Living in an online, technologically advanced era certainly has its perks; however, young teens’ text messaging, picture messaging, and social networking can get out of hand if not properly monitored. If abused, these forms of communication can lead to “cyber-bullying” and can profoundly affect the emotional and psychological development of a child.
A quickly emerging form of communication amongst young teens is “sexting.” “Sexting” is the act of sending or posting nude or partially nude images of minors. Many youth are convinced that anything they want to do with their bodies and their phones is their business. Cell phones are a relatively new form of communication in our society and provide young individuals an unprecedented privacy and freedom from their parents or guardians. One in five teens has used this privacy and freedom to explore their sexuality by having sent a sexually-suggestive text or picture message. Young teens are often pressured by friends, respond to a sexual message they’ve received, and others willingly send nude photos of themselves to a boyfriend or girlfriend. These teens often make these decisions without thinking about the consequences. “Sexting” poses a significant social danger. Digitally sent sexually explicit material can be very easily and widely distributed. Trust is broken when an image is forwarded without the originator’s consent and this image is impossible to get back, having the potential to circulate forever. Youth engaging in this form of communication risk reoccurring embarrassment and victimization.
Youth who sext may face charges of producing, possessing, or distributing child pornography. As long as sexually-suggestive messages circulate, anyone with them may face charges. Furthermore, these pictures can find their way into the hands of sexual predators that prey on children and collect child pornography. This type of exploitation can be psychologically devastating for the creator.
How can responsible parents prevent their children from “sexting?” I believe the establishment of household rules and expectations regarding text messaging and access to the internet can help a great deal with this conflict. When expectations are not met, youth should face highly restricted and monitored access to the internet and texting functions. Although restricting and monitoring a teen’s access to the internet and other mobile devices may reduce his or her feeling of independence and sense of personal autonomy, this type of control may be necessary to protect the innocence of children everywhere.
Friday, April 30, 2010
STEM vs. more Arts
A compelling argument was made on both sides of the Curriculum debate today.
I was particularly impressed with Stuart’s presentation. Although his arguments may not have been delivered with the same fervor or passion of his opponent, his calm resolve and two statements in particular seemed to have a huge impact in persuading me on his side of the debate. His admission, in his opening, that his career choice was to be a Math teacher, while arguing for a more, well rounded curriculum that includes the arts, humanities, music and physical education was compelling in itself. At least it was compelling enough to provoke interest. The second point Stuart made seemed to cement my opinion on this particular debate. He stated that students that participate in band generally do better in Math. With that point stated it seems nobody is arguing whether or not Math is important however, perhaps the argument should be there might be more than one way to get there. Way to go Stuart!
I was particularly impressed with Stuart’s presentation. Although his arguments may not have been delivered with the same fervor or passion of his opponent, his calm resolve and two statements in particular seemed to have a huge impact in persuading me on his side of the debate. His admission, in his opening, that his career choice was to be a Math teacher, while arguing for a more, well rounded curriculum that includes the arts, humanities, music and physical education was compelling in itself. At least it was compelling enough to provoke interest. The second point Stuart made seemed to cement my opinion on this particular debate. He stated that students that participate in band generally do better in Math. With that point stated it seems nobody is arguing whether or not Math is important however, perhaps the argument should be there might be more than one way to get there. Way to go Stuart!
Bullying
Social/Relational aggression among high school kids is harmful and dangerous. An argument can be made that kids will be kids and that bullying is just another one of those character builders that kids must face. Social/relational aggression has evolved with the evolvement of technology. What use to be teasing in the hallways, something that happened that a victim would put behind them, has now turned into something much larger. With text messaging victims of bullying can be continually harassed and their peer’s negative opinions of them can quickly spread in and out of school. An embarrassing encounter between a bully and a victim can now easily be video taped. What was once just gossip through the school can now easily be published on the internet. These technologies give an entirely new dimension to bullying and the degrees to which bullies are able to impact their victims. One could argue that social/relational aggression is not as harmful as physical aggression; however, after dissecting the outcomes of both types of aggression, in terms of the impact it has on its victims, we can reasonably conclude that bullying in any form is harmful.
Thank you all
Now this blog is going to be a bit different then the ones that we all have been posting thru out the year. I want to say thank you to all of you. This class with the interaction with each other thru the whole time is the best ever. now giving speeches to me is hard but we have all gotten thru it. My hats off to you. Talking to each other in your group about the topic and coming up with ideas or given your option about what is in class and expersing it out. Man this is the first class that we where able to fight on what we belive or hear out on what it is like in the world around us, by living , kids, love, what ever. I dont have a study about this or nothing I felt that we all need a pat on the back for the work everybody has done. Now that we only have over a little of a week, I can say this what a great run. Everybody in class has been able to speak out about everything. Well sorry Mondays it takes a few mins for us to warm up but still we have voiced what we think, and to me or to anybody that is the best way to understand everything or anything in this world. The teachers can tell you this is what it is and you take notes and move on in your life but to sit down and talk to each other with the teacher there improves everything. Well sorry to me I have seen where we started off a bit shy but now, how cow there is nothing holding us back. Thank you all.
More art in school?
I do believe that fine arts, vocational, and physical education classes are vital for secondary education. Granted the majority of jobs and advancements in today’s society fall within the realm of STEM courses, and in order to ensure the success of our nation and the children who live here we need these courses to be stressed. However, that does not mean that we can toss the other classes by the hip side. STEM does not include English, history, geography, or health classes and there is no arguing that these are important. With No Child Left behind there has been a push to STEM courses, and the ones left out are the fine arts and PE. These courses are necessary because not all students excel in the areas and they will not all grow up to have careers in these fields. Just because their strengths lie in other domains doesn’t mean that they should be given a lower chance at success. Currently I am attending Tech to become a high school Math teacher, so I know the importance of such courses. However, we cannot neglect the fine arts, if we do we will be neglected some of the brightest young minds in our country.
spanking your child
Now a days most parents are afraid to spank your child in public at all. Just knowing that if somebody sees you doing this act will they turn you in to the courts for abusing your child? Most of us that grew up with the paddle or the belt on the wall know that spanking was hard at that time but for me did me good. Ya we all did something to piss off our parents. Man I did it all the time not to do it but just because it was fun till you find out it was dangerous and that the parents are more upset of what you did because of the danger of it. My parents divorce when I was 7 so I lived with my mother thru the school year and then with my father thru the summer time. I was the only daughter and the only granddaughter on my father’s side so I can say this I was daddies little girl. I hate my mother so to live with her for 9 months of the year was like living in hell. On the first day of summer going to my fathers was the best time ever. But back to the spanking, my mother had a belt with my name on it and one for my brother’s name on it hanging on the wall next to the door. Man when she said to grab that belt and go to your room. Now that I am a mother of 2 boys and a aunt of 3 boys I only spanked my oldest a couple of times and I felt so bad that I had to change. I did not want to turn out to be like my mother. So I am a stern person. When I say something in my house my family knows that I mean business and that you better do what I tell you to do. I love my boys but I am their mother. Not their friend. So I have to be stern to them to keep them out of trouble. So if you choice to be the person that spanks or not and just send them to the corner you are being a parent.
Debate
Today there was a couple of groups that were able to give there debate. The difference on the option on each side is good. Now the one that I have to comment on is the arts vs. math etc. Now the reason why I am commenting on this one is that we did not get a chance to commit in class. I have two teens’ boys. One is in 6th grade that is jr high and the other one is 9th grade high school. Now my youngest loves to draw anything and everything. There was one person that said that there is not much math in high school above geometry. Well that is not true. My youngest just took the nations math test to see where he falls in “normal range or higher”, he received his test scores back yesterday. Man I am so proud. He scored to be a senior beginning college level. In the school that they are in, you do learn calculus and beyond. So I don’t know or understand the diff. you can request for the higher math if you want to in high school. Don’t get me wrong in some cases there might be where the schools only teach the lower math but I do believe there should be arts in class.
NCLB PROGRAM
Americans both care about their schools and want them to improve. Though adults give the nation’s public schools only mediocre grades—a plurality confer a “C”—they are willing to invest more money in public education and they are reasonably confident that doing so will improve student learning. They are also open to a host of school reforms ranging from high-stakes student accountability to merit pay for teachers to school vouchers and tax credits that would give low-income families greater access to private schools. By sizable margins, they back reauthorization of No Child Left Behind, the federal law that mandates school accountability.
The public, however, also appears selective in its desire for change. Americans balk at some market-based reforms, such as paying more for teachers who work in fields like math and science, where quality teachers are in scarce supply. And substantial percentages remain undecided about charter schools and other reform initiatives, suggesting that the current national debate over school policy has the potential to sway public opinion in one direction or another.
All this—and more—is indicated by a new national survey of U.S. adults conducted under the auspices of Education Next and the Program on Education Policy and Governance (PEPG) at Harvard University. Here they report the opinions of both the public at large and three ethnic subgroups (whites, African Americans, and Hispanics). They also distinguish the views of those who have worked for the public schools from those who have not. Except for opinions on school choice issues, differences across ethnic groups are generally smaller than those between public school employees and those who have never been employed by the schools.
Perhaps the most popular school reforms are those that hold students and schools to account for their performance. Accountability policies take many forms, but the public generally supports the concept in all its guises, including the federal No Child Left behind Act.
On the most high-profile issue of the day—the debate over extending the life of NCLB—a majority of those polled indicate that they support the law’s reauthorization with no more than minor changes. NCLB requires states to establish performance standards in math and reading; to test students against those standards annually in grades 3 to 8 and again when students are in high school; and to intervene in schools that fail to make adequate annual progress toward the goal of near-universal student proficiency by 2014.
Despite NCLB’s bipartisan origins, controversy has beset the statute ever since its passage. The law places unprecedented demands on the states, several of which have passed resolutions critical of it. Reporting on recent grass-roots efforts to overturn the law, Time magazine noted that “more than 30,000 educators and concerned citizens have signed an online petition calling for the repeal of the 1,100 page statute.”
It is perhaps surprising, then, that the American public holds NCLB in reasonably high regard. When asked for their view on the matter, 57 percent of respondents prefer that Congress renew the act either as is or with minimal changes. Still, the intense debate over NCLB appears to be eroding public support for the law as a symbol. When NCLB is described as “federal legislation” rather than mentioned by name, as was the case for a randomly selected half of our survey respondents, support for extending its accountability provisions rises to 71 percent.
Similar levels of support are observed across ethnic lines, with never less than one-half of African Americans, Hispanics, or whites recommending that Congress renew the act as is or with minor changes, regardless of how the question is asked. Current and former public school employees, however, consistently register lower levels of support for NCLB.
Just because the public favors reauthorization of NCLB does not mean that it opposes efforts to amend the act by establishing a single national standard. Currently, NCLB asks each state to set its own standards, design and administer its own tests, and establish its own definition of student proficiency. A number of prominent Washington think tanks, including the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation and the Center for American Progress, have argued that proficiency standards vary so widely that they should be replaced by a single national definition. But other groups, on both the right and the left of the political spectrum, oppose any single standard as unnecessary federal intrusion into local matters. Given the controversy surrounding all proposals to establish a uniform national standard, it is noteworthy that nearly three-quarters of the American public support the concept.
Separate and apart from NCLB, which focuses on the performance of schools and districts, the public strongly supports reforms designed to hold individual students accountable for their performance on state tests. Currently, only a few states (e.g., Florida) and cities (e.g., Chicago and New York) require students to pass a test in order to move from one grade to the next, thereby modifying the practice of “social promotion,” which keeps youngsters with their peers by passing them to the next grade regardless of academic performance. Twenty-three states currently require students to pass an examination in order to graduate from high school, but the rest, a group that includes Illinois, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, do not.
Despite the fact that holding students accountable for their performance is far from a universal practice in American education, student accountability commands widespread public support No less than 81 percent of all respondents support requiring students in certain grades to pass an exam before they proceed to the next grade, and 85 percent support requiring students to pass an exam before graduating from high school. Only 10 percent of respondents oppose either policy. African Americans, Hispanics, and current and former school employees are all modestly less likely to support graduation exams than other respondents, but in no case does more than 16 percent of a subgroup oppose the policy.
Although Americans appear quite willing to use test results to determine the pace of students’ progress through school, they are less enthusiastic about using them to open up alternative routes into higher education. Only 45 percent of respondents support allowing students who pass an exam at the 10th-grade level to transfer immediately to a community college, as recently proposed by the New Commission on the Skills of the American Workforce. Rather, 55 percent of all respondents, and roughly the same share of each subgroup, support requiring students to complete four years of high school.
High-stakes student accountability is more popular than the simple practice of publishing the average test performance of each school’s students. Only 60 percent of those surveyed support the latter policy, which is less stringent than the NCLB requirement that states publish the percentage of students in each school, and of various subgroups within it, that are proficient in math and reading. Just 20 percent of the public oppose publishing average test scores at the school level, with another 20 percent expressing neither support nor opposition.
NCLB also requires that schools be reconstituted if they fail to meet state-mandated performance benchmarks for five years in a row. Currently, states and districts are granted a great deal of flexibility in deciding how to reconstitute schools. Options range from minimal reorganization to replacing teachers and administrators to conversion into charter schools. When asked about these options, Americans express greater support for replacing teachers and principals than for converting failed district schools into charter schools. Roughly two-thirds of the adult population support replacing teachers and/or principals at persistently failing schools, and only one in ten opposes such options. Just 29 percent support converting the schools into charter schools. Still, that doesn’t signal widespread opposition to charter schools, a topic we return to below. Only 25 percent of the population actually opposed charter-school conversion, while fully 46 percent take no position one way or the other.
Many accountability initiatives have long enjoyed the support of policymakers and the general public. More controversial in state and national policy discussions have been proposals to enable parents, especially low-income parents, to exercise greater choice over their children’s education through school vouchers, tax credits, charter schools, or home schooling. Despite that controversy, a plurality of the general public supports choice initiatives. African Americans and Hispanics express more support for school choice than do white Americans. Opponents of most forms of choice, meanwhile, constitute a fairly small segment of the American public, though many adults have yet to be persuaded one way or the other.
Few education reforms inspire as much debate as do proposals to provide low-income families with vouchers that would allow them to send their children to private schools. Apart from programs serving disabled students, only Wisconsin, Ohio, and Washington, D.C., have publicly funded voucher programs in operation. Elsewhere, state legislatures, referenda, and/or state courts have defeated proposed voucher initiatives.
Despite the legislative and legal disputes, a plurality of the public supports the voucher idea. Forty-five percent of those surveyed favor offering vouchers to low-income families, 34 percent oppose the idea, and 20 percent neither favor nor oppose it. Both African Americans and Hispanics are markedly more likely to support vouchers than are whites. Indeed, 68 percent of African Americans and 61 percent of Hispanics favor vouchers, compared to 38 percent of whites. Only 15 percent of African Americans and 23 percent of Hispanics oppose vouchers, compared to 40 percent of whites.
When asked about the design of a school voucher program, 85 percent of Americans support allowing parents using vouchers to choose both religious and nonreligious private schools, a practice the U.S. Supreme Court upheld in 2002. Though African Americans appear slightly more likely to support the option of sending a child to a religious school, subgroup differences on this matter are small.
Tax credit programs that help defray the cost of a private education are a less publicized, but more widely available, form of school choice than vouchers. Such programs exist in one form or another in several states, including Pennsylvania, Arizona, Minnesota, Illinois, and Florida. The greater incidence of tax credit programs could be due to the broader public support for this approach than for vouchers. Nationwide, 53 percent of adults favor tax credits, while only 25 percent oppose them, with another 23 percent neither favoring nor opposing the idea. As with vouchers, African Americans and Hispanics express the highest levels of support for tax credits.
Compared to school vouchers and tuition tax credits, state legislatures have generally found charter schools to be more politically palatable. Charter schools are public schools of choice that are privately managed under a renewable performance contract that exempts them from many of the regulations that apply to other public schools. The first of these schools opened its doors in Minnesota in 1992, and their numbers have grown steadily since. In the 2006–07 school year, roughly 4,000 charter schools served 1.15 million students across 40 states and Washington, D.C.
For the most part, Americans either express support for charter schools or opt not to take a position one way or the other. Forty-four percent of respondents support their formation, and another 42 percent neither support nor oppose them. Only 14 percent of Americans oppose charter schools. Differences across subgroups are reasonably small, with slightly higher proportions of African Americans supporting charter schools and school employees opposing them.
Three-quarters of Americans also believe that charter schools should be given at least the same amount of funding per child as district-operated public schools, in contrast to the widespread state practice of awarding charter schools less funding. Even 68 percent of present or past school employees endorse funding charter schools at levels equivalent to (or better than) those of traditional public schools.
Though Americans appear cautiously supportive of charter schools, most are confused about them. For example, when asked whether charter schools are free to teach religion (they are not), or whether they can charge tuition (they cannot), almost two-thirds of the public confesses to not knowing the answer and another quarter offers the wrong answer. Indeed, only 13 percent of adults nationwide correctly note that charter schools cannot teach religion and 16 percent correctly observe that charter schools may not charge tuition.
Importantly, support for charter schools appears especially high among those adults who reveal higher levels of knowledge about them. Fully 66 percent of those adults who correctly answer both of the knowledge-based questions support charter schools, as compared to 38 percent of those who answer both incorrectly. Similarly, 81 and 68 percent of the two respective groups claim that funding for students in charter and other public schools should be equalized. Opposition to charter schools, to the extent that it exists, appears to be highest among those who know less about them.
Under NCLB, if a school has failed to meet the law’s accountability provisions two years in a row, parents have the option of sending their child to a higher-performing public school within the same district. But only about 1 percent of those eligible to move to a different school under NCLB have taken advantage of this option. As a result, choice advocates have proposed revisions in the legislation that would expand the range of options available to parents.
A clear plurality of the public at large supports revisions in NCLB to increase the number of choice options available to parents whose children attend low-performing schools. Sixty percent support allowing them to select a school in another district, a step that would vastly expand the range of options, yet has not received serious consideration in Congress. Only 14 percent oppose it. Meanwhile, 47 percent support giving parents the option of sending their child to a private school, and only 23 percent oppose it.
Americans reveal low levels of support for the option of sending children to a failing school within the same district. Only 25 percent express support, probably because the public sees scant benefit from moving a child from one failing school to another.
The number of American families opting to teach their children at home has increased dramatically in recent years. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, about 1.1 million students were being home schooled in the United States in 2003, the most recent year for which official data are available, up from roughly 850,000 students in 1999.
Forty percent of the public say they know a family that currently home schools its children. And most Americans support allowing home-schooled children to take advantage of public school resources, including attendance in selected classes and participation in sports and other extracurricular activities. Americans who know a home-schooling family are especially likely to support a more expansive array of schooling options for them. Fully 68 percent of adults who themselves know a home-schooled child believe that such children should have the option of taking selected classes at local public schools, and another 61 percent support allowing them to participate in sports and extracurricular programs, as compared with 48 percent and 51 percent, respectively, of adults who do not know a home-schooled child.
Just as lively (and divisive) as the controversy over school choice and home schooling has been the debate over teacher pay and licensure. On these issues, pluralities of the public support some, but not all, reform proposals.
Although most scholars agree that teachers represent the single most important school contributor to a student’s academic progress, consensus breaks down as soon as the question turns to how best to design compensation systems to enhance teacher quality. On one side, the National Education Association defends the current practice of paying all teachers the same amount, except for differences based on past experience and graduate coursework. On the other side, groups such as the Teaching Commission, and the Progressive Policy Institute have proposed that we pay teachers according to how much students are learning in their classrooms (often as measured by test results), the difficulty of the teachers’ classroom environment or how hard it is to recruit quality teachers knowledgeable in a particular subject.
Though willing to entertain some reforms, the public is in no rush to abandon the traditional compensation system. Forty-five percent agree that a teacher’s salary should depend in part upon students’ academic progress while 31 percent disagree, and the remaining 24 percent choose not to express an opinion. A bare majority of Americans support increasing the salaries of those teaching in challenging school environments instead of using the same funds to offer all teachers a smaller pay increase. By a two-to-one margin, however, respondents would prefer to see new funds for teacher pay distributed equally across all teachers rather than targeted toward those in high-demand subject areas, such as math and science.
To be fully certified, public school teachers in nearly every state must complete a requisite number of courses in education and the subject matter appropriate to their chosen area of instruction. In recent years, however, some states have modified this practice by allowing principals to hire college-educated individuals who have not completed the coursework ordinarily required for certification. The innovation remains controversial, as many education schools and teacher organizations believe that a teacher is only qualified after completing appropriate pedagogical training.
A plurality of the public, however, supports a more permissive teacher-recruitment policy. Forty-eight percent of those surveyed say that principals should be allowed to hire college graduates who lack formal teaching credentials, while only 33 percent oppose the idea, and 20 percent express no opinion. A larger share, 41 percent, of current and former school employees opposes the idea.
The average amount of money spent per pupil by U.S. public schools has more than doubled in real terms since 1970, and the number of pupils per employed teacher has declined from 22 to 15. Teacher salaries have only barely kept pace with average wages nationwide, and the gap between teacher salaries and those of other college-educated workers has actually widened. Given these facts, some policy analysts claim that current spending levels are more than adequate and that further cuts in class size are unnecessary, while others say much more needs to be done, especially on the teacher salary front.
The public is closely divided on this issue. Specifically, 51 percent say that spending on public education should increase, while 38 percent think it should remain the same and 10 percent favor spending cuts. Support for additional spending is highest among African Americans, Hispanics, and current and former public school employees, with more than 60 percent of each of those groups calling for increases in public school budgets.
Most Americans also express confidence that spending more on public education in their local school district would result in increased student learning. Fifty-nine percent of the public is at least somewhat confident that spending would increase student learning, as are 80 percent of African Americans, 70 percent of Hispanics, and 64 percent of school employees.
Given the stagnation of teacher salaries in the last three decades and the concomitant decline in class sizes, it is somewhat surprising that the public continues to prefer further cuts in class size over increases in teacher salaries. When asked whether education dollars are better spent increasing teacher salaries or decreasing class size, fully 77 percent prefer the latter option. Though scholars continue to debate the benefits of class-size reductions, the general public would appear convinced.
The expanding reach of federal and state policies notwithstanding, responsibility for the day-to-day management of the nation’s 14,000-plus school districts still lies primarily with locally elected school boards. Yet turnout for school board elections, which are often held at dates different from those of general elections, is notoriously low, often lingering in the single digits. Such dismal figures may make it possible for a motivated group, such as the local teachers union or advocates of a particular curricular innovation, to disproportionately influence election outcomes. One wonders, then, whether the relatively small number of voters who show up on Election Day share the general views of other district residents.
When using poll data to examine turnout, it is important to keep in mind that Americans consistently overstate their propensity to vote in U.S. elections. As a result, the precise proportion of Americans who claim to vote in school board elections—40 percent, in our survey—is less informative than differences in reported turnout across the various subgroups. Whites and African Americans appear slightly more likely than Hispanics to have voted in their last school board election. Important differences, meanwhile, are observed among public school employees and the rest of the population. Indeed, current and former public school employees are 21 percentage points more likely to claim that they voted in their last school board election than is everyone else.
Support for school choice in all its forms and for NCLB appears to be somewhat weaker among voters in school board elections than among the population as a whole. Compared to the rest of the population, those who claim to have voted in the last election are 8 percentage points more likely to oppose school vouchers, 7 percentage points more likely to oppose charter schools, and 9 percentage points more likely to oppose tax credits. Voters are also 10 percentage points more likely to oppose the renewal of NCLB when the law is mentioned by name, than is the rest of the population; but when the law is described but not named, nonvoters are actually 2 percentage points more likely to oppose its renewal.
When asked to grade the public schools, respondents in this survey offer assessments that look much like those observed in other national surveys of education attitudes. Forty-three percent give the schools in their own community an A or a B, 38 percent assign a C, and 18 percent give a D or F. When asked about public schools around the nation, these grades drop. Just 22 percent of Americans give public schools in general an A or B, 55 percent a C, and 24 percent a D or F.
Among the various subgroups, some interesting differences emerge. When asked about the schools around the nation, whites, Hispanics, and African Americans offer similar assessments, as do public school employees and the remaining population. When asked about the schools in their own district, however, African Americans and Hispanics give notably lower marks than whites. Fully 48 percent of whites award the schools in their community an A or B grade, as compared to 40 percent of Hispanics and 27 percent of African Americans. The responses of public school employees and everyone else do not differ significantly.
For the most part, how Americans evaluate the public schools in their own communities does not strongly correlate with their support for the reform proposals included in this survey. One exception, though, bears mentioning. Though respondents who give their schools a C, D, or F are just as likely as respondents who give their schools an A or B to support increases in school spending, the former group is twice as likely to express no confidence that more spending will improve student learning.
Conclusion:
This survey reveals a U.S. public that continues to support its public schools, but also one that wants these schools to become more effective and is willing to endorse a wide variety of reforms it thinks will bring that about. Americans, for the most part, are pragmatists. They are searching for something that works. It could be accountability, it might be choice, it could be class-size reduction, and it may be changes in teacher recruitment and pay. Reform proposals in each of these areas have pluralities in support of them. In some instances, though, sizable portions of the public remain unpersuaded by advocates on either side.
Clearly, the debate over American education is far from over.
Kids Need to Feel Safe at School
As I was mindlessly flipping through the channels on the television yesterday, there was yet another story of teenage bullying in the news. I'm not completely sure if it only seems like this particular issue is more prevalent because we have been talking about it so much in class lately and I am subconsciously more apt to be interested in it or if this is becoming an issue of epic proportions.
This incident was particularly troubling to me. A high school boy in Arkansas was hospitalized, suffering bruises and some broken bones. This is troubling because it was the second time this school year the same bully had beaten up the same victim. The first attack however apparently didn't raise many eyebrows because it was not as severe as the second, which landed the victim in the hospital. So I'm asking myself if that is the criteria for schools to get involved, they don't step in until it is serious enough the victim ends up in the hospital? This particular schools claim was that they are understaffed and the area (and the school) has become overpopulated. It seems like I've heard that one before, there is not enough teachers to monitor all of the students all of the time. Now, I'm not saying the schools should be 100% responsible; the parents and the bully himself need to assume some accountability,however all kids should be able to feel safe at school. With all of these recent bullying examples, this doesn't seem to be the case.
Something has to be done about this issue, it is simply not just going to go away. how long can the schools play the "our hands are tied card" without taking steps to try and correct this problem. If the schools are not somehow held accountable of bullying that occurs on and off school grounds, I believe that is a grave disservice to our children.
http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=102736938327&id=93710322266
This incident was particularly troubling to me. A high school boy in Arkansas was hospitalized, suffering bruises and some broken bones. This is troubling because it was the second time this school year the same bully had beaten up the same victim. The first attack however apparently didn't raise many eyebrows because it was not as severe as the second, which landed the victim in the hospital. So I'm asking myself if that is the criteria for schools to get involved, they don't step in until it is serious enough the victim ends up in the hospital? This particular schools claim was that they are understaffed and the area (and the school) has become overpopulated. It seems like I've heard that one before, there is not enough teachers to monitor all of the students all of the time. Now, I'm not saying the schools should be 100% responsible; the parents and the bully himself need to assume some accountability,however all kids should be able to feel safe at school. With all of these recent bullying examples, this doesn't seem to be the case.
Something has to be done about this issue, it is simply not just going to go away. how long can the schools play the "our hands are tied card" without taking steps to try and correct this problem. If the schools are not somehow held accountable of bullying that occurs on and off school grounds, I believe that is a grave disservice to our children.
http://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=102736938327&id=93710322266
Epigenetics
For decades, the scientific community’s view of heredity has been written in the language of DNA. Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is the genetic material of all living organisms. DNA is made up of two strands consisting of building blocks called nucleotides. Nucleotides are made up of the sugar deoxyribose, a phosphate group, and a base. The four bases of DNA are adenine, guanine, cytosine, and thymine. The nucleotides present in the chains are arranged in an elegant double helical structure. This structure is quite dynamic and has the ability to tip, buckle, roll, tilt, stretch, shear, and shift.
Gregor Mendel, the father of modern genetics, described genes as factors. Genes are scientifically defined as specific sequences of nucleotides and are generally the sequences used to describe the traits that are passed on from parent to offspring. Mendel’s scientific accomplishments lead him to conclude that inherited characteristics are determined by genes and that each organism contains two copies of each gene (one inherited from its mother and one from its father). Alternative versions of genes called alleles account for variations in inherited characters.
Although recombinations and genetic mutations have driven how phenotypic traits are passed on from one generation to another, recent discoveries associated with the field of epigenetics are changing the way researchers view heredity. Epigenetics is the study of heritable changes in gene function that occur without a change in the genetic sequence. Epigenetic theory relies heavily on gene activation and inactivation by way of mechanisms such as DNA methylation, histone acetylation, and RNA interference. Recent research suggests these epigenetic mechanisms are more than just “small players” in phenotypic transmission and development. Epigenetics may provide ways to connect past and future generations that, at one time, were never thought possible. This theory proposes the environment and experiences one’s ancestors were exposed to can have a great affect on one’s mental and physiological health. Epigenetics can change the way we think about our relationship with every generation.
Epigenetics certainly opens a wide array of questions related to developmental psychology. With respect to the “nature” aspect of development, the once semi-clear picture of an individual’s inherited characteristics is now blurred by the concept of genes’ ability to turn “on” and “off” at different points throughout childhood and adulthood. Below are links to an awesome PBS video describing epigenetic theory.
Ghost in Your Genes
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOid4jrCeFE
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg_XpenoBaM
Gregor Mendel, the father of modern genetics, described genes as factors. Genes are scientifically defined as specific sequences of nucleotides and are generally the sequences used to describe the traits that are passed on from parent to offspring. Mendel’s scientific accomplishments lead him to conclude that inherited characteristics are determined by genes and that each organism contains two copies of each gene (one inherited from its mother and one from its father). Alternative versions of genes called alleles account for variations in inherited characters.
Although recombinations and genetic mutations have driven how phenotypic traits are passed on from one generation to another, recent discoveries associated with the field of epigenetics are changing the way researchers view heredity. Epigenetics is the study of heritable changes in gene function that occur without a change in the genetic sequence. Epigenetic theory relies heavily on gene activation and inactivation by way of mechanisms such as DNA methylation, histone acetylation, and RNA interference. Recent research suggests these epigenetic mechanisms are more than just “small players” in phenotypic transmission and development. Epigenetics may provide ways to connect past and future generations that, at one time, were never thought possible. This theory proposes the environment and experiences one’s ancestors were exposed to can have a great affect on one’s mental and physiological health. Epigenetics can change the way we think about our relationship with every generation.
Epigenetics certainly opens a wide array of questions related to developmental psychology. With respect to the “nature” aspect of development, the once semi-clear picture of an individual’s inherited characteristics is now blurred by the concept of genes’ ability to turn “on” and “off” at different points throughout childhood and adulthood. Below are links to an awesome PBS video describing epigenetic theory.
Ghost in Your Genes
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOid4jrCeFE
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg_XpenoBaM
Bullying
Current surveys show that approximately one-third of today’s children feel they are the direct or indirect victims of bullying. Phoebe Prince is the latest, most well-known victim of this type of harassment. Fifteen year-old Prince committed suicide in response to being bullied by some of her high school peers. Nine Massachusetts teens were indicted for driving Prince to her eventual suicide and charges include statutory rape, stalking, criminal harassment, and a violation of civil rights with bodily injury.
With more and more extreme cases surfacing every year, who is ultimately responsible for these social injustices? Who should take the blame? In a recent interview with CNN’s Larry King, long time anti-bullying advocate Dr. Bill Cosby, suggests that adults (teachers, counselors, and administrators) present in schools need to be more responsible and recognize these problematic social situations and “wake-up” to the serious issues that surround bullying. Dr. Cosby also expresses a concern regarding the technology children are exposed to. The violence witnessed daily while watching television or searching the web promotes violence and the mistreatment of individuals. Bill Cosby states that bullying can be recognized and can be stopped. Sometimes bullying and misbehavior are ignored not only by school faculty, but are also ignored by parents. Children understand it is wrong to mistreat their peers, but someone must intervene when this type of behavior is employed and more attention should be given to these children.
Larry King Live
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq7QA2k-3xg
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rn-hG8CJdfE
With more and more extreme cases surfacing every year, who is ultimately responsible for these social injustices? Who should take the blame? In a recent interview with CNN’s Larry King, long time anti-bullying advocate Dr. Bill Cosby, suggests that adults (teachers, counselors, and administrators) present in schools need to be more responsible and recognize these problematic social situations and “wake-up” to the serious issues that surround bullying. Dr. Cosby also expresses a concern regarding the technology children are exposed to. The violence witnessed daily while watching television or searching the web promotes violence and the mistreatment of individuals. Bill Cosby states that bullying can be recognized and can be stopped. Sometimes bullying and misbehavior are ignored not only by school faculty, but are also ignored by parents. Children understand it is wrong to mistreat their peers, but someone must intervene when this type of behavior is employed and more attention should be given to these children.
Larry King Live
Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kq7QA2k-3xg
Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rn-hG8CJdfE
Terror Management Theory
Exactly why do humans experience fear? Moreover, why do people experience anxiety, a less concentrated form of fear in which it is not always obvious what it is a person is afraid of. Fully understanding the human condition requires a greater comprehension of the roots of anxiety. Anxiety is kept hidden from one’s awareness and is an inherent aspect of the human condition that plays an important role in everything one does.
Terror Management Theory attempts to explain that fear and anxiety are permanent attributes of the human condition. We are born with an evolved natural inclination to stay alive and fear generally drives this tendency. Throughout time, the human race has developed more sophisticated intellectual abilities that make possible the survival in a wider range of environments. However, these unique intellectual abilities also make us aware of the absolute certainty of death. Essentially, we are forced to realize that death can come unexpectedly and for any number of reasons.
Terror management theory suggests the unavoidable conflict between a core desire for life and an awareness of the inevitability of death creates the potential for terror. Human beings know exactly what they are afraid of and understand there is no escape from reality.
Cultural worldviews and self-esteem are two components developed to manage the terror caused by the “survival vs. awareness of death” conflict. Cultural worldviews provide order, meaning, and a comforting view of the world that helps us come to terms with the conception of death. Additionally, self-esteem allows us to view ourselves as important contributors to what our culture has defined as a meaningful life. The effectiveness of cultural worldviews and self-esteem depends heavily on support from others and also from those with differing beliefs.
Pyszczynski, Tom. What are we so afraid of? A terror management theory perspective on the politics of fear, Social Research 2004.
Terror Management Theory attempts to explain that fear and anxiety are permanent attributes of the human condition. We are born with an evolved natural inclination to stay alive and fear generally drives this tendency. Throughout time, the human race has developed more sophisticated intellectual abilities that make possible the survival in a wider range of environments. However, these unique intellectual abilities also make us aware of the absolute certainty of death. Essentially, we are forced to realize that death can come unexpectedly and for any number of reasons.
Terror management theory suggests the unavoidable conflict between a core desire for life and an awareness of the inevitability of death creates the potential for terror. Human beings know exactly what they are afraid of and understand there is no escape from reality.
Cultural worldviews and self-esteem are two components developed to manage the terror caused by the “survival vs. awareness of death” conflict. Cultural worldviews provide order, meaning, and a comforting view of the world that helps us come to terms with the conception of death. Additionally, self-esteem allows us to view ourselves as important contributors to what our culture has defined as a meaningful life. The effectiveness of cultural worldviews and self-esteem depends heavily on support from others and also from those with differing beliefs.
Pyszczynski, Tom. What are we so afraid of? A terror management theory perspective on the politics of fear, Social Research 2004.
Competition
Competition is everywhere in today’s society, but what affects does competition have on a child’s psyche? Children are often introduced to the concept of competitiveness as they begin to participate in competitive athletics. Paulo David, author of Human Rights in Youth Sport: A Critical Review of Children’s Rights in Competitive Sports, found that children do not always understand the concept of competition until age six or seven. However, more and more parents are shuttling their children into competitive, organized sports at a younger age to gain an advantage and collect the best skill necessary to compete and be a starter at the high school and collegiate levels.
Fred Engh, author of Why Johnny Hates Sports states, “If kids are competitive at early ages, then they may not be trained in how to fail.” Kids may be scared to fail and make mistakes when parents and coaches place an emphasis on winning. Mistakes are a part of the learning process and learning from these mistakes can result in success. This idea not only serves an important purpose in children’s organized sports but is recognized at the high school, collegiate, and professional levels. If kids are not allowed to fail, and face consequences when they do so, parents and coaches are training them to be afraid of trying. Allowing children to try and fail extinguished their fear of their parents, coaches, peers, and of humiliation.
Too much competition too early may cause “burnout.” Jean Lawrence, author of Stress of Youth Sports, defines the relatively new term “burnout” as “the athlete’s natural response to chronic, ongoing stress.” Lawrence suggests “burnouts” begin to manifest and children start to quit their given sport by age thirteen.
While attending Montana Tech, I have contributed to youth athletics in the community of Butte. I have coached two sixth grade boys’ basketball teams and a sixth grade Little Guy Football team. I am a very competitive individual and stress the importance of competition and the hard work required to succeed with all of my kids. I do agree with all of the arguments above, but I do believe there is a healthy form of competition all young individuals should experience whether it be academic, athletic, or by another means.
Fred Engh, author of Why Johnny Hates Sports states, “If kids are competitive at early ages, then they may not be trained in how to fail.” Kids may be scared to fail and make mistakes when parents and coaches place an emphasis on winning. Mistakes are a part of the learning process and learning from these mistakes can result in success. This idea not only serves an important purpose in children’s organized sports but is recognized at the high school, collegiate, and professional levels. If kids are not allowed to fail, and face consequences when they do so, parents and coaches are training them to be afraid of trying. Allowing children to try and fail extinguished their fear of their parents, coaches, peers, and of humiliation.
Too much competition too early may cause “burnout.” Jean Lawrence, author of Stress of Youth Sports, defines the relatively new term “burnout” as “the athlete’s natural response to chronic, ongoing stress.” Lawrence suggests “burnouts” begin to manifest and children start to quit their given sport by age thirteen.
While attending Montana Tech, I have contributed to youth athletics in the community of Butte. I have coached two sixth grade boys’ basketball teams and a sixth grade Little Guy Football team. I am a very competitive individual and stress the importance of competition and the hard work required to succeed with all of my kids. I do agree with all of the arguments above, but I do believe there is a healthy form of competition all young individuals should experience whether it be academic, athletic, or by another means.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Rules Domain
I really enjoyed listening to this news report on rules for kids. I learned many tips from it. I especially liked the little boy answering questions. He sure sounded so sure of himself. The boy helped by showing that he understand the difference in rules. The little boy definitely did not mind most of his mothers rules and understood why they were there. I thought it interesting on how the little boy wanted to be able to choose his own friends and he made that very clear. I agree and understand why a child would want to be able to choose his own friends. It gives him a sense of control over his life. Any child wants to have some sort of independents.
For my daughter, I will strive to be understanding of the rule domains and use their advise accordingly. I am already starting to see her independence showing. She wants to do things without my help or assistance. If I try to help, she gets extremely upset. This happens more when she is studying a toy or object and try to help her. I am going to have to work real hard on not telling her what to wear and not to wear as she gets older. This is going to be a difficult one for me. I will have to remember to use the advise on giving my daughter choices not just demand her to do it my way.
After listening to the program, I understood completely why rules were in their own categories. Before, I had not even thought of the real difference between rule domains and their purposes. I will work hard to make sure our rules in the house are fair and try to always use choices.
It is going to be an exciting journey being a mom. Something that I thought would never be, because a child just never seem to fit into our traveling military life. We were always to busy. Well she is a blessing and I am learning as I go. I am so glad I took developmental psychology. It has taught me a lot and made me more aware.
For my daughter, I will strive to be understanding of the rule domains and use their advise accordingly. I am already starting to see her independence showing. She wants to do things without my help or assistance. If I try to help, she gets extremely upset. This happens more when she is studying a toy or object and try to help her. I am going to have to work real hard on not telling her what to wear and not to wear as she gets older. This is going to be a difficult one for me. I will have to remember to use the advise on giving my daughter choices not just demand her to do it my way.
After listening to the program, I understood completely why rules were in their own categories. Before, I had not even thought of the real difference between rule domains and their purposes. I will work hard to make sure our rules in the house are fair and try to always use choices.
It is going to be an exciting journey being a mom. Something that I thought would never be, because a child just never seem to fit into our traveling military life. We were always to busy. Well she is a blessing and I am learning as I go. I am so glad I took developmental psychology. It has taught me a lot and made me more aware.
Good luck Parents
Monitoring what you think is going on:
I am assuming that most parents want to think that they are closely monitoring their children, especially their teenagers. I have recently asked my mother if she felt that she monitored her children well at all stages of our youth. When my mother replied that she felt that she became better at monitoring us with each one of her children reaching their teenage years, I about fell over in my chair. I am not suggesting that her parenting was negative in anyway or she didn’t monitor us, but her perception on what good monitoring was conflicted with my high school memories. I was the youngest of four children, I caught on fast how to provide a response that my mother would accept and yet I could still do what teenagers do without having consequences. In my family it was a rule that we had to be home for dinner. Catching up on the day was typical table talk however, as us children grew older so did our ability to sensor what we discussed. As learned in class, it is found that adolescents who did not eat dinner with their parents five or more times a week had statistically higher rates of smoking , drinking, marijuana use, fighting, and initiation of sexual activity. I can see the truth to this but I am pretty sure that at least one of us four children was up to one or all of these things throughout our teen years.
This brings me to my point, how do parent really monitor what their children (teens) are doing? Do some parents just luck out and have that “good” child who devotes all of his or her attention on education and school based clubs? I would say that I was an average child growing up, if I found interest in things such as sports activities, my mother would enroll me into the programs carrying the rule that I would be required to stick them out until the end. When I hit high school the only things that seemed important to me was my friends and whatever we were planning. I am not suggesting that all teenagers are out smoking marijuana and drinking but I do feel that no matter how much you monitor teenagers, most are in their autonomous state of thinking. My belief is that parents do need to monitor their children but finding that way to can be tricky. Monitoring to closely can create more deception and monitoring to little bring on countless risk factors. Additionally, I can remember parents of my friends whose parenting style of monitoring was to play the friend roll. In high school, I would always wonder why my parents were not “cool,” and accepting as my friends parents were. Reflecting back to it now they were still being sneaky, they were usually the kid(s) that were raising the bar of rebellious behavior.
I am assuming that most parents want to think that they are closely monitoring their children, especially their teenagers. I have recently asked my mother if she felt that she monitored her children well at all stages of our youth. When my mother replied that she felt that she became better at monitoring us with each one of her children reaching their teenage years, I about fell over in my chair. I am not suggesting that her parenting was negative in anyway or she didn’t monitor us, but her perception on what good monitoring was conflicted with my high school memories. I was the youngest of four children, I caught on fast how to provide a response that my mother would accept and yet I could still do what teenagers do without having consequences. In my family it was a rule that we had to be home for dinner. Catching up on the day was typical table talk however, as us children grew older so did our ability to sensor what we discussed. As learned in class, it is found that adolescents who did not eat dinner with their parents five or more times a week had statistically higher rates of smoking , drinking, marijuana use, fighting, and initiation of sexual activity. I can see the truth to this but I am pretty sure that at least one of us four children was up to one or all of these things throughout our teen years.
This brings me to my point, how do parent really monitor what their children (teens) are doing? Do some parents just luck out and have that “good” child who devotes all of his or her attention on education and school based clubs? I would say that I was an average child growing up, if I found interest in things such as sports activities, my mother would enroll me into the programs carrying the rule that I would be required to stick them out until the end. When I hit high school the only things that seemed important to me was my friends and whatever we were planning. I am not suggesting that all teenagers are out smoking marijuana and drinking but I do feel that no matter how much you monitor teenagers, most are in their autonomous state of thinking. My belief is that parents do need to monitor their children but finding that way to can be tricky. Monitoring to closely can create more deception and monitoring to little bring on countless risk factors. Additionally, I can remember parents of my friends whose parenting style of monitoring was to play the friend roll. In high school, I would always wonder why my parents were not “cool,” and accepting as my friends parents were. Reflecting back to it now they were still being sneaky, they were usually the kid(s) that were raising the bar of rebellious behavior.
Suicide Prevention
There has recently been a program on the E channel about bullying in schools and some have resulted in fatal outcomes. Not only does bullying need to be a primary focus in schools but I think action needs to be taken for suicide prevention in schools. I have not personally heard of anyone using the suicide hot lines, so new approaches should be taken.
A few years ago two of my good friends were buried within a month of each other from suicide. And both were on anti-depressants. They did not have the typical "anti-social" personalities. Actually both were quite popular and would do absolutely anything for anyone. After those tragedies I frequently heard people make the comment that "They were not the type to do that" or "They would have been the last person I would have expected to do something like this".
We need to change the thinking processes of who we would "label" as having that personality or would likely commit suicide. Everyone thinks it could never happen to them or someone they know, but 1 in 15 people suffer from depression in the United States. Not only that but anti-depressants alone can not be expected to make everything better.
Wrong dosage of anti-depressants can actually make the depression worse. It also takes 4 weeks for the anti-depressants to properly work...a long time for someone suffering from depression. It is not a magical pill that will make all the problems go away.
From personally knowing several people suffering/ or have suffered with depression I strongly believe there are other underlying issues that should be addressed. High stress levels can actually deplete serotonin levels, which are what anti-depressants are trying to fix. Counseling should be prescribed as frequently as the medicine has been.
Depression needs to be addressed as something that is common in society now....and issues need to start being faced head on, instead of the thinking that it can be avoided by just simply taking the medicine. We all know about heart disease, cancer, and car crashes as leading causes of death...but suicide is now also a major cause of death with certain age groups.
Some eye-opening statistics:
A few years ago two of my good friends were buried within a month of each other from suicide. And both were on anti-depressants. They did not have the typical "anti-social" personalities. Actually both were quite popular and would do absolutely anything for anyone. After those tragedies I frequently heard people make the comment that "They were not the type to do that" or "They would have been the last person I would have expected to do something like this".
We need to change the thinking processes of who we would "label" as having that personality or would likely commit suicide. Everyone thinks it could never happen to them or someone they know, but 1 in 15 people suffer from depression in the United States. Not only that but anti-depressants alone can not be expected to make everything better.
Wrong dosage of anti-depressants can actually make the depression worse. It also takes 4 weeks for the anti-depressants to properly work...a long time for someone suffering from depression. It is not a magical pill that will make all the problems go away.
From personally knowing several people suffering/ or have suffered with depression I strongly believe there are other underlying issues that should be addressed. High stress levels can actually deplete serotonin levels, which are what anti-depressants are trying to fix. Counseling should be prescribed as frequently as the medicine has been.
Depression needs to be addressed as something that is common in society now....and issues need to start being faced head on, instead of the thinking that it can be avoided by just simply taking the medicine. We all know about heart disease, cancer, and car crashes as leading causes of death...but suicide is now also a major cause of death with certain age groups.
Some eye-opening statistics:
- There has been a 60% increase in suicide rates since 1950
- Suicide is the 3rd leading cause of death in ages 15-24
- There are 33,300 suicides each year in the United States
- There are approximately 1500(known) failed suicide attempts per day
Is Abstinence Education the Best Sex Education?
Is abstinence the best sex education? No, because in my mind it is like sticking your head in the sand. Ostrich's stick their head in the sand when they are afraid. Does that save them from the predator? No, it does not. It just keeps them from having to face reality, that they are the prey. It will not save the ostrich, only make it easier for the predator.
In reading Thomas Lickona's viewpoint that he beliefs that abstinence education is the best sex education, I found myself thinking of the ostrich scenario. I could also tell he was very religious and pushing that "only religious people have values". In my way of thinking, hiding from a problem is not going to solve it. He did not even consider the natural biology stages of life. When puberty begins at age 11 or 12, and in some cases even earlier, kids are changing dramatically. They are going to ask questions or want to. If they are denied an answer, they will just go test it out for themselves. Kids are going to rebel against the fact that they are being controlled, yet, again, without proper facts to support his reasoning. It is a "just because I said so and it is wrong to have sex before marriage". Yet, he did have some pretty convincing evidences about how the abstinence education was working in certain schools, until I read Roffman's and Brick's side of the argument.
In reading Roffman's and Bricks side of the argument, I was surprised to find out a lot of Lickona's data had no supporting evidence. The evidence he used had been manipulated to suit his own purpose. He tried to show that in a couple of school's abstinence education was very effective on lowering the teen pregnancy and sexual activity in teens. When actually, those schools were pushing so hard on abstinence that kids were not reporting the truth, due to fear of reprisal. Later, non-bias surveys were done to prove that the numbers Lickona used were inaccurate. The new surveys showed increase in activity, not decreased as Lickona claimed.
I agree with Deborah Roffman and Peggy Brick side of the debate. The education about sex is needed in order for kids to be able to understand and evaluate their choices by knowing and understanding the consequences.
In reading Thomas Lickona's viewpoint that he beliefs that abstinence education is the best sex education, I found myself thinking of the ostrich scenario. I could also tell he was very religious and pushing that "only religious people have values". In my way of thinking, hiding from a problem is not going to solve it. He did not even consider the natural biology stages of life. When puberty begins at age 11 or 12, and in some cases even earlier, kids are changing dramatically. They are going to ask questions or want to. If they are denied an answer, they will just go test it out for themselves. Kids are going to rebel against the fact that they are being controlled, yet, again, without proper facts to support his reasoning. It is a "just because I said so and it is wrong to have sex before marriage". Yet, he did have some pretty convincing evidences about how the abstinence education was working in certain schools, until I read Roffman's and Brick's side of the argument.
In reading Roffman's and Bricks side of the argument, I was surprised to find out a lot of Lickona's data had no supporting evidence. The evidence he used had been manipulated to suit his own purpose. He tried to show that in a couple of school's abstinence education was very effective on lowering the teen pregnancy and sexual activity in teens. When actually, those schools were pushing so hard on abstinence that kids were not reporting the truth, due to fear of reprisal. Later, non-bias surveys were done to prove that the numbers Lickona used were inaccurate. The new surveys showed increase in activity, not decreased as Lickona claimed.
I agree with Deborah Roffman and Peggy Brick side of the debate. The education about sex is needed in order for kids to be able to understand and evaluate their choices by knowing and understanding the consequences.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Bullying in Schools
In gathering information for my debate, I was surprised on how bad bullying has gotten for middle school and high school kids. There is statistics saying the violence in schools has been decreasing since 1998. Yet, there is an increase in bullying leading to suicides of children and adolescents. Is it because the bullying incidents are getting documented more in schools than in the past? Is it due to the increase articles focusing on high levels of violence in adolescents in schools?
The media focuses on the most violent tragedies to write about, because those are what sells. You rarely see something printed that is not high violence related these days. Either way, bullying is a real problem in schools, including the trips from home to school and back again.
When I was in high school, bullying was definitely present, but not as brutal as it is now. I was the Deputies daughter growing up, so there was some incidents of harassment towards me. It was the worst in the seventh and eighth grade, but it never was any worse than name calling or jokes. Actually, I have never really classified it as being bullied, just referred to it as teasing. I had a reprieve from it, because when I went home it all ended. I had no cell phone or internet at home. They could not reach me when I was there. I know this helped me cope with it better. My parents were very supportive and listened to me when I talked to them about it. Then, they would explain to me why the other kids were so mean and how the best way was to handle it. I know that this saved me.
Now, due to the advancement of technology, bullying can reach victims at their homes. So the victims have no relieve from the tauntings. Even 8 year old kids carry cell phones now and have internet access. What is the best way to handle this? My feeling on this is not to let my child have a cell phone so young. I think the parents should have rules and motoring controls over the use of the internet when child is home. That way the child has some reprieve from the kids at school. I would make sure their is good communication and support for my daughter. So she would feel free to talk to me about anything. I know for me, growing up with my parents support and them communicating with me, helped me cope with the school pressures.
The media focuses on the most violent tragedies to write about, because those are what sells. You rarely see something printed that is not high violence related these days. Either way, bullying is a real problem in schools, including the trips from home to school and back again.
When I was in high school, bullying was definitely present, but not as brutal as it is now. I was the Deputies daughter growing up, so there was some incidents of harassment towards me. It was the worst in the seventh and eighth grade, but it never was any worse than name calling or jokes. Actually, I have never really classified it as being bullied, just referred to it as teasing. I had a reprieve from it, because when I went home it all ended. I had no cell phone or internet at home. They could not reach me when I was there. I know this helped me cope with it better. My parents were very supportive and listened to me when I talked to them about it. Then, they would explain to me why the other kids were so mean and how the best way was to handle it. I know that this saved me.
Now, due to the advancement of technology, bullying can reach victims at their homes. So the victims have no relieve from the tauntings. Even 8 year old kids carry cell phones now and have internet access. What is the best way to handle this? My feeling on this is not to let my child have a cell phone so young. I think the parents should have rules and motoring controls over the use of the internet when child is home. That way the child has some reprieve from the kids at school. I would make sure their is good communication and support for my daughter. So she would feel free to talk to me about anything. I know for me, growing up with my parents support and them communicating with me, helped me cope with the school pressures.
Sex-Ed or Abstinence-Ed?
In a continuation of talks in class and the reading on Sex-Ed or Abstinence-Ed I have a strong opinion that I would like to discuss. Although I do like the idea behind teaching only abstinence in the classroom I find it hard to believe that it would be the best education for our youth and teens. Abstinence is obviously the only way to completely prevent transmitting a STI or STD “Sexually Transmitted Disease”, and teen pregnancy, and I truly believe we should still preach to our youth that abstinence is the correct thing to do but, ultimately when a teen reaches this point of experimenting sexually it will be completely their own decision. So we really need to prepare them of the risks them could suffer from engaging in sexual intercourse.
I know people in today’s society find it hard to believe when someone in later adolescence is sexually abstinent. Now I’m not saying it is impossible for youth to stay sexually abstinent until marriage because I’m 19 and currently trying to achieve that goal and so far have. But, that being said I have experienced sexual temptations. Now if I had been taught only of abstinence it may be a different story because maybe I wouldn’t have some of the fears of teen pregnancy or STD’s that have crossed mind dealing with these temptations.
So what I don’t understand is if people believe that if abstinence only education is taught in the classroom sexually relationships between teens will just stop occurring because sex will still be talked about outside of the classroom. That doesn’t include the power and influence of the media across the world incorporating sex in nearly everything. Sex will still be everywhere we turn and look. Television, musical lyrics, commercials, posters, pictures, radios, and the list continues of things we see or hear everyday that have sex in them or are even completely about sex. There have been study’s that show no change in sexual relationships among teens that have experience abstinence only classrooms for 3 years in certain areas across our nation. Also these areas actually had a slight increase of teen pregnancy as they did not know proper ways to protect themselves. So if we know the youth of this nation and/or the world is going to experience sexual relationships by their own personal choices we should prepare them for the risks them may suffer from.
I know people in today’s society find it hard to believe when someone in later adolescence is sexually abstinent. Now I’m not saying it is impossible for youth to stay sexually abstinent until marriage because I’m 19 and currently trying to achieve that goal and so far have. But, that being said I have experienced sexual temptations. Now if I had been taught only of abstinence it may be a different story because maybe I wouldn’t have some of the fears of teen pregnancy or STD’s that have crossed mind dealing with these temptations.
So what I don’t understand is if people believe that if abstinence only education is taught in the classroom sexually relationships between teens will just stop occurring because sex will still be talked about outside of the classroom. That doesn’t include the power and influence of the media across the world incorporating sex in nearly everything. Sex will still be everywhere we turn and look. Television, musical lyrics, commercials, posters, pictures, radios, and the list continues of things we see or hear everyday that have sex in them or are even completely about sex. There have been study’s that show no change in sexual relationships among teens that have experience abstinence only classrooms for 3 years in certain areas across our nation. Also these areas actually had a slight increase of teen pregnancy as they did not know proper ways to protect themselves. So if we know the youth of this nation and/or the world is going to experience sexual relationships by their own personal choices we should prepare them for the risks them may suffer from.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Is Abstinence education the best education?
After reading the article for class even though the education that teaches abstinence is proven to have the lowest sexual intercourse rates, I still believe teaching kids' safe sex is needed. I know when my mom was going to give me the whole talk, it was pretty straight forward. Which I think helped me out in many ways. I knew I could go talk to her about anything that I had thoughts about and in school I didn't feel I could ask questions. I think sex education in high school is needed for kids whose parents didn't take the time to tell them about the birds and the bees. I do have to admit when I went through sex education in high school I thought it was funny but I did learn from it. I think if you talk to your kids at an early age that's good. It just seems that parents now a day's rarely have time to do much with their kids because they have to work so much to live a comfortable lifestyle. If it were me I would try to find a way to incorporate abstinence, safe sex, consequences of sex, and why you should wait for marriage, and how to go about peer pressure if you choose abstinence. I think getting information from your parents is different than getting information from school, that is why I believe both are essential to learning.
Should schools more closely monitor peer groups?
I was recently watching a special, where a school was coming under heat for a fight that happened there. The fight happened, within one peer group. It appears one girl was kicked out, and retaliated by jumping three group members with her sisters. One girl was rushed to the hospital. However, the other two were able to walk home. This was not the first time the peer group had caused trouble, and this all happened right outside school property.
All this raises my question should schools monitor peer groups more closely? I believe, schools should not monitor the groups more closely just better. Schools could stop a lot of violence and harassment by doing simple things. Simple things such as teachers being active in the children's lives, kepping their ears' open, and listening to the students. Then, the teachers can know about problems in advance, or be there when the problem is happening. However, schools should constantly monitor groups that cause problems. This could be done with weekly counselor visits or by asking peers what the groups are doing.
All this raises my question should schools monitor peer groups more closely? I believe, schools should not monitor the groups more closely just better. Schools could stop a lot of violence and harassment by doing simple things. Simple things such as teachers being active in the children's lives, kepping their ears' open, and listening to the students. Then, the teachers can know about problems in advance, or be there when the problem is happening. However, schools should constantly monitor groups that cause problems. This could be done with weekly counselor visits or by asking peers what the groups are doing.
Vido Games and Their Affects on Devlopment
Lately we have been hearing a lot about video game and their negative affects on health. I was curious if games could help people in any way. A group of researchers in California and Pittsburg compiled multiple studies looking at the affects of game play.
A study done in the late 90’s had participants play two computer games. One was Conjecture, a computerized word game, or Marble Madness, which the participant used a joystick to move a marble along a 3-d grid. The participants who used marble madness had a better feel for spatial representation. This meant they had better spatial visualization. They also had an easier time with target tracking and extrapolating spatial paths. Another finding, from a cross-cultural study, found that participants who played the game concentration on the computer improved their iconic skills. Those who played on a board were better at using their verbal skills. Iconic skills, and also spatial skills are crucial in scientific and technical reasoning.
Another aspect to look at is social development, which might be surprising. According to research from 1995, using computer players, showed that frequent players meet friends outside of school more than less frequent players and they had no differences in social interactions. Kids who played more frequently also made online friends. This study, however, did not include kids that spent 30 or more hours a week online.
This study was published in 2001, so it may be outdated. It dealt with computer players and a lot of the cited studies were done in video game infancy. A lot has changed, but I think that some of this information could still be useful. Also the games from the second paragraph were specific for a certain skill and was not your Pong or Modern Warfare 2, but people did learn better from the virtual or more interactive versions then from the board or word based activities.
Parents or Pop Culture? Children's Heroes and Role Models
When I first read this article the first thing I noticed was all the apparent holes in their study. The biggest flaw is the assumption that the role models are the only source for moral teachings for children. I admit role models can influence a person’s moral standings considerably; however, a person’s beliefs and morals are developed in so many other ways, such as their life experiences. Children also learn morals from school and their parents. Now these are the most influential possible Role Models, but the article puts too much emphasis on pop heroes being the sole role models. I believe that children start with their parents as role models and learn from them. Then choose more role models, usually from the media, that fit what they have already learned. Thus the actual influence of these pop heroes is minimized due to the parent’s teaching and the fact that an actual person is more influential than a picture.
Other flaws I noticed are that the statistics seem misrepresented and that there is a great deal of confounding factors that have not been accounted for. Some of these possible factors include, how much control the parents have over the children’s exposure to the pop media, i.e. how much television is allowed and what type of shows are watched. Also the data that states minorities and females are more likely to choose role models that are different than themselves, hence white and male. This is because of the proportion of possible role models that are white males and those that are not. Also that African Americans are more likely to choose professional athletes, maybe because this is what the majority of successful famous African Americans are. In the end it does state that the majority of our children do choose their parents as a role model. This is very important influence that we hold over children, and we must use it effectively in the raising of our children.
Other flaws I noticed are that the statistics seem misrepresented and that there is a great deal of confounding factors that have not been accounted for. Some of these possible factors include, how much control the parents have over the children’s exposure to the pop media, i.e. how much television is allowed and what type of shows are watched. Also the data that states minorities and females are more likely to choose role models that are different than themselves, hence white and male. This is because of the proportion of possible role models that are white males and those that are not. Also that African Americans are more likely to choose professional athletes, maybe because this is what the majority of successful famous African Americans are. In the end it does state that the majority of our children do choose their parents as a role model. This is very important influence that we hold over children, and we must use it effectively in the raising of our children.
The Nurture Assumption
The old nature vs. nurture debate. What effect do parents really have on their children? This has to be one of the oldest debates that developmental psychologists have argued about, and it seems to be an ongoing one. Both sides present valid points, however since I will be debating for the nature side for the final developmental psychology class debate starting this Friday, I will attempt to make (part of) my case for the idea that parents (beyond genetics) are inconsequential in determining how youth develop. I will do this by introducing and expanding on some of Judith Harris' points from our reading "The Nurture Assumption".
Harris introduces the "group socialization theory" in that reading, and at least to me, it makes a whole lot of sense. This theory basically states that the group is and always has been the natural environment of the child. Children as early as pre-school (ages 3-5) have a desire to fit in and begin to identify and pick up behaviors of other children. An excellent quote from Harris in that reading is "children identify with a group of others like themselves and take on the norms of the group-they don't identify with their parents because parents are not people like themselves-parents are grown ups". That makes a lot of sense doesn't it-kids reach an age where pleasing your peers and fitting in with them is more important than pleasing your parents-because they (your parents) will love you unconditionally. So if kids identify with their peers more (people like themselves) and are more influenced by those peers-at a crucial point in their development-a time when they are beginning to think abstractly about the world and strive to create an "identity" for themselves, whom do you think has more of an impact on the type of adult that person will become? Now, this is to assume the parents are "good enough"; meaning not abusive or neglectful. This is also a somewhat perplexing conundrum: does the negative influence by neglectful and abusive parents have a stronger impact to the outcome of the child than the positive influence of the so called "super parents" has to the child. In short I'm asking what percent of abused and neglected kids will have difficulties in life (social, psychological, emotional etc.) compared to what percent of kids from "super parents" turn out to be "super adults" themselves? Is the difference between "bad" parents and "good" parents far greater than the difference between "good" parents and "super parents", in terms of the outcome of their children? Harris and others who place emphasis on the nature part of this debate would argue that it is.
The first major influence on the child is the parent, I think we can all agree on that. It is the parent who is responsible for nurturing and caring for the child until the child can begin to, albeit slowly, care for themselves. There comes a time, however, when the child discovers other little people like themselves and they become part of a social group. An identity is then created within the group and even as ideologies and groups or people in the groups may change; the one constant is that most children will desire social acceptance, and especially during adolescence more so than parental acceptance.
Harris introduces the "group socialization theory" in that reading, and at least to me, it makes a whole lot of sense. This theory basically states that the group is and always has been the natural environment of the child. Children as early as pre-school (ages 3-5) have a desire to fit in and begin to identify and pick up behaviors of other children. An excellent quote from Harris in that reading is "children identify with a group of others like themselves and take on the norms of the group-they don't identify with their parents because parents are not people like themselves-parents are grown ups". That makes a lot of sense doesn't it-kids reach an age where pleasing your peers and fitting in with them is more important than pleasing your parents-because they (your parents) will love you unconditionally. So if kids identify with their peers more (people like themselves) and are more influenced by those peers-at a crucial point in their development-a time when they are beginning to think abstractly about the world and strive to create an "identity" for themselves, whom do you think has more of an impact on the type of adult that person will become? Now, this is to assume the parents are "good enough"; meaning not abusive or neglectful. This is also a somewhat perplexing conundrum: does the negative influence by neglectful and abusive parents have a stronger impact to the outcome of the child than the positive influence of the so called "super parents" has to the child. In short I'm asking what percent of abused and neglected kids will have difficulties in life (social, psychological, emotional etc.) compared to what percent of kids from "super parents" turn out to be "super adults" themselves? Is the difference between "bad" parents and "good" parents far greater than the difference between "good" parents and "super parents", in terms of the outcome of their children? Harris and others who place emphasis on the nature part of this debate would argue that it is.
The first major influence on the child is the parent, I think we can all agree on that. It is the parent who is responsible for nurturing and caring for the child until the child can begin to, albeit slowly, care for themselves. There comes a time, however, when the child discovers other little people like themselves and they become part of a social group. An identity is then created within the group and even as ideologies and groups or people in the groups may change; the one constant is that most children will desire social acceptance, and especially during adolescence more so than parental acceptance.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Risky Adolescents: More Mature?
Lately in class we have been talking a little bit about adolescents. Professor Risser had mentioned that the kids who were very popular engaged in not only pro-social behaviors but also highly aggressive behaviors as well. So I thought when I got home I would look up more research on the subject and find out what other views of adolescents might be skewed. Sure enough, it wasn't long before I came across another surprising finding about adolescents. It turns out that the more risky adolescents may be more mature than their cautious peers.
A paper was published in 2009, in the August 26th edition of PLoS ONE (Public Library of Science) saying that teens, between the ages of 12 and 18, who in engage in risky behavior tend to have highly developed white matter in their brains which is an indicator for maturity. However the research group's original hypothesis stated the exact opposite. Researchers from Emory University were hoping to show that less maturity led to risky behaviors.
To test their hypothesis they had students, ages 12-18 yo, fill out the Adolescent Risk Questionnaire (ARQ), which gives an idea as to how risky a person's actions are. Then they all underwent diffusion tensor imaging which measures the amount of white matter in the brain. After adjusting for changes in white matter that may be due to age it was found that there was a positive correlation between the two variables between the ages of 14 and 18.
However, we must remember that correlation does not imply causation, so the parents in the class shouldn't encourage their children to be more risky. This study does not show that risky behaviors will cause more maturity or that more mature teens tend to participate in more dangerous activities. I do feel that this study had some surprising findings though, I always felt that all of the immature kids when I was growing up tended to be a little more "dangerous," and I usually thought someone would do something stupid because they were immature. This makes me wonder how many other things we have false assumptions about, especially concerning adolescents.
Citation
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Bullying
After talking in class the other day about bullying I had a question that I wanted to ask. It is along the lines of prevention for situations such as these. We have discussed weather it is the responsibility of the school or is it the responsibility of the parents of these children. We also discussed the types of teaching techniques that we could use to try and put a stop to this kind of activity. I see allot of good information about role reversal, counseling and support groups for the children. However, I did not see any thing that was directed at the parents of the children! Is my thinking wrong to believe that we need to address the problem in the home also? I have a feeling, and I could be wrong, but I think that the problem stems from attention in the home or lack of attention. I do not mean direct attention to the child, but attention to the child's life outside of the home. Like who their friends are, what did they do today and how are things at school going. I think that if we educated the parents to keen to these concepts about their children then they may notice something before it becomes a problem and it can be dealt with. Also how many of the bullies are learning this kind of behavior in their home and how many parents just think that it is just kids being kids.
Going into the field of addictions treatment I have to take a look at prevention methods and how effective they are. So far I have not found any that have shown great improvement in the area of addiction problems. The major problem that I see is that the kids are learning this stuff at school but it is not being reinforced in the home. Yeah parents are telling their children that it is not OK to drink until you are twenty one, but they tell them about their kegger parties that they went to when they were in high school. This behavior is very contradicting to what is being taught in the school.
So, am I wrong in believing that we need to target the parents also. I would just like some feed back concerning my beliefs on this subject. Like I said, I could be wrong. So please let me know what you think.
Going into the field of addictions treatment I have to take a look at prevention methods and how effective they are. So far I have not found any that have shown great improvement in the area of addiction problems. The major problem that I see is that the kids are learning this stuff at school but it is not being reinforced in the home. Yeah parents are telling their children that it is not OK to drink until you are twenty one, but they tell them about their kegger parties that they went to when they were in high school. This behavior is very contradicting to what is being taught in the school.
So, am I wrong in believing that we need to target the parents also. I would just like some feed back concerning my beliefs on this subject. Like I said, I could be wrong. So please let me know what you think.
Is Abstinance Education the Best Education
After reading this article I still feel the same about my opinion on sex education. I believe that sex education should be taught in the home by the parents. Who else would be better to talk to your children about the "birds and the bee's." The problem that I see with any kind of sex education that will be taught in the school is the peer pressure that the child may feel from their friends. They may not ask questions when they have them, because of feeling like they will be ridiculed by their friends. When I was a teenager getting sex ed at school, we it viewed as a joke. We all laughed at it because we thought that we already knew everything that we needed to know about sex. The truth of the matter is that abstinence is the best solution to the problem of teenage pregnancy, but the reality is that kids are going to do it when they feel that they are ready to do it. That may be when they are married or when they are 15 years old. So, I believe that as a parent, it is my responsibility to let my child know what to expect and how to be safe, if and when she decides to do it. I will let her know not only how it is done, but what the consequences can be if she is not safe about it. But most of all I will let her know that no matter what her decision is I will always love her no matter what and that I will always be there for her.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Girls gone bad
As I read the article/paper “Girls Gone Bad,” it came to no surprise to me that parents do not like what they see with our celebrities these days. My personal option is, if you are going to be famous and be role models for our younger generation then don’t make stupid mistakes that leave parents trying to explain it to their children, like the Lindsay Lohan photo of being seen without panties on. Or if you type Lindsay Lohan’s name into Google images, the photos that appear are not what younger children should be looking at. She has pictures half nude and with alcohol beverages in her hands. As for myself that is always around younger children I find it difficult to explain to them when they are finding interesting articles in papers, magazines, or other sources of information about their role models “acting out.” Yes, just because they are famous doesn’t mean their not like everyone else in this world, but when you have people looking up to you, you shouldn’t be acting in such a modest behavior. Younger children tend to dress, act, and behave like their role-models do (I know I use too.) All in all I think that us as older supervisors should help our younger generation with making correct and accurate decisions and lead them away from the negative aspect of celebrities today.
Story about bullying--the victims side!
I received this story in an e-mail yesterday and I thought I would share it with all of you guys since we are talking about bullies and victims of bullying. This truly is an amazing story that really touched the heart. The e-mail didn’t contain information as to where it was from or who the author was because she wanted to remain anonymous.
One day, when I was a freshman in high school I saw a kid from my class was walking home from school. His name was Kyle. It looked like he was carrying ALL of his books. I thought to myself, “Why would anyone bring home all his books on a Friday? He must really be a nerd.” I had quite a weekend planned (parties and a football game with my friend tomorrow afternoon), so I shrugged my shoulders and went on…As I was walking, I saw a bunch of kids running toward him. They ran at him, knocking all his books out of his arms and tripping him so he landed in the dirt. His glasses went flying and I saw them land in the grass about ten feet from him…He looked up and I saw this terrible sadness in his eyes, my heart went out to him. So, I jogged over to him as he crawled around looking for his glasses, and I saw a tear in his eye. As I handed him his glasses, I said, “Those guys are jerks.” They really should get lives. “He looked at me and say, ‘Hey Thanks!’
There was a big smile on his face. It was one of those smiles that showed real gratitude. I helped him pick up his books, and asked him where he lived. As it turned out, he lived near me, so I asked him why I had never seen him before. He said he had gone to private school before now. I would have never hung out with a private school kid before. We talked all the way home, and I carried some of his books. He turned out to be a pretty cool kid. I asked him if he wanted to play a little football with my friends. He said yes. We hung out all weekend and the more I got to know Kyle, the more I liked him, and my friends thought the same of him. Monday morning came, and there was Kyle with the huge stack of books again. I stopped him and said, ‘Boy you are going to really build some serious muscles with this pile of books everyday! ‘He just laughed and handed me half the books. Over the next four years, Kyle and I became best friends. When we were seniors we began to think about college.. Kyle decided on Georgetown and I was going to Duke. I knew that we would always be friends, that the miles would never be a problem. He was going to be a doctor and I was going for business on a football scholarship.
Kyle was valedictorian of our class. I teased him all the time about being a nerd. He had to prepare a speech for graduation. I was so glad it wasn’t me having to get up there and speak.
Graduation day, I saw Kyle… He looked great; he was one of those guys that really found himself during high school. He filled out and actually looked good in glasses. He had more dates than I had and all the girls loved him. Boy, sometimes I was jealous!
As he started his speech, he cleared his throat, and began, ‘graduation is a time to thank those who helped you make it through those tough years, your parents, your teachers, your siblings, maybe a coach, but mostly your friends. I am here to tell all of you that being a friend to someone is the best gift you can give them. I am going to tell you a story.’ I just looked at my friend with disbelief as he told the first day we met. He had planned to kill himself over the weekend. He talked of how he had cleaned out his locker so his Mom wouldn’t have to do it later and was carrying his stuff home. He looked hard at me and gave me a little smile. ‘Thankfully, I was saved; my friend saved me from doing the unspeakable.’ I heard the gasp go through the crowd as this handsome popular boy told us all about his weakest moment.
I saw his mom and dad looking at me and smiling that some grateful smile. No until that moment did I realize its depth. Never underestimate the power of your actions, with one small gesture you can change a person’s life, for better or for worse.
One day, when I was a freshman in high school I saw a kid from my class was walking home from school. His name was Kyle. It looked like he was carrying ALL of his books. I thought to myself, “Why would anyone bring home all his books on a Friday? He must really be a nerd.” I had quite a weekend planned (parties and a football game with my friend tomorrow afternoon), so I shrugged my shoulders and went on…As I was walking, I saw a bunch of kids running toward him. They ran at him, knocking all his books out of his arms and tripping him so he landed in the dirt. His glasses went flying and I saw them land in the grass about ten feet from him…He looked up and I saw this terrible sadness in his eyes, my heart went out to him. So, I jogged over to him as he crawled around looking for his glasses, and I saw a tear in his eye. As I handed him his glasses, I said, “Those guys are jerks.” They really should get lives. “He looked at me and say, ‘Hey Thanks!’
There was a big smile on his face. It was one of those smiles that showed real gratitude. I helped him pick up his books, and asked him where he lived. As it turned out, he lived near me, so I asked him why I had never seen him before. He said he had gone to private school before now. I would have never hung out with a private school kid before. We talked all the way home, and I carried some of his books. He turned out to be a pretty cool kid. I asked him if he wanted to play a little football with my friends. He said yes. We hung out all weekend and the more I got to know Kyle, the more I liked him, and my friends thought the same of him. Monday morning came, and there was Kyle with the huge stack of books again. I stopped him and said, ‘Boy you are going to really build some serious muscles with this pile of books everyday! ‘He just laughed and handed me half the books. Over the next four years, Kyle and I became best friends. When we were seniors we began to think about college.. Kyle decided on Georgetown and I was going to Duke. I knew that we would always be friends, that the miles would never be a problem. He was going to be a doctor and I was going for business on a football scholarship.
Kyle was valedictorian of our class. I teased him all the time about being a nerd. He had to prepare a speech for graduation. I was so glad it wasn’t me having to get up there and speak.
Graduation day, I saw Kyle… He looked great; he was one of those guys that really found himself during high school. He filled out and actually looked good in glasses. He had more dates than I had and all the girls loved him. Boy, sometimes I was jealous!
As he started his speech, he cleared his throat, and began, ‘graduation is a time to thank those who helped you make it through those tough years, your parents, your teachers, your siblings, maybe a coach, but mostly your friends. I am here to tell all of you that being a friend to someone is the best gift you can give them. I am going to tell you a story.’ I just looked at my friend with disbelief as he told the first day we met. He had planned to kill himself over the weekend. He talked of how he had cleaned out his locker so his Mom wouldn’t have to do it later and was carrying his stuff home. He looked hard at me and gave me a little smile. ‘Thankfully, I was saved; my friend saved me from doing the unspeakable.’ I heard the gasp go through the crowd as this handsome popular boy told us all about his weakest moment.
I saw his mom and dad looking at me and smiling that some grateful smile. No until that moment did I realize its depth. Never underestimate the power of your actions, with one small gesture you can change a person’s life, for better or for worse.
Piaget's Legacy
Although the article was completely one sided (as the author states in the opening paragraph) I found it to be an article giving well deserved acclaim to one of the fields most important theorists. With his cognitive development theories, Jean Piaget transformed the field of developmental psychology, and laid the groundwork necessary for current and future researchers to expand on his theories. He challenged the blank slate theory with his four major stages of development, and broke down each stage to explain how he thought kids thought and were able to acquire knowledge through the curiosity and exploration of their world. At the time, this ideology was somewhat hard to swallow for many because it deviated from the common theories then that children can be sort of molded for "programmed" into whatever adults wanted them to be. Piaget insisted children learned intrinsically, from what they could deduce about their world, not extrinsically, like the blank slate theory suggests. Piaget's theories have been criticized, and he probably wasn't right about everything, but his influence on the field of developmental psychology cannot be denied, as we can all attest to by spending a prodigious amount of class time studying his stages of cognitive development.
Responsibilities of the Schools
During the class discussion today, all of the bullying and victim issues were placed only on the schools shoulders. None of the groups came up with ways in how parents should help out or be responsible. As tragic as the case of Phoebe Price is, it does bring about issues that have been going on in schools for a very long time. This girls received endless harassment on and off school grounds. Yet, all the articles are only talking about what the school should have done, and discussing ways in which the schools had the possibility of preventing this. In my personal opinion, I do think that the school officials did have a responsibility for what happened, but I also believe that the parents had a major contributing factor too.
When I was growing up, I was not allowed to have a social web site page that my Mom was not able to continually monitor. As for a cell phone, my Mom read through my text messages on a nightly basis, and she would make sure I was not deleting any on my phone by double checking the bill. At the time, I thought she was horribly strict, and I did not like her getting involved in my personal business. As I got further into high school, there were quite a few suicides. I do not really know if these happened from bullying, but I realized that my Mom was just doing all those things to keep an eye out on me.
When suicides are happening involving minors due to bullying and teasing, I often wonder how their parents were involved. There should be some kind of information available for parents from the schools on the best ways to monitor for bullying, and if their child is getting bullied on the best ways to discuss it with their child. In addition, I do think that parents should have the option of doing the school vouchers if their child is the victim of chronic bullying. Obviously, a lot has to be done in order to change bullying behaviors from all sides. I do think that there has not been much discussion about the parent's involvement in the media, and it seems to me like the media only expects the solutions to come from the schools.
When I was growing up, I was not allowed to have a social web site page that my Mom was not able to continually monitor. As for a cell phone, my Mom read through my text messages on a nightly basis, and she would make sure I was not deleting any on my phone by double checking the bill. At the time, I thought she was horribly strict, and I did not like her getting involved in my personal business. As I got further into high school, there were quite a few suicides. I do not really know if these happened from bullying, but I realized that my Mom was just doing all those things to keep an eye out on me.
When suicides are happening involving minors due to bullying and teasing, I often wonder how their parents were involved. There should be some kind of information available for parents from the schools on the best ways to monitor for bullying, and if their child is getting bullied on the best ways to discuss it with their child. In addition, I do think that parents should have the option of doing the school vouchers if their child is the victim of chronic bullying. Obviously, a lot has to be done in order to change bullying behaviors from all sides. I do think that there has not been much discussion about the parent's involvement in the media, and it seems to me like the media only expects the solutions to come from the schools.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)