Isn't that new? But for once, I am at a loss as to what to post. So, here are some minor updates.
- Went to visit Red for Fall Break. We got to hang out together for 9 wonderful days. Pictures will be posted later.
- Had two parades last week. Jazz Band played. We were on a trailer. They went well, but I still managed to learn a thing or two.
Notes for future parades:
*Locate a generator BEFORE the week of the parade
*Don't rely on Middle Schoolers to take the information home. Also don't rely on emails, letters sent home or phone calls. Try carrier pigeons.
*If you have to dress up as superheros, insist that they MAKE THEIR COSTUMES! (seriously! Who spends $60 on a costume?)
- Had 1st quarter Parent/Teacher conferences. I hate Parent/Teacher conferences. It's awful. I'm not sure they're actually effective. I mean, they work at first, but then everybody just falls back into hold habits. sigh. I was in heels for 14 hours that day. What was I THINKING?!
- uh. I keep waking up at 4:30 for no apparent reason. Why can't I sleep? Why?
- I added a poll to my blog. You should check it out. I don't know why I decided to. Thought it might be fun, I guess. Or I'm lonely. Probably both.
And.....that's it. See, I told you! Nothing to say. But, seeing as I'm the Queen, I had to make an attempt. Maybe the next one will be better.
Warning: Trick-or-Treaters: Stay away. I do not have candy for you. Bah. Humbug.
29 October 2008
07 October 2008
Teacher Rights?
I've had it put to me that a teacher is the person with the fewest rights. Teachers are not allowed to express their own opinions, but rather are only allowed to say and teach what is in the text/curriculum. This is not, however, entirely true. Teachers are allowed to talk about what they believe. They are allowed to express opinions. They just aren't allowed to require that the students agree with them or learn that information for a test or grade. If a student asks a teacher a question about his beliefs, the teacher has the right to answer it (or not answer it).
I think that this is, actually, a good thing. Teachers have an enormous amount of influence over their students. Elementary teachers see their students for 7 hours a day, and it is not uncommon for a youngster to disregard mom and dad's knowledge because "my teacher told me...". Once students hit the secondary levels, teachers become less cool, but they still hold influence because students are a captive audience. They have to listen. And, in a lot of cases, they may actually like their teachers, which gives them the desire to listen. (and, let's face it. Anyone is cooler than mom and dad). I think it is important, then, that teachers are careful to only teach fact as fact (let's not get into the creation/evolution argument right now, ok? cough cough: both are religions! cough cough) and opinion as opinion, making sure to stress that people are allowed to have their own opinions.
As a teacher, I am always aware that I have different morals and convictions than do the parents of my students, and as I am not the parent of those students, I do not have the right nor obligation to pass those morals on to them. As a future parent, I would be madder than all get-out if a teacher tried to usurp my role as parent and tell my child that they believed incorrectly.
All that being said, I had a very hard time keeping my mouth shut today. A couple of my students were talking as I was repairing an instrument. I didn't hear the whole thing, but I tuned in when a student said
"I think they should be allowed to have abortions. After all, they're not even alive yet!"
Other students jumped in and disagreed. Comments like "no, that's murder!" and "that's not right" got all jumbled up in their eagerness to have their opinions heard. One student even remarked "what if you'd been aborted?" And I wanted to join in with them. I had an almost overwhelming urge to take this kid by the shoulders, look him square in the eye and talk to him until I had convinced him of the error of his ways. My first thought was horror. How can a parent allow their child - their precious, wonderful gift from God - to believe it would have been ok if they had decided to murder him? My second thought was the practical me telling myself to keep my mouth shut because they hadn't asked my opinion, he was already outnumbered, he is allowed to believe what he wants to believe and I am not allowed to force my beliefs on a student. My third thought was but I've got influence. I could say just a few things and maybe get him to thinking. My fourth mirrored the second and I just kept vascillating between the two.
Ultimately I kept my mouth shut. I let the conversation continue for maybe 3 minutes all told before I just quietly said "We need to end this conversation. Please understand that you are allowed to believe what you want to, and you don't always have to agree. If you want to have a conversation about this, you need to go in with the attitude of learning about the other person's opinion rather than trying to convince them they're wrong. And you need to do it on your own time."
I didn't add any of my opinions. Not a single one. But I really wanted to. I wanted to look at him and just cry. How can parents allow their children to think murder is ok? How can a person say "I have a right to do what I want with my body" in order to justify murdering another human being? Don't they understand that the instant that life comes into being, their decisions about "their body" affect another person? How do people justify these things to themselves? How do they sleep at night knowing that murders are being committed and it's 100% legal? How?
How?
I think that this is, actually, a good thing. Teachers have an enormous amount of influence over their students. Elementary teachers see their students for 7 hours a day, and it is not uncommon for a youngster to disregard mom and dad's knowledge because "my teacher told me...". Once students hit the secondary levels, teachers become less cool, but they still hold influence because students are a captive audience. They have to listen. And, in a lot of cases, they may actually like their teachers, which gives them the desire to listen. (and, let's face it. Anyone is cooler than mom and dad). I think it is important, then, that teachers are careful to only teach fact as fact (let's not get into the creation/evolution argument right now, ok? cough cough: both are religions! cough cough) and opinion as opinion, making sure to stress that people are allowed to have their own opinions.
As a teacher, I am always aware that I have different morals and convictions than do the parents of my students, and as I am not the parent of those students, I do not have the right nor obligation to pass those morals on to them. As a future parent, I would be madder than all get-out if a teacher tried to usurp my role as parent and tell my child that they believed incorrectly.
All that being said, I had a very hard time keeping my mouth shut today. A couple of my students were talking as I was repairing an instrument. I didn't hear the whole thing, but I tuned in when a student said
"I think they should be allowed to have abortions. After all, they're not even alive yet!"
Other students jumped in and disagreed. Comments like "no, that's murder!" and "that's not right" got all jumbled up in their eagerness to have their opinions heard. One student even remarked "what if you'd been aborted?" And I wanted to join in with them. I had an almost overwhelming urge to take this kid by the shoulders, look him square in the eye and talk to him until I had convinced him of the error of his ways. My first thought was horror. How can a parent allow their child - their precious, wonderful gift from God - to believe it would have been ok if they had decided to murder him? My second thought was the practical me telling myself to keep my mouth shut because they hadn't asked my opinion, he was already outnumbered, he is allowed to believe what he wants to believe and I am not allowed to force my beliefs on a student. My third thought was but I've got influence. I could say just a few things and maybe get him to thinking. My fourth mirrored the second and I just kept vascillating between the two.
Ultimately I kept my mouth shut. I let the conversation continue for maybe 3 minutes all told before I just quietly said "We need to end this conversation. Please understand that you are allowed to believe what you want to, and you don't always have to agree. If you want to have a conversation about this, you need to go in with the attitude of learning about the other person's opinion rather than trying to convince them they're wrong. And you need to do it on your own time."
I didn't add any of my opinions. Not a single one. But I really wanted to. I wanted to look at him and just cry. How can parents allow their children to think murder is ok? How can a person say "I have a right to do what I want with my body" in order to justify murdering another human being? Don't they understand that the instant that life comes into being, their decisions about "their body" affect another person? How do people justify these things to themselves? How do they sleep at night knowing that murders are being committed and it's 100% legal? How?
How?
02 October 2008
Warning: Politics ahead
Why is it ok to punish people for doing a good job? When did this society get to the point that we have to PULL down those who excel so that we all can live in a world of mediocrity. It's this attitude that it isn't FAIR for someone to do well if I can't do JUST as well as they. I have a real problem with this.
We should NOT be punishing the "very wealthy" by raising their taxes simply because they make more money. Why is this a good idea? Don't you understand that if we continue to punish people for doing a good job they will simply stop doing it? NOBODY wants to have their efforts support someone else without their say-so. I would be furious if someone told me that because I have a good job and am a hard-working citizen I have to give half my paycheck to support someone on welfare who does not have a job. I am WORKING for my paycheck. I am WORKING to support myself. People on welfare are also able to WORK and SUPPORT themselves, but it is my opinion that most of them choose not to do so, because they know the government will support them.
And really, that's a brilliant plan! Who in their right mind wants to do more work than they have to? I would love to be able to sit at home all day and have no worries and be able to afford whatever I want. I would LOVE to not have to work. But I have more pride than that. I take pride in my God given abilities TO work and I will NEVER have it said that the government had to step in and care for me. Where is your personal pride? We are forever teaching our children about "self-esteem" and "being whatever you want", but at the same time, we cripple them with this "everybody gets a trophy for playing" schlock. I'm sorry, socialists, but everybody DOES NOT get a trophy for playing. In real life, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. But just because you lose, doesn't mean that you are allowed to punish the winner. No, to borrow an old cliche, you need to get back on the horse and ride again.
The very wealthy are working to support themselves. They have earned this money and they should NOT be punished for enjoying a life of ease. Don't you understand that if you continue taking their money, they will stop making it? The very wealthy put a lot into our economy (and please, let's not get into the ethics of how they make their money or use it. That's not what this is about and it is NOT our job to police them. That's the police's job. Let them do their job, but do not use a possible ethics problem as a right to take money away from ALL the very wealthy) and without their money and contributions, our society could not continue as it has. Read "Atlas Shrugged". Ayn Rand paints a very bleak, and yet, I think, very possible future should we continue on this road of punishing someone for what he has simply because "I have not".
I don't know where or when this attitude of total selflishness came into being, but I am disgusted and embarrassed by it's prevalence amongst the American people. You are NOT entitled to wealth. You are NOT entitled to have what I have, just as I am not entitled to have what you have. If you work hard and get more than me, congratulations! I'm very happy for you! If I work hard and don't get more than you, don't pity me. Chances are I am very happy with my decisions, and if I'm not happy, I (I) will take steps to change it. I am NOT your responsibility and you are NOT mine. The constitution says that every person has the Right to Life, Liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. It doesn't say that each person has the right to wealth, nor the right to what everybody else has.
To the wealthy people I say, congratulations. I'm so happy that you are living the American Dream. I'm so happy that you have worked hard and earned to much. Please continue to do so. Do NOT, however, feel that you are obligated to help anyone if you do not wish to. It is the Christian thing to do to give to the poor, and I feel strongly that you should, but NOWHERE in the Bible does it say that you are required to give to the poor, nor does it say you should feel guilty for what you have, NOR does it say that if you do choose to give that you are required to give everything. That helps nobody.
To quote my favorite fictional character "Your life is your own; rise up and live it."
We should NOT be punishing the "very wealthy" by raising their taxes simply because they make more money. Why is this a good idea? Don't you understand that if we continue to punish people for doing a good job they will simply stop doing it? NOBODY wants to have their efforts support someone else without their say-so. I would be furious if someone told me that because I have a good job and am a hard-working citizen I have to give half my paycheck to support someone on welfare who does not have a job. I am WORKING for my paycheck. I am WORKING to support myself. People on welfare are also able to WORK and SUPPORT themselves, but it is my opinion that most of them choose not to do so, because they know the government will support them.
And really, that's a brilliant plan! Who in their right mind wants to do more work than they have to? I would love to be able to sit at home all day and have no worries and be able to afford whatever I want. I would LOVE to not have to work. But I have more pride than that. I take pride in my God given abilities TO work and I will NEVER have it said that the government had to step in and care for me. Where is your personal pride? We are forever teaching our children about "self-esteem" and "being whatever you want", but at the same time, we cripple them with this "everybody gets a trophy for playing" schlock. I'm sorry, socialists, but everybody DOES NOT get a trophy for playing. In real life, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. But just because you lose, doesn't mean that you are allowed to punish the winner. No, to borrow an old cliche, you need to get back on the horse and ride again.
The very wealthy are working to support themselves. They have earned this money and they should NOT be punished for enjoying a life of ease. Don't you understand that if you continue taking their money, they will stop making it? The very wealthy put a lot into our economy (and please, let's not get into the ethics of how they make their money or use it. That's not what this is about and it is NOT our job to police them. That's the police's job. Let them do their job, but do not use a possible ethics problem as a right to take money away from ALL the very wealthy) and without their money and contributions, our society could not continue as it has. Read "Atlas Shrugged". Ayn Rand paints a very bleak, and yet, I think, very possible future should we continue on this road of punishing someone for what he has simply because "I have not".
I don't know where or when this attitude of total selflishness came into being, but I am disgusted and embarrassed by it's prevalence amongst the American people. You are NOT entitled to wealth. You are NOT entitled to have what I have, just as I am not entitled to have what you have. If you work hard and get more than me, congratulations! I'm very happy for you! If I work hard and don't get more than you, don't pity me. Chances are I am very happy with my decisions, and if I'm not happy, I (I) will take steps to change it. I am NOT your responsibility and you are NOT mine. The constitution says that every person has the Right to Life, Liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness. It doesn't say that each person has the right to wealth, nor the right to what everybody else has.
To the wealthy people I say, congratulations. I'm so happy that you are living the American Dream. I'm so happy that you have worked hard and earned to much. Please continue to do so. Do NOT, however, feel that you are obligated to help anyone if you do not wish to. It is the Christian thing to do to give to the poor, and I feel strongly that you should, but NOWHERE in the Bible does it say that you are required to give to the poor, nor does it say you should feel guilty for what you have, NOR does it say that if you do choose to give that you are required to give everything. That helps nobody.
To quote my favorite fictional character "Your life is your own; rise up and live it."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)