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 television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

It's clear that no one is ever going to agree on what to cut, especially those in the PE advocacy realm.  If I were queen, I would cut school days rather than totally eliminating a certain subject.  This would be fair to teachers as most jobs could be preserved and they certainly could adjust their curriculum to cover what they need to cover.  A shortened school year does not have to be an onerous thing.  When I was in high school in a suburban school in Oregon, we regularly got out of school two weeks before Portland schools, usually by the end of May.  It gave us an advantage in job seeking and it allowed us to earn a little more money for that first year of college.  Our SAT scores were always above the state average, so we did not suffer academically.  Kids come to school for many different reasons, and completely eliminating some subjects also completely eliminates some students! 

posted 2 years, 11 months ago
view in context