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 never considered myself very good at math while growing up.  I was taught traditional algorithms and just never understood any of it.  The teachers didn't seem to care, as long as I could do them.  When I became a teacher, is when I really started to understand math and get excited about it.  I taught K/1 and never taught my students 'how' to do a problem, but let them work it out on their own and then explain how they got there.  I was always amazed at the different ways students came up with the solution, if I just allowed them to explore on their own.  This, I believe, was teaching them not only to understand what they were solving, but also allowing them to figure it out based on what made sense for them.  I also made sure I brought in math that was all around us in our world.  This lets students know that math is not only important but is a natural part of our world and worth knowing.  Your discussions have been great and I am hopeful by what I see and hear happening about math.  

posted 2 years, 6 months ago
view in context

This topic certainly resonates with those of us who have been diagnosed with breast cancer, reading all the comments thus far.  I am one of those who would probably be dead if it had not been for early detection.  I was 40 at first mammo, which showed nothing.  By nearly 41, I found a lump, which turned out to be cancerous.  Without that base mammo, it would have been hard to know how fast the cancer's growth rate was.  Fortunately after a lumpectomy, radiation and chemo, 13 years later I am still cancer free after being stage 2.  At what percentage of detection does it become worth suggesting mammos in 40's?  I find it interesting that this task force was made up of primary care doctors.  What about breast cancer doctors?  They have to deal with the aftermath if insurance companies decide not to cover early screening.  Them, and the families of those who will surely die.  At what cost does life become worth it?  

posted 3 years, 6 months ago
view in context