversity in America. I got a little off topic.

Diversity means a great variety of the same kind of thing. You could say that a supermarket has a diverse selection of soups. Diversity can also refer to different kinds of people. Many people would say that New York City is the most diverse city in the world. I believe our society is becoming too diverse. With the internet, television, and ease of travel, I think every culture is becoming more and more diluted. At its root, American culture is the most susceptible it being overrun or replaced because it doesn’t have the hundreds or thousands of years or tradition behind it. Sharing and mixing cultures does have its advantages, as it brings greater knowledge and understanding of other people. You must be careful however not to let the weaker culture be squashed out by the dominant culture.

To continue with the soup analogy, if you mix every kind of soup together it does not create the greatest soup in the world, it in fact makes a really yucky soup. For American Culture to be a real culture all of the "flavors" and "ingredients" can't overpower or cancel each other out. I am NOT saying that we should deport everyone I am more saying we need to change the image of what it is like to live in America. This is not a place where you can have all your old customs and traditions (like a caste system or marrying 12 year olds) and have a big house with 2 cars in the garage. But that is the image that people outside of the U.S. think it is like here. I can live exactly how I was in my home country, except I can also have all the material possesions I could dream of!

I look at it this way. Imagine an island and it has only six inhabitants. A native and someone from Egypt, India, China, England, and France. Each person continued to live they way they had in thier home country. Some interacted and were friendly to a few, and some refused to talk with anyone. This island could be described as very diverse, but what culture could you say it had? No one works together for common goals, no one worships the same way, no one even teaches thier children the same way. It is in fact a clashing of cultures.

Can my teacher be my drinking buddy?

·To what degree do you think a teacher's private life should truly be private?


First off, what is the definition of “private life”? I’m not trying to be a lawyer here, but I think this is a key distinction that must be clarified. I would say that most people’s definition of a “private life” is whatever you do off the clock; be it go to a movie, out to dinner, or anything really. This definition I believe is wrong. If you have left your house you are now out in PUBLIC. People see you, interact with you, and you interact with them right back. Private Life I feel is when you are in your own house, or your own thoughts, or anything that does not involve, interact with, or affect anyone else. If you want to dance around your own house with underwear on your head and jelly smeared on your thighs be my guest. But when you are out in public you aren’t Jimmy the worlds greatest Jelly Dancer, you are Mr. Smith, fifth grade teacher out enjoying a movie. And if you can’t handle that responsibility then you picked the wrong career path buster.

·Should what the teacher does on his or her own personal time, always be protected by the law?

This view I feel is a little unconventional, but it’s what I think. I believe people should be allowed to be responsible for themselves. As I stated above I feel you should be free to do whatever when you are in your own house, or your own thoughts, that does not involve, interact with, or affect anyone else. That goes for just about everything. Drugs, drinking, everything. But I cannot stress enough IT MUST NOT INVOLVE, INTERACT WITH, OR AFFECT ANYONE ELSE. I am fine with you getting so high you can tell the difference of the colors robins’ egg blue and sky blue by taste alone. But you must be in your own house, and not leave or endanger anyone else. The minute whatever you step outside to listen to sunshine, then it would be illegal. Severely illegal. Mandatory prison time and then drug free probation. I know this thinking has some flaws, and I’m not going to keep explaining everything (I could keep going. And going, and going..) But the answer to the question I think that as long as it in no way affects anyone else then it should be legal.

·Is a teacher completely free to live his/her life in whatever way he/she decides?

Yes and no. Parents choose to send their children to school for what reason? To Learn, not just facts and numbers, but how to be a successful person in this world. If school was only about A B C’s and 1 2 3’s then torture would be a far more effective teaching tool than any teachers use today. But thankfully it’s not just that. Parents want their children to learn how to be a part of society, and that requires a moral basis and a code of ethics. I believe parents should be much more involved with choosing their child’s education and not just necessarily leaving it up to the nearest public school. They should find a teacher that expresses the same ethics and morality that they share. Now I’m not supporting KKK Elementary, but if a teacher wants to express their religious views, or sexual preference, as long as it fits with what the parent wants them to learn they should be allowed to do it. This is all within reason of course.

A Question of Trust

This week I had to find an article and review it. Here is my review of it:

Article Title- A Question of Trust
Author- Anonymous
Source- Scholastic Administr@tor

This article discussed the views of Ronald D. Stephens, the executive director of the National School Safety Center. That is an independent nonprofit group that focuses on school crime prevention and safe-school planning. He discussed his thoughts on using security cameras in schools. Stephens gave the opinion that security cameras are not the end all solution to solving school violence and vandalism and in fact can cause extra hostility. He gave an example of a school in Minnesota that had cameras, metal detectors, and security guards but none were able to stop a student from killing 7 people in the school with a handgun in 2005. He later did clarify that he thought security cameras were a good solution for solving immediate problems like: Who is tagging the cafeteria walls, or who is breaking into the soda machines. He ended these thoughts by stating that schools should be careful how they use their power to enforce security. He said “If the school does something that does not use common sense or good judgment, they will ultimately have to answer for that in the courts."

I agree with Mr. Stephens for the most part. My work recently installed security cameras all around the campus and I am annoyed thinking that I am being watched all the time. I sometimes feel a bit rebellious and see what I can get away with on camera. And if I feel that way, imagine a middle school full of pre-teens. My solution unfortunatly is much more costly than cameras and therefore TUSD would never go for it. I would hire more monitors. I know a few monitors and one in paticular is more than just hired muscle. He gets to know all the kids, good and bad, and he relates with the and develops a basic relationship. That’s something a camera could never do. I also agree that cameras can be a nessesity to try and catch repeat offences. There are at least 19 other ways listed in our textbook that help reduce violence and vandalism. Some of them listed on pages 118-119 are: Creating alternative schools for repeat offenders; having a zero-tolerance policy for bringing weapons to school; establishing high expectations for the behavior and performance of students and staff; and create classroom enviroments centered on respect and kindness. All of the suggestions in the text book have a common theme. It’s about getting involved with the students and educating them, not monitoring them like prisoners. We as teachers are not sheperds herding around mindless sheep who need electric fences to keep them safe, we are instead trail guides showing the student the way so that one day they can make the trek on their own.

It's dark, and we're wearing sunglasses. Hit it.

This is my idea for the contract the Nationals baseball team should offer phenom pitcher Steven Strassberg, who they just selected with the number one pick in the draft. This pitcher throws 102mph and people think he could be the greatest ever.

Here's what I would ideally offer. (I don't know if this contract would be legal or not) I offer him 7 years/up to $35 million structured like this: $10 million is a signing bonus to be paid over the first four years. He automatically gets that. During that time he gets paid the salary of $88,750 for every year he is in the minors and salaries of $400,000, $500,000, $550,000 and $700,000 for time spent on the Nationals' major league roster. Then at the end of the 4th year the team has an opt out clause they can exercise ONLY IF he has spent at least half his time as a National on the DL. For the 5th year he receives a salary of $5 million dollars. At the end of the 5th year HE has an opt out clause if he wishes. If he does NOT opt out, he receives a no trade clause for the final two years and a salary of $7.5 million and $10 million respectively. Here's why I do it. First they can afford it. If he really is all that and a bag of chips then he will bring in enough money to pay that total contract. The 4th year opt out clause is just in case he turns into Mark Prior( no need to shoot yourself in BOTH feet with an overpaid injured pitcher) the 5th year opt out clause is if he can smell the money buried under the New Yankee Stadium. He doesn't have a no trade clause then however so if the Nationals suck( which you know they will) they can shop him and get whatever they can for him before he bolts. He gets the no trade clause if he doesn't opt out so that after he decides to stick with the marriage the Nat's cant turn around and divorce him the next year.I think that is very fair for both sides of a player with that much potential/talent. I just have no idea if that contract would be legal or not, but I think it would be.

Look! A Title!

Your text describes Age-Sex Pyramids of populations of countries in 5 year age cohorts. Choose a few countries of different socio-economic levels i.e. Sweden and Bolivia, or Canada and Botswana. Analyze and compare their Age-Sex Pyramids. What population issues can you conclude could be associated with each? Can we go beyond socio-economic issues and make assumptions on types of economic or political systems?

I chose to compare India and Switzerland, two VERY different countries with two very different Age-Sex pyramids. Switzerland maintains a mostly rectangular pyramid, which coincides with the fact that it is a well developed country. One interesting thing about it though is that the overall population of Switzerland is projected to decrease by 2050. In each population summary the number of average child bearing adults (20-44) drops by several tens of thousands. This then causes the number of children born to drop, thus continuing the cycle. The only way I can think to explain this is that the population continues to focus less and less on raising a family and instead focuses on maintaining the economy and industry of Switzerland. I have no first hand experience but I am told that Switzerland is a very beautiful and expensive country to live in. Perhaps any influx of immigration will be mostly older more established families and retirees.India on the other hand appears ready to explode in population over the next 50 years. The pyramid for the year 2000 is a clearly defined evergreen tree indicating an under developed country. The average life span is currently pretty low, with the same number of people ages 60+ as the small range of 30-34, about 76 million. The projections however change rapidly and by 2050 the pyramid is no longer an evergreen shape but a very large rectangle. It estimates that there will be 1.5 billion Indians between the ages of 0-59 with no age group any higher than the other. To me this indicates they are projecting India to become MUCH more developed in the areas of healthcare, education, and nutrition. In highly developed countries the birth rate lowers and in India this will also apparently be the case. There will be so many child bearing adults however that the overall number of children age 0-4 will stay the same as 2000, about 120 million. My guess is that if you are in the field of healthcare or education or anything else that flourishes with a large population, India is the place you want to be for the next 50 years.

Sorry, this is for my Geography class, its more boring than EDU but I thought you might find this interesting.

If men are from Mars, and women are from Venus, and boys play with toys, what do girls get... grills?

Respond to the following: As a student have you noticed that teachers pay more attention to boys than girls? Why do you think teachers favor boys in class? What steps can you take to prevent yourself from shortchanging girls when you become a teacher?


It sure seems that teachers pay more attention to boys, but is it because they favor them more? I say certainly not. I believe it is because a teacher knows that if he or she stops paying attention to the boys in the class for even just a moment, the average boy will have enough time to tear his books in two, jump on his desk and prance around the room screaming something about root beer and jellyfish sandwiches. OK, so I exaggerate, but only by a little. The heart of the matter is that a boy's attention span and learning method is different than a girl's, and it requires a much more hands on approach. Boys, and men for that matter, like to do, build, and experience to gain new learning. As our textbook even states " A researcher at Harvard University argues that schools don't accomidate boys' learning styles and classroom needs." That is how the male mind works. My favorite way to play when I was little was to take things apart and try and put them back together. Did I want to spend the morning reading a manual, or did I want to spend the morning building through trial and error until I fixed it again? I learned by doing, and there is the problem. There is a time for lecture and listen. Far too many teachers in my many years of classroom experience however have made lecture and listen their bread and butter. Boys, and really all children, can only take so much of that. Teachers need to, and I believe slowly are, expanding their teaching repertoire to include alternate teaching methods to reach all the children. That's what I love about our textbook. It addresses that need in the hope of weeding it out entirely. The more children are engaged in the classroom, the more they will learn. Until all teachers add alternate learning methods however, teachers eyes will be firmly focused on the boys.

Let's fail a kid for a change...

ok, I'm a terrible person, I'm sorry. I can't post regularly to save my life. But to help with that, I am going to start posting some of my assignments that I write about, because you can pretend that they are interesting too. so without further adu...

Name one common practice in schools that you would like to change. Describe why and how you would make the change.

My wife is a middle school music teacher for TUSD and I was pretty shocked when she told me about this awhile back. Her middle school and others, regularly promote children on to high school even if the child has failed one or more of their core classes. The way she explained to me how they get away with it is this: There is no standard credits for admittance to high school. High schools want kids to have taken math, science, reading, etc, however there is no mandate saying that they had to have passed any of those classes. My wife told me of a mother who last year had to beg the school board to hold her daughter back because she failed SIX out of SEVEN classes her eighth grade year. She obviously was not ready for high school however the middle school was willing to say she was. It also doesn't help that TUSD is an open district, meaning that parents can choose which school to send their children to. Shiny 100% promotion rates help make the schools look smarter or more successful than they actually are. What a school won't tell you is that everyone was premoted because no one COULD fail. How would I fix this? It wouldn't be with an entrance exam to high school, I deplore standardized testing. I would simply just require every student have a passing grade in the core subjects before they could attend high school. If summer school is needed for the child to raise the grade, then so be it. It's what they would tell the child to do in high school anyway...

We multiply like we mathmatists...

Yes, the weekend has come and gone. I suck. But I want you all to know, I am researching the topic that I am going to write the president, and my printer ran out of ink. So, I may not be quick, but rest assured, you will have QUALITY. In other news, after considering a hostle takeover of TUSD after what seems like months of stupidity and indescision they might have started to redeem themselves. I still cannot reccomend anyone to enroll thier child in any TUSD school on the eastside however. Time to shower and get ready for the day!

Coming soon to a theater near you...!

So my next post is not going to be about TUSD, it is going to be a letter I intend to sent to our president. What could it be about? Will I thank him for his hard work? Will I ask for front row U2 tickets? Do I just want to say "Hey"? Stay tuned and find out this weekend!

Waste Allocation Load Lifter Earth-Class (WALL-E)

(this started as a comment on Bethany's blog, but it just got longer and longer so I made it a post of my own.)

I have already come to terms with the fact that Tucson will become a neo Garden of Eden when the waters rise, and honestly I wouldn't leave here even if you paid me though I might consider moving to Colorado Springs. There is no doubt in my mind that the Earth will at least become like it is portrayed in Idiocracy and at the very worst we are only a few hundred years away from leaving Wall-E behind to clean up our mess.

The two main pollution problems are trash and air contamination. Of the two, we have more viable solutions to greatly reduce air polution. Here's a question I can't find an answer to: We can make solar panels. Yuma to Tucson rarely recieves rain or even clouds. WHY ARE THERE NO GIANT SOLAR PANEL FIELDS FROM YUMA TO TUCSON?!?!? To give credit, there has been a big push in Tucson for roof top solar panels (I guess the government will pay you like they pay the failing banks if you get your own solar panels.) Hybrid or electric cars would be nice too, and I guess some company is looking to build an electric car charging station in Casa Grande so electric cars can make it from Phoenix to Tucson. That would be nice. Electric and Hybrid cars would, in the sort term however, produce more trash and I'll be honest with you, I don't know what to do with it all.

Trash sucks. EVERYONE currently produces some amount of unrecycleable, unreusable unredusable trash. I really don't know what we are going to do with it all. We can't just bury it(or could we...) we can't just burn it(see pollution #1) we can't afford to put it in giant rockets and shoot it at the Sun(GREAT idea though...) I honestly feel overwhelmed when I try and think about how to solve this garbage situation. Here are a few thoughts I came up with before my brain turned to mush:
1. Have the government open giant recycle factories in every major city. The main job of these factories would be to go through the current landfills and find any and everything that can be recycled. There is over 200 years worth of trash in these landfills, and I bet that if it is all properly sorted, the amount of non-recycleable, non-reusable trash would actually be alot less than the current size of our dumps. Think of the jobs this would create, think of the extra resources that could come out of a dump!

1a. Charge MUCH larger trash taxes based on the WEIGHT of your dumpster. This will pay for the recycling centers, AND encourage people to make less trash. I think 1 and 1a are genius ideas.

2. Nuke the trash. Ok, this idea is a work in progress. I don't think irradiating the planet will help, so maybe we build giant rockets, fill them with trash and a bomb, send them to space and set them off. Cheaper than shooting them to the Sun, AND think of the cool fireworks show in space. (note: idea #2 is not endorsed by me or anyone else who has a proper head on thier shoulders)

(Edit: After posting this I told my wife all that I had said and after metioning this idea she thought it was terrible because setting off bombs in space would piss off the aliens. Man, I love her.)

Well, all this talk of trash has made me hungry, so I think Ill end it here. Who knew that I had such opinions... I did, thats who. I was going to post a lengthy blog on how I think TUSD is shooting themselves in the foot and then taking a great big dump on it, but I'll save that for later I guess.

Money can't buy knives...

I was going to post something deep and thoughtful, but my back and neck are so sore from throwing a baseball with my wife that I just want to lie down. I'll come up with something soon, do you worry.

AAAAAAAAAAAND We're back!

Wow, two years between posts is a long time. I'm happy to say I am now married! AND I have 3 kids! AND that was a total lie! Haha, fooled you. But anyway, I am much happier than I use to be, and I hope to start posting more again since I finally reset my password. Deep thoughts to come, that I promise!