2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

I went to school in a place and time when the kids and parents did not have to do any fundraising (auctions, theme dances, sales of Entertainment Books and gift wrap, etc., pleas for donations). We also did not have to buy any school supplies. Citizens paid for everything via their taxes. And we got a superb public school education.

People understood that, in a democracy, everyone contributed to the pot according to his or her ability, and everyone benefited with an educated and employed populace.

I was appalled when my own children started school, just as Measure 5 was going into effect. Already, we had to buy all of their school supplies at the beginning of the school year, with requests continuing throughout the year. Then we had to start pleading parents and neighbors to buy junk and to contribute to various other fundraisers, and on and on. It seems as if the parents and kids spend more time raising money than on education. When will the citizens of Oregon realize that everyone needs to chip in according to his or her means, that everyone benefits at some time or other. When people are educated, they are much less likely to be the ones hanging on street corners, collecting unemployment, or mugging someone because they can't get a job.

posted 3 years, 4 months ago
view in context

While it seems that a family should have to give the special ed services at the public school a try before transferring to a private school, I certainly understand the frustration of the family in this lawsuit. I could only get my son's school to test him after threatening to pull him out of school in second grade. He was immediately diagnosed with a learning disability and qualified for services. Two years later, he was diagnosed with ADHD. He had extensive special ed help and private tutoring, and after three years he finally met benchmarks. That, unfortunately, was a signal to the school psychologist that he no longer had his learning difficulties, and she pulled his IEP.

We fought for another year and-a-half and finally put him in private school, but could no longer afford it. My son's high school refused to test him in 9th grade. Acquaintances said, "They'll give him services if he fails enough classes." Sure enough, that is what happened. They agreed to test him again after he failed four classes, and again he qualifies for special ed services.

There is definitely something wrong with the system!

Porcella

posted 3 years, 11 months ago
view in context

My children were victims of so-called innovation in the public schools. In the early grades, they wrote using "Guess and Go" and "Stretch and Spell," rather than actually learning spelling and grammar rules. They were trundled to the computer room to write essays when they could neither write an essay nor type. I rarely saw more than a line or two appear in a half-hour session in the computer room. To this day, the writing and spelling among most of their peers is atrocious. How can they be creative when they can't put their thoughts on paper in any coherent way?

In math, they were subjected to the first years of "Investigations," in which they learned lots of alternative ways to add and multiply, but never learned the actual math. To this day, my daughter says they just played with the little tiles called "manipulatives," never actually learning anything from them. They would tell you that, to divide a number in the hundreds, you had to subtract 100 until there wasn't another hundred to subtract, but they could never actually divide the amounts.  Later, they had "Connections," which expected the students to figure out the math by looking at the applications. The books jump from subject to subject rather than building on a base of knowledge and contain a tremendous amount of reading to find just a problem or two -- very little practice to reinforce what the lessons are supposed to teach. Students who have had this method have huge gaps in their basic knowledge and then struggle mightily through high school math. If you don't know that 2 X 2 = 4, you can't apply it.

Group learning seems to be a popular method of "teaching." An occasional group project may be fine, but, when used on a regular basis, one student usually does all the work, while the rest do nothing.

Finally, who is teaching the teachers? I may scream if I hear one more teacher or principle say, "We're doing real good." Even your guest Michele McNeil said, "It depends on where you are AT." (My CAPS.)

posted 4 years, 2 months ago
view in context