On Thursday, the House voted to repeal the estate tax which would… increase the deficit by $269 billion over a decade.
Author Archives: pandora
College Remedial Courses And The State Test
Even though I know there are unique and deserving circumstances, I can’t help but wonder how kids needing remedial courses are even accepted into college, especially University of Delaware which touts itself as highly selective. Okay, I don’t really wonder. Remedial courses are a cash cow for colleges so I understand why they offer them. Having parents/students pay for non-credit courses makes achieving a degree take longer than four years which adds another semester, or two, in tuition and room and board fees… Cha-Ching!
And when you consider that over 50% of Delaware students had to take a remedial course before entering a Delaware college in 2012 we can all agree there’s a problem. Here is the latest solution:
High school juniors who do well on the state’s tough new standardized test will not have to take remedial classes if they attend a Delaware college or four-year university, state leaders announced Tuesday.
Gov. Jack Markell said the arrangement, which applies to the University of Delaware, Delaware State University, Wilmington University and Delaware Technical Community College, will hopefully allow more students to avoid paying for classes that don’t count toward their degree.
“Addressing the remedial crisis is one crucial step we have to take,” Markell said. “Using these tests will help remove a barrier to make sure that more graduates go on to acquire that critical education they need to be successful.”
This strikes me as putting the cart before the horse. We are in the process of giving the Smarter Balanced Assessment (SBA) for the very first time. We have no idea (yet alone a baseline for) what the test results will show (Altho, we’ve been warned that most kids won’t pass. And if that’s true that then this promises to be really ugly.).
Add to that reports of “intermittent network issues” during actual testing this week from certain schools and I question whether using these tests as “reward” is fair to those students whose testing, and mindset, was thrown off course. Should a child who experienced “intermittent network issues”, which had to result in their test being interrupted, be held to the same standard as a child who suffered no interruptions? After all, this slapped together plan by our Governor, DDOE and our state colleges and universities has raised the stakes on this test. If this test is going to result in tangible benefits for those who pass it, then students who experienced “intermittent network issues” should be able to retake the test under the same circumstances as those students who didn’t experience technical difficulties. Also, why is a test with “intermittent network issues” being given before the bugs are worked out – not only given, but given with consequences for not passing?
Moving on, anyone else notice who is missing from the formation of this plan?
Let’s look to Steve Newton’s second comment (the News Journal deleted his first comment. WTH?) about this situation:
“Here’s the gist of my comment that the News Journal deleted yesterday: this decision reached with no input or participation by public education, teachers, parents, or legislators. This decision was almost immediately opposed by the DE PTA. The press conference itself was announced to legislators only one hour in advance, and I am told by several that the announcement did not include the location of the press conference. Matthew Allbright: please tell us that you’re not okay with the WNJ decision to censor legitimate comments about your stories.”
So much for transparency when it comes to the News Journal and those involved with this 11th hour decision – which, imo, has little to do with remedial courses (which, I bet, will still exist in practically the same numbers, along with the Accuplacer test – which will now be stressed as a simple placement/filler test while Delaware colleges/universities break down remedial classes into more specific courses. “Oh, you passed the SBA, but you have deficiency in basket weaving. No problem, we just added a special basket weaving remedial class!”) and everything to do with the Opt Out movement.
Yep, this plan is just another way to scare parents from opting out of standardized testing. It preys on the fear of parents not doing everything possible for their child’s educational future. Take the test or ruin your child’s future!
Now, I’m going to write something that I do not mean to be taken in a negative way. Hopefully, this will come out correctly. Ready? Here goes… the idea that the University of Delaware, Delaware State University, Delaware Technical Community College and Wilmington University will have the same standards is not believable. I’m actually surprised that the University of Delaware agreed to this. (Okay, I’m hating how elitist this is sounding) But… come on. All colleges and universities are tiered. Right or wrong, they are tiered. They don’t cater to the same student – and that’s a good thing because it opens pathways to all students. But the idea that UD will accept the SBA without double checking those results by administering the Accuplacer test (or whatever new name they’ll decide to call it) doesn’t ring true. It also doesn’t strike me as responsible. What it does strike me as is a way to still get money out of parents whose children fail the credit based course fall semester of Freshman year and end up in the remedial course in the spring semester.
Here’s the big questions: How can we tie a test that’s never been given to an educational reward? What exactly are we basing these test results on? Can the results of this never-before-given test accurately reflect student achievement given that we are still implementing the Common Core curriculum which is what SBA is based on? And can I add how happy I am that my youngest is graduating this year and heading out of state to college?
The Delaware PTA has issued a press release that sums everything up:
Delaware PTA’s Response to Press Release on SBAC and DE Higher Ed Institutions
In a statement made today by Governor Markell, Delaware PTA learned that the four colleges; Wilmington University, University of Delaware, Delaware Technical and Community College and Delaware State University have all agreed that the outcomes of the 11th grade Smarter Balanced Assessments is a good indicator of college readiness. In addition, these institutions have all agreed to accept the assessment in lieu of other placement exams.
At a time when there is so much turbulence in our public education system, we are disheartened to learn that the conversations that proceeded this major conclusion did not include input from any of our major stakeholders. The Delaware Department of Education and the Governor’s office have publicly committed to greater transparency and collaboration with the broader community, yet Delaware PTA, the Delaware State Education Association, state legislators and other community stakeholders were not only excluded from these conversations, but we only learned of this decision a few hours prior to the public announcement.
We believe the lack of a collaborative process has resulted in misguided decisions regarding the efficacy of the Smarter Balanced Assessments, further misleading parents and students.
While Delaware PTA supports the use of assessments with a growth model that will effectively and adequately measure student growth and college and career readiness, we stand by our previous statements, citing the following concerns with the Smarter Balanced Assessments:
1. In its current form, the SBAC does not provide a true growth model;
2. In its current form, the SBAC is overly subjective and not an accurate assessment of student knowledge, skills and abilities;
3. Our educators have not had sufficient time to teach and our students have not had sufficient time to learn;
4. In its current form, the SBAC does not provide parents or teachers with the individual diagnostic data necessary to work together to support student success.
Although we believe that this most recent development is a knee jerk reaction to HB 50 on the Parent Opt Out, Delaware PTA remains fully committed to engaging in collaborative and transparent discussions on developing a state assessment that provides meaningful data for parents, students and teachers.
Decisions made in a vacuum often lead to outcomes that are misaligned and unsuccessful. Delaware parents, students and teachers deserve better.
Excellent points. Let’s add Rep. Kim Williams’ statement to the mix.
State Rep. Kim Williams has been critical of the stakes that are tied to the new test and has asked her son’s school not to give him the test.
“I just worry that we’re tying all of these things to these tests, and a lot of students haven’t even taken it yet,” Williams said. “We don’t even know what the results of this test are going to look like, but we’re already saying we’re going to use it for all these things. Where does it stop?”
I know exactly why we are tying these carrots to the test. Parents are opting out, that’s why.
Why are we, yet again, facing such a rush? Why are we offering a reward to a test that most students haven’t taken or completed yet? Didn’t we just go through this with the Priority Schools? How’d that plan work out for the Governor and DDOE? Oh, it didn’t? It was delayed and, in some cases, derailed? Wasn’t it supposed to be implemented this fall – with schools that didn’t comply with the state’s terms being shut down, converted to charter or privatized? You’d think this group would have learned their lesson after that much egg on their faces. The lesson I’ve learned is that transparency is just a word they trot out while steamrolling ahead with their charter/privatization agenda. Struggling high poverty schools? Charterize/Privatize them! Parents opting out of the SBA? Threaten to penalize their children. Nice outreach you guys have going there. It must be tiresome to have all your ideas come under fire – especially since your spokespeople can’t answer (or haven’t even thought of or considered) basic questions. Careful, guys, your true agenda keeps showing, and it has nothing to do with actually educating children or preparing them for college.
And if this group thinks they have problems now, consider this: “State leaders say they don’t know for sure how many students will qualify because this is the first year students are taking Smarter Balanced.
Based on results from a national pilot program last year, fewer than half and, in some cases, less than a third of students are expected to score “proficient” on the test.”
They don’t know for sure? Why not? Well, they do know that “fewer than half and, in some cases, less than a third of students are expected to score “proficient” on the test.” That’s a ton of kids, many of whom should be passing a standardized test easily. You know, there’s a universal wisdom in education: If the vast majority of students (not speaking about special class/student situations, but that’s okay because neither are the SBA test supporters) fail a test, then the problem is probably the test itself. Everybody brace themselves. The parental outcry is going to be deafening, and I expect a lot more parents to opt out next year. Good luck keeping your agenda on track once those test scores (and corresponding school rankings) are released. These results will no longer be confined to our high poverty schools, they are headed to middle class suburbia. I’m going to invest in earplugs before the test results are released!
And here’s another thing… Common Core has entered College Board and the SAT.
When Coleman became president of the College Board back in 2012, after his work developing the Common Core, he stated his goal for moving the SAT to better reflect those standards. On Wednesday, Education Week described in detail how the new changes to the SAT align with the Common Core—and presented an excellent side-by-side comparison of the SAT and Common Core that illustrates how Coleman’s goal will become a reality.
That’s quite a goal. Mr. Coleman must really believe in these tests. Oh, wait…
As the New York Times reiterated, “Critics have long pointed out—and Mr. Coleman admits—that high school grades are a better predictor of college success than standardized test scores.” [emphasis mine, because this needs to be emphasized.]
Here’s the deal: Anyone who has been through the college application process knows AP courses (and those similar to AP) carry just as much, if not more, weight than the SAT or ACT. These advanced courses are a far better assessment of how kids will preform in college. Don’t believe me? Go look at the guidance counselor form attached to every college application. One of the first questions is to rate the difficulty of courses a student has taken. Given how concerned colleges are with drop-out rates, these courses carry a lot of weight. Add to that, colleges have already started to de-emphasize the SAT and ACT – many don’t require them at all. If College Board puts forth a different standard for these tests and colleges/universities don’t like it, they’ll drop these tests and/or devise their own. Mr. Coleman should proceed carefully, he could be creating his own extinction.
It’s Not About Gay Wedding Cakes. It’s About A National Religion
Take a good long look at this story.
MILLEDGEVILLE, Ga.– Brittany Cartrett recently learned some bad news from her doctor about her pregnancy. She miscarried around five or six weeks along.
“So we made the decision to not do a D&C and to get a medicine. So he said I’m going to give you this medicine, you’ll take it, and it will help you to pass naturally so that you don’t have to go the more invasive route”, said Brittany Cartrett.
The doctor’s office called the Milledgeville Walmart to fill the prescription but they were told no and they were not given a reason.
“So we found another place to fill it but I still had to go up there to get another prescription so when I went up there she asked if I had any questions about this prescription I said no I don’t but I do have a question about the other one. And she looks at my name and she says oh, well…I couldn’t think of a valid reason why you would need this prescription“, Cartrett said.
The drug in question is Misoprostol, which can also used to induce abortions. [emphasis mine]
Everyone okay with a pharmacist overruling an actual doctor’s orders and diagnosis? Everyone okay with a pharmacist deciding, without examining you (not that they would even be capable of that) or knowing your medical condition, if you have a “valid reason” for the prescription decided upon by an actual doctor?
Republicans knew what they were doing making this about wedding cakes and photographers – they knew most people would shrug at cakes, flowers and wedding photos while missing the end game. These pharmacist “conscience clauses” are simply another way to achieve the same end. Religious Discrimination. I can’t even imagine a pharmacist thinking they are remotely qualified to make such a decision. How certain drugs interact? Sure. Whether you have a “valid reason” for needing a drug? That decision is far above their pay grade. They are not qualified (not one little bit) to make such a decision.
They should be forbidden, by law, from making/overruling a decision made by an actual doctor. And if their “conscience” bothers them then they need to find a new job, because they are unable to do the job they were hired for. And we’d never tolerate this behavior in any other profession. A fireman/woman who refused to enter a burning building because fire = Satan? A fast food worker who refused to serve an overweight person because fast food could lead to their death? And there’s Cassandra’s example of a Muslim grocery store clerk who won’t allow pork products in their lane. (We know the last example won’t happen since these proposed/existing laws only consider christian beliefs. We are fast approaching a National Religion, and that should concern everyone.)
And given the Hobby Lobby decision – which said what you believe matters (that Plan B and Ella are abortifacients), not facts (they aren’t)* – then what happens when pharmacists “believe” other medication cause abortion or death and they can’t fill prescriptions because of their conscience? Don’t worry, Viagra will always be considered a god-given right, but what about other medications considered unsafe during pregnancy? What if the pharmacist “believes” you’re pregnant, and in “good” conscience refuses to fill your actual doctor’s prescription? And that’s not a leap, it’s the plan. All women of child bearing age shall be considered pregnant at all times. I’m bracing myself for mandatory pregnancy tests administered at the pharmacy counter.
And just like wedding cakes aren’t remotely the real issue (they are just a way to get to get lazy focus groups to say “yep” without having to think – because, hey, it’s just a cake!), these “conscience clauses” aren’t about a pharmacist’s conscience, they are about inflicting the pharmacist’s religious views on everyone else. And that’s a problem that will eventually impact everyone. I cannot stress that enough. Be very careful in dismissing/labeling these incidents as gay issues or women issues or minority issues. Religious Conservatives are counting on that; they are counting on people letting this nonsense slide because their next steps rely on laying this groundwork.
*Pay close attention to Hobby Lobby’s bogus claim that Plan B and Ella are abortifacients. Once they get that lie cemented into public opinion (just like they did with wedding cakes) get ready for The Pill to come under further attacks by “pro-life” groups and christian pharmacists because the medication in Plan B and Ella are exactly the same as oral contraceptives. See how that works? If you “believe” Plan B/Ella are abortifacients then you believe oral contraceptives are abortifacients. No leap required.
What Am I Doing Today? Getting Ready For The Walking Dead Season Finale
When The Walking Dead first aired I didn’t pay much attention. Hello? Zombies aren’t really my thing. I was a Game of Thrones addict. Loved Dexter. Orange Is The New Black is sooo good. Rome is still one of the best series I’ve seen. Everyone on House of Cards is scarier than TWD zombies. Sherlock is one of the most perfect, amazing, wonderful series EVER. (If you haven’t watched Sherlock I strongly suggest you do.)
I started watching The Walking Dead (TWD) with my son as a sorta mother-son bonding thing. He liked all things zombie and I’ll admit to rolling my eyes when he suggested we start the series on Netflix. Now, I can’t get enough. This series draws you in. So much so that I’m writing about tonight’s season finale.
If you’re not interested in TWD, I understand. But if you are, share your thoughts, hopes, dreams in the comments!
Note: I have not read the comics. Everything written below is just me guessing.
I’m not sure what to expect tonight, but will confess that I have envisioned everyone’s possible death – except Rick and Carl’s. They are safe. I think Glenn is safe, but I’m worried about Maggie. I’m also extremely concerned for Carol – one of the most amazing, smartest, toughest characters on TWD – because I can see Pete (wife abuser) killing her (former abused spouse). Oh, the irony.
Is Daryl (Love him!) safe tonight? Not sure. I can picture him living and dying. I would really miss him and the group would be significantly weakened by the loss of his skills.
Michonne? (Another one of my all-time favorites) The scene where she literally hung up her sword doesn’t bode well.
Sasha has been suffering from PTSD. I could see the zombie hunter being taken out by a zombie.
Tara: Could she not survive the head injury? Just die without waking up? If that happens my bet is that it happens early in the finale and sets the tone. It would not only further show the recklessness and incompetence of Alexandria, it would fuel our groups anger with the loss of one of their own. Preventable deaths are grounds for a death sentence in TWD.
Abraham: I like Abraham, but I’m not emotionally attached to him for some reason. That might be why I can envision his death. It wouldn’t be a tearjerker for me.
Eugene: I can see him getting killed off doing something heroic or cowardly. His character is evolving.
Rosita: This character hasn’t been given enough screen time. I don’t know much about her story (altho, given the last discussion on DL about TWD it’s entirely possible I missed it!). Guess I’m saying she’s expendable. Ouch! It’s a shame since last week’s scene in the woods with Michonne and Sasha was really good.
Father Gabriel: Since everyone wants him to die, he’ll probably live.
Have I missed anyone from the main group? Oh, Judith. Will they kill the baby? Could Rick ever recover from that. He’s hanging on by a thread as it is. So, I’m guessing Judith lives.
As far as the Alexandria inhabitants go… everyone except Deanna and Aaron are fair game. I think these two characters will be safe. For now… Bwhahaha! Not sure about Enid mainly because who she is and why she’s there hasn’t been addressed. I think we’ll find out her story tonight, and that will probably determine her fate.
As I write this I’m thinking I spend too much time thinking about The Walking Dead. But, in my defense, the show does make you think about situational humanity, morality and ethics and how they change given specific circumstances. In the beginning you think Rick is the good, moral guy and that Shane is the bad guy who has no heart. In the last episode Rick says exactly what Shane said – he has become Shane and adopted Shane’s philosophy and we all now agree. Shane was right. It just took Rick, and the rest of us, longer to see the truth.
Is It Time To Get Rid Of Fraternities?
I will admit I have a strong bias against fraternities. During college I witnessed them in action, and what I see today is no different from what I saw then. I am not saying that all members are all awful, but the mob mentality surrounding them is disturbing. I don’t see a strong sense of leadership or individuality in fraternities (or sororities). Everyone seems to just follow the loudest voice, and if that voice is singing a racist song… everyone just sings along.
TPM puts together quite a list of bad frat behavior. Actually, it isn’t “bad” it’s appalling and shocking. Here’s a recap of incidents from just this month:
1. SAE’s racist song/chant
This month’s boomlet of fraternity news began on March 8, when a video that allegedly showed members of a University of Oklahoma fraternity singing a racist chant on a bus ride went viral.
“There will never be a nigger in SAE,” the frat members sang. “There will never be a nigger in SAE. You can hang them from a tree, but they’ll never sign with me. There will never be a nigger in SAE.”
Even more shocking than this vile chant is the way it was excused by many. The Morning Joe crew even blamed this behavior on rap music – claiming that these frat guys learned these words, thoughts, ideas from rap. Never mind that the song/chant they sang wasn’t rap, that it obviously was home grown at SAE, all that mattered was that these boys were somehow not responsible for the words that left their mouths. But not being responsible is as common to frats as secret handshakes.
Add to that how the discussion morphed into how these boys weren’t racist. Exactly what do you have to do today to be considered racist? Actually lynch a black person rather than just singing about lynching a black person?
2. Kappa Delta Rho posts photos of nude, unconscious women on FB page
Students at Pennsylvania State University were up in arms against a fraternity accused of sharing photos of nude, unconscious women on Facebook.
[…]
Police have since determined that at least two of the photos could lead to criminal charges, and some of the women pictured in the photos have come forward.
[…]
The anonymous (member of Kappa Delta Rho) student and self-proclaimed “good guy” insisted that the fraternity members didn’t share the photos maliciously. He also argued that the only person who should be punished for the group’s behavior is whoever “snitched.”
“It’s just satire. … Nobody’s sitting there like, ‘Oh … how are we going to victimize these people?’” he said in defense of his fraternity.
Someone doesn’t understand the meaning of the word satire. Also notice where he feels the blame deserves to fall – on the snitch. That mindset is disturbing. What’s even more disturbing is I doubt he’s the only person to feel this way.
3. Pi Kappa Phi – The Notebook
“It will be short and painful, just like when I rape you.”
“That tree is so perfect for lynching.”
Those were just a couple of the jarring comments members of North Carolina State University’s Pi Kappa Phi fraternity wrote in a so-called “pledge book” discovered last week.
Local TV station WRAL, which first obtained the notebook, posted photos of some of its pages that blurred out offensive language. The following statements were legible, however:
“Dude if she’s hot enough, she doesn’t need a pulse.”
“Be kind to the whales for they’ll lead you to the dolphins.”
“The only reason I don’t hook up with fat chicks is I’m afraid I’ll love it.”
“I like little girls.”
This is the stuff of horror movies. Lynching, rape, necrophilia, pedophilia? Anyone would be forgiven for thinking these were the comments of a serial killer – and if they were a serial killer’s words everyone would say, “That makes sense. This guy’s dangerous and obviously mentally imbalanced – Evil”.
None of this falls under the heading of humor. Imagine having someone say things like this at your next dinner party. (Sure, some people will find the fat jokes funny – whatever, not the point) Now imagine any of the other comments being tossed across the table.
So what causes things like this to be written down, posted to Facebook, sang when everyone knows this wouldn’t happen in mixed company? I tend to blame the insular environment of frats. On some level, these fraternities are okay with this behavior. On some level I even think it’s expected. I also don’t think today’s behavior is anything new. We just hear about it today due to technology.
4. Kappa Sigma “F*%k Consent email
Here’s the full text of the email, as quoted by the Huffington Post:
Regardless of the rush shirt let’s get rachet as f*** during rush week. My d**k will be sucked and f***ed in compound basement whether you guys like it or not. Don’t invite any n****r gals or curry monsters or slanted eye chinks, unless they’re hot. Ziggy you’re [sic] girl can come she’s cool. Remember my n***as, erect, assert, and insert, and above all else, f*** consent … d**ks untouched.
Yes, this is one email sent by one person, but the fact that he felt comfortable enough to send this email under his real name speaks volumes. It helps that someone who received and read this email reported it. That gives me hope. But I have to ask myself, like I did with the above example, why are these guys so comfortable with saying these things? To me that implies acceptance of what’s being said and done. And that’s the problem in a nutshell.
5. Alpha Delta Phi – Branding
Dartmouth confirmed this week that it extended the suspension handed down to the fraternity last fall for holding unregistered parties over fresh allegations that the organization branded its new members like livestock.
Branding? Is it any wonder that someone who would agree to be branded (and other hazing rituals) wouldn’t be considered an independent thinker? And as awful as all the other examples above are (and they are stomach turning awful) the branding incident gives us a clear view inside the fraternity mindset. There aren’t many taboos left once you let someone brand you.
So, what do you guys think? Is it time to get rid of fraternities? Do they need more oversight? Regulations? Is there a fix for this behavior? My daughter leaves for college this fall. My husband (who belonged to a frat, btw) told her, in no uncertain terms, to stay away from fraternities.
*And yes, I know there are wonderful individuals associated with frats (Hello? I married one.), but we’re not discussing individuals. We’re discussing an organization – an organization that’s pretty “adept at ducking liability for what happens under their roofs.”
Redrawing School District Lines
I have been on record saying that Delaware has too many school districts. 19 public/Vo-Tech school districts and 18 (and counting) charter districts. Each charter school is its own district. To me, that’s simply too much administrative overhead. Which brings us to the plan of reducing the number of districts in the city of Wilmington. Something I support, but know that the devil’s in the details.
When the Wilmington Education Advisory Committee (WEAC) submitted its report to the Governor, one of its suggestions was removing Christina and Colonial School Districts from the city and having the only two districts (Red Clay and Brandywine) serve the city.
As a city resident the idea of fewer school districts sounds wonderful. Having four districts fractured the city’s voice. It was hard to organize and advocate for city kids since school districts would only listen to people who lived in their district about concerns with their district. I do understand that, but it was extremely frustrating. Especially since 99% of our concerns applied to every district. But those district lines sent us off in four different directions, with less people, and were easily ignored. And, make no mistake, we were ignored. The districts’ go-to solution was always to form a committee to study the problem. Where all those committee reports ended up… I have no idea. And it was infuriating to keep bringing up the same concerns year after year only to have district administrators feign surprise and call for a new committee. So, most city residents would be happy with fewer school districts – if it’s handled correctly.
It’s no secret that I have huge issues with the Priority School’s plan. It’s about punishment, not education. That said, I did like that it finally triggered a discussion on the mess these districts had made of their city schools. And I really liked a lot of what came out of WEAC.
Now let’s talk about the realities of redrawing district lines, because this won’t be easy – which doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be done.
The News Journal’s article from yesterday:
Redistricting was thrust to the front of the state’s educational agenda when the Wilmington Education Advisory Committee recommended it in its interim report in January. The group, established by Markell to find ways to improve education, proposed removing the Christina and Colonial school districts from the city and giving those schools and students to the Red Clay School District.
That would leave only Red Clay and Brandywine serving students in the city limits.
While this plan reduces the number of districts from four to two it really is all about Red Clay, because it looks like the plan is for RCCD to take over all of Christina’s city schools and to take all of Christina’s and Colonial’s K-12 students. It appears Brandywine SD would remain untouched – serving city and suburban students.
Before continuing, here’s how the News Journal sums up the plan:
If the Wilmington Education Advisory Committee’s plan for redistricting is implemented by the legislature, five schools that are currently in the Christina School District would be moved to the Red Clay district. Students who live in the city and attend Christina high schools, which are located in the suburbs, would also be moved to Red Clay.
The Colonial school district serves some Wilmington students, but does not operate any schools in the city limits. Wilmington students in Colonial would move to Red Clay under the committee’s plan.
I’m not saying this can’t work, or be for the best, but there’s a lot of details to be worked out. And unless they are – and a ton of extra funding has to be part of it – I can’t see why RCCD would agree to this (would they even have a choice?). That’s a lot of poverty heading to all their schools, which we know is extremely expensive.
First, the complexities of school funding need to be worked out. High-poverty schools like those in the inner city require more resources to serve students’ challenges, but districts usually receive less property tax money from the city than they do from the suburbs.
Christina’s tax base in Wilmington does not provide enough money to pay for the students in Wilmington, Jaques said. That means Christina would see a significant financial benefit but Red Clay would be in a financial hole if the schools were simply handed over.
It will also increase the student population at Red Clay middle and high schools. The city doesn’t have a high school and only Christina’s Bayard Middle School – which houses approx. 470 students out of roughly 1300 in their elementary schools (is there another middle school in the city limits serving city kids? I don’t think so.) – to serve these students. Does Red Clay have the capacity at its existing middle and high schools to house extra students? I’m not sure. What I am sure about is that, if this plan goes through, it’s going to be expensive. I don’t have a problem with funding high needs kids – I have always said that they deserve and need higher funding – but this plan will result in increased poverty at RCCD’s middle and high schools. That must be addressed before implementing a plan. We cannot do this the way we did Neighborhood Schools. You know, create neighborhood schools, which then created high poverty schools and then act surprised that we re-segregated! Whooocouldaknown!
I’ll end with Kilroy. I’m not sure what possessed him to write this stuff. It makes me sad.
The Wilmington committee refuses to look in the mirror and realize Wilmington needs it’s own school district but I am sure they know it. The city leaders and so-called civil rights leaders won’t support a stand-alone Wilmington school district because if they fail they won’t have the white caretakers to blame. The solution is a stand-alone Wilmington school district with a school board that has the authority to be approval and oversight authority for all charter schools in Wilmington meaning current charter schools would move under that authority. The time is now for the men of Wilmington to man-up and be the guardian of their children.
I’m not even sure what to do with this paragraph. Time for the men of Wilmington to man-up? Why just the men? White caretakers? This statement is racially divisive and offensive. Seriously, Kilroy? You’re better than this.
He goes on to call out Sen. Bryan Townsend:
“I do think there’s a need for a sense of urgency,” said Sen. Bryan Townsend, D-Newark. “There are tough logistics, there’s no doubt, but the adults have really got to be courageous and committed to finding solutions, even if they’re tough, that are in the best interest of our schoolkids.”
Let me guess, Glasgow Class of 99? The Beavis and Butt-Head generation. Slowdown rookie, left not pull the alarm so fast! And there you go saying it’s for the kids if we don’t act fast! Stop kissing Jack Markell ass! You have bright future ahead of you but please walk upright!
But earlier he praised Rep. Kim Williams – who basically said the same thing.
“I get that there’s energy around this and I agree with that,” said Rep. Kim Williams, vice chairman of the House Education Committee. “But this is not something that can be figured out over a cup of coffee. We’ve been operating this system for years and years and years, and it’s not going to just take a couple of months to figure out how to change it.”
Spot on Rep Williams! But we’re talking Governor Jack Markell who has been come so reckless with public education and cares more about his change agent egotistic image than what’s right for children and parents.
I’m confused. Both said there’s a sense of urgency/energy around this topic. Both acknowledged that it wouldn’t be easy. But Kilroy saw these as two very different statements. I don’t understand why.
Redrawing districts won’t be easy, and I shudder to think of the outcry heading our way. Even if there’s a ton of money attached to this plan it’s going to be nasty and ugly. We got a taste of this with the Concerned Neighbors of Cooke Elementary School who fought to keep the high poverty children of Lancaster Court Apartments out of their school – be sure to read the comments on that post because that’s what will be heading our way. Now take that situation and apply it district wide. That doesn’t mean I don’t see problems with this plan. I do, and have mentioned them above (financing, space, etc.). I think they can be worked out (and would have to be worked out before moving forward), but even if they’re worked out I see a major fight on the horizon – and it won’t be pretty.
Do Men Really Trust And Believe Women?
Add this article, Men Just Don’t Trust Women – And It’s A Huge Problem, to another thing I find fascinating. The author admits that he basically doesn’t trust and believe things said by his wife. He downgrades the emotional importance she attaches to a problem. He states: “Generally speaking, we (men) do not believe things when they’re told to us by women.”
Panama and I were talking about the Rolling Stone story controversy. It eventually segued to Cosby, which then segued into a realization that there’s a common thread in each of these types of stories and the tenor of the conversations surrounding them.
Trust. Well, the lack thereof. Generally speaking, we (men) do not believe things when they’re told to us by women.
[…]
This conversation is how, after five months of marriage, eight months of being engaged, and another year of whatever the hell we were doing before we got engaged, I realized I don’t trust my wife.
[…]
But you know what I don’t really trust? What I’ve never actually trusted with any women I’ve been with? Her feelings.
If she approaches me pissed about something, my first reaction is “What’s wrong?”
My typical second reaction? Before she even gets the opportunity to tell me what’s wrong? “She’s probably overreacting.”
My typical third reaction? After she expresses what’s wrong? “Ok. I hear what you’re saying, and I’ll help. But whatever you’re upset about probably really isn’t that serious.”
I’m both smart and sane, so I don’t actually say any of this aloud. But I am often thinking it. Until she convinces me otherwise, I assume that her emotional reaction to a situation is disproportionate to my opinion of what level of emotional reaction the situation calls for. Basically, if she’s on eight, I assume the situation is really a six.
I found myself nodding my head in agreement through his article because I have dealt with the situation he mentions. My husband and I go through the same thing. Full disclosure: I am the one in our relationship who feels more strongly about things (I am a blogger! And bloggers feel things strongly). I have overreacted, but he has under-reacted. I will say that a lot of my overreactions were due to his treating my 6 situation like a 3 situation which then had me ramping it up to an 8. I’m wondering how common my situation is? Okay, I know a lot of women agree with me, but I’m curious how men feel about this article and my example.
This is part of the reason why it took an entire high school football team full of women for some of us to finally just consider that Bill Cosby might not be Cliff Huxtable. It’s how, despite hearing complaints about it from girlfriends, homegirls, cousins, wives, and classmates, so many of us refused to believe how serious street harassment can be until we saw it with our own eyes. It’s why we needed to see actual video evidence before believing the things women had been saying for years about R. Kelly.
There’s an obvious parallel here with the way (many) men typically regard women’s feelings and the way (many) Whites typically regard the feelings of non-Whites. It seems like every other day I’m reading about a new poll or study showing that (many) Whites don’t believe anything Black people say about anything race/racism-related until they see it with their own eyes. Personal accounts and expressions of feelings are rationalized away; only “facts” that have been carefully vetted and verified by other Whites and certain “acceptable” Blacks are to be believed.
So, men of DL, do you do this with women? Do you believe and trust women without readjusting their outrage meter?
While More Men Are Wanting Babies/More Women Are Considering The Child-Free Option
I find stuff like this fascinating.
In a nationally representative survey of single, childless people in 2011, more men than women said they wanted kids. (On the other hand, more women reported seeking independence in their relationships, personal space, interests, and hobbies.) A different poll from 2013 echoed those findings, with more than 80 percent of men saying they’d always wanted to be a father or at least thought they would be someday. Just 70 percent of women felt the same.
It really hasn’t been that long since women actually had control in having children. My grandparents had a lot of children. Without effective birth control (along with societal and religious expectations) people of that generation had a lot of kids. The Pill came onto the scene in my mother’s generation – and there was much rejoicing! – however, the idea that people get married and have kids was still the only plan on the table.
And while I’ll admit the “get married and have kids” plan still strongly exists (ask any couple who’s decided not to have kids how often they’re asked when they’ll have kids, or told they’ll eventually change their minds if you don’t believe me.) this survey shows an interesting trend. And the reasons women cite for not wanting children (seeking independence in their relationships, personal space, interests, and hobbies) seem to really come down to this:
The majority of today’s young people of both genders seek an egalitarian split in work and family responsibilities. But even if both partners want it, women are aware that they probably won’t get it. Achieving equality in the home is easier said than done: In a 2011 survey of fathers, 65 percent said they believed both parents should spend an equal amount of time on child-rearing. But when asked about their realities, 64 percent said their wives provided more care. “I think before you have kids it’s a lot easier for men to imagine combining work and family,” Coontz said. “There’s work involved with having kids that women can anticipate better than men. We saw our moms do it.”
That’s both men and women saying that women will provide more child care. It’s no wonder more women are questioning whether the want to have a baby.
I am a stay-at-home mom, but how this came about might surprise you. My decision to stay at home had nothing to do with “bonding” or what was best for the baby. Hell, the baby didn’t even exist when we decided I’d stay home. So what was my decision based on? Two things:
1. Finances. The cost of quality daycare is ridiculous. Had I stayed working almost all of my paycheck would have gone to paying for daycare – the remainder would have gone to diapers, wipes, laundry detergent (until you have a child you have no idea how much laundry is involved. It’s staggering. 🙂 ), clothes, food and a million other expenses.
2. Labor distribution. I was one of the last of my group to have kids so I got to observe. What I saw was eye opening. Mothers were doing most of the work – and my generation was the one supposed to be different. We are better, and men have really stepped up (and yes, I know there are fathers that do more than mothers, but that really isn’t the norm), but we still have a long way to go. So when I looked around my first thought was, “I can’t do all that. I can’t work, cook, clean, grocery shop, take kids to the doctor/stay home when they’re sick, etc.” Even more important – I didn’t want to do all that, but I knew I would.
And yes, a lot of these expectations I placed on myself – or had placed on me by a society that expects women to work outside and inside the home. Mr. Pandora didn’t really care if the house was cleaned and he never expected dinner on the table, but I did. It was ingrained in me.
What I also knew was this: Babies are a lot of work. I grew up around babies and saw what was involved. My husband did not grow up around babies. Needless to say, our views of what was involved differed greatly. His focus centered on loving the baby, taking it for walks, Christmas mornings, playing, etc.. Mine was, well, a bit darker. I knew sleep was history along with movies, dinners out, socializing without diaper bags. I knew my life was about to completely change and it was frightening. I lost count of the number of times I questioned my decision to become pregnant. What had I done? I wasn’t remotely ready for this.
Yes, everything worked out for the best (so far!) and neither of us regrets having kids – altho, I’d be lying if I said we never fantasize about what our life would be like if we’d chosen the child-free option. That fantasy usually involves the piles of fun money we’d be rolling around in, because kids are expensive. Don’t believe anyone who tells you differently.
And I honestly don’t know how working moms do everything most of them do. I’m sure there are pros and cons to every situation. I ended up loving staying at home, but I had my resentments (doesn’t everyone?). One of my biggest was feeling that my time wasn’t valued (by almost everyone) and how my home constantly became a daycare center… since I was home and could help out working parents, for free. But a lot of that resentment faded when I purged certain people. Go me!
But we all know working moms are viewed differently compared to working dads. (Has any man ever been asked how they plan to juggle work and a baby?) Women leaving work to take care of a child is a given (and usually comes with some resentment), while men doing the same thing is praiseworthy. That said, I’m sure there’s a line for how much time a man can take off, and I bet men know where that line is drawn.
I also know there’s still a huge amount of pressure for men to be the main breadwinner, and don’t even get me started on the eyebrow raising and masculinity questioning that stay-at-home dads endure. Society loves its traditions, and will gladly shame anyone who goes against them.
Which brings me back to plans. Seems like when it comes to having a baby it’s a crap shoot. I always chuckle when I listen to expectant parents’ plans (I was so guilty of the same thing!) because I know many of those plans will be blown to dust. Yep, I was one of those pre-parents who stated smugly, “I’ll never use the TV as a babysitter.” Um… Best. Babysitter. Ever. If Cartoon Network had held a fundraiser I would have gladly contributed. Often.
Discussing baby plans with your partner is really important – even if all the plans don’t work out. You need to make sure you’re on the same page. Consider this:
She eventually told her husband about her missed period (which later turned out to be a false alarm), and he was overjoyed. But she voiced her concerns. “I was like, ‘’You know, you travel four months out of the year. I will have to give up my entire life if I’m going to have a kid.’” She had already thought through the disruption, but the notion that his life would change was entirely new. “Even in a progressive, liberal, feminist household like ours, there was still that idea that the woman will stay home and the guy will keep working … or that a man’s work isn’t going to be compromised.” At one point, she asked if he would consider quitting his job to be a stay-at-home father given how much he wanted a baby. “That just wasn’t the plan he had in mind,” she said.
“That just wasn’t the plan he had in mind.”
Yep, I’m big on communication – and how your life will be once having a baby isn’t something to discuss after the baby arrives. Neither one of the people in the above story is wrong, but, boy, they sure weren’t on the same page. Add to that that a lot of couples that opt to keep working or stay at home change their minds once the baby arrives. Can we ever really plan for a baby? And if we accept that plans can easily fall apart can we blame women for being hesitant? Because when plans fall apart, most people agree that it’s mothers who end up providing the most child care – it’s the default position. And those couples that try and buck the system find themselves constantly battling society’s rules.
So… if you were looking for a solution, you came to the wrong post!
Forced Birth Improves The Economy? Armed “young, hot little girls on campus” Will Stop Rape?
There’s just so much of this nonsense. As a woman, who’s also raising a teen daughter, it’s overwhelming and frightening. It’s also disheartening when issues that directly impact over 50% of the country are dismissed as single-issue votes. Women do not view abortion or contraception as a “pet” issue. These issues directly affect our economy. Having a child is one of the biggest economic decisions for both men and women. If only we treated these issues with the same freak out we display when it came to a gas tax and tax cuts – and, make no mistake, abortion and contraception are a way bigger deal than things like the gas tax and tax cuts. Mainly because cutting/raising taxes won’t make a damn bit of difference to a woman’s (who’s forced to give birth) economy.
And yeah, I’m going to keep writing about women’s issues, mainly because it’s really all the GOP talks about. They link controlling women to every flippin’ bill they pen. It’s almost impossible to discuss anything the GOP puts forth without discussing women – and religion and gay people. All Republican roads lead to controlling sex.
I’m going to deal with Brownback’s comments about what improves the economy first.
“It’s working,” Brownback agreed. “What we want Kansas to be is the best place in America to do two things: raise a family, grow a small business.”
“And we are moving that way,” he continued. “I’ve signed 10 pro-life bills, there’s another one moving through the legislature on ending dismemberment abortions, where you actually dismember the child to abort it. It’s passed the state Senate, it’s going to pass the House, and I’m going to sign it.”
According to Perkins, Kansas was proving that a “pro-family agenda” was “entwined” with economic growth.
“They really support each other,” Brownback agreed. “Frankly, one of the big problems we have in the country is we’re not forming enough families. And that is hurting our economic work and hurting our economic projection because the best place for that child is within a strong family. And if you’re not forming a family unit, you are also slowing your economic performance.”
“So, these things really tie together. And I think we really do a disservice politically when we separate them,” he opined.
The idea that having unplanned/unwanted babies forms strong families is ludicrous. It’s actually one of the main reasons a couple falls apart. Is Brownback really claiming that making abortion illegal (or very difficult to obtain) would result in an improved economy because more women would have to give birth? It sure sounds like it. And I fully expect this idea to become Republican gospel. After all, it would result in women who aren’t mothers being blamed for a bad economy. It’s a natural fit. Sorta like Romney linking single parents for gun violence. And blaming women and minorities is the go-to for the GOP.
And speaking of guns…
As gun rights advocates push to legalize firearms on college campuses, an argument is taking shape: Arming female students will help reduce sexual assaults.
Support for so-called campus carry laws had been hard to muster despite efforts by proponents to argue that armed students and faculty members could prevent mass shootings like the one at Virginia Tech in 2007. The carrying of concealed firearms on college campuses is banned in 41 states by law or by university policy. Carrying guns openly is generally not permitted.
But this year, lawmakers in 10 states who are pushing bills that would permit the carrying of firearms on campus are hoping that the national spotlight on sexual assault will help them win passage of their measures.
“If you’ve got a person that’s raped because you wouldn’t let them carry a firearm to defend themselves, I think you’re responsible,” State Representative Dennis K. Baxley of Florida said during debate in a House subcommittee last month. The bill passed.
The sponsor of a bill in Nevada, Assemblywoman Michele Fiore, said in a telephone interview: “If these young, hot little girls on campus have a firearm, I wonder how many men will want to assault them. The sexual assaults that are occurring would go down once these sexual predators get a bullet in their head.”
Oh, sweet Jebus! Where to begin? “Young, hot little girls?” Really? First, rape isn’t about sex. It’s about power. And it has nothing to do with how “hot” a little girl (OMG! She actually used these words!) is. If you buy into that nonsense, then explain why a 74 year old nun was raped in West Bengal this week.
But this push by the NRA, and gun worshipers along with the GOP, to allow guns on college campuses has nothing to do with protecting women, and everything to do with Guns! Guns! Everywhere! It also ignores the fact that allowing guns on campus also allows the rapist to carry a gun. And since rapists tend to plan their rapes (long and short term) who do you think would be faster on the draw?
And how exactly would arming women against rape line up with Republicans definitions of “legitimate” and “forcible” rape? And given that the conservative view of rape is that “women lie about rape” can you imagine what would happen to a women who actually shot her attacker – and ruined a young man’s promising future?
This mindset also approaches rape as the mostly fictitious “man jumps out of the bushes” scenario. Can you imagine how this would go down if a women shot the frat guy at a party? She would be blamed for drinking and what she was wearing and if she smiled at the poor guy, called a liar and then we could blame everything on rap music. Because everything is women’s, the gays and rap music’s fault. Amirite!
Consider this: If you are tired reading posts about the War on Women, guns, race and bigots, imagine how tired of them I am. I would love to not write about these issues anymore, because that would mean the GOP would have stopped talking about, and legislating them. Instead, Republicans keep making everything about these issues. As a women, who’s also raising a teen daughter, I can’t afford the luxury of letting these things slide – or not prioritizing them. Reproductive rights and sexual assault aren’t side issues to women. They directly, and in many cases immediately, impact our daily lives.
Warning: “Choreplay” Isn’t A Cute Phrase, So Don’t Use It. Really, Just Don’t
Even as a stay-at-home mom who handles almost all the household work, the term “choreplay” irritates me. Haven’t heard it yet? Well, here’s what it means: Men can get more sex if they do chores around the house.
This NYT article makes a lot of good points, including the part about fathers and women’s voices in business. (Note to beer and car manufacturers: I’m the one who buys most of the beer in our household. I don’t drink beer, but I buy it for my husband since I’m the one who runs most of the errands. I’m also part of the car buying decision. So if your ad is sexist and I don’t like it, I won’t buy your product. Perhaps, you should cater to me, too. I swear, when I watch some of these commercials I know there aren’t women, in positions of power, making decisions, because half this nonsense would never be aired if there were.)
But here’s where the NYT’s article goes off the rails:
If that isn’t exciting enough, try this: Couples who share chores equally have more sex. As the researchers Constance T. Gager and Scott T. Yabiku put it, men and women who work hard play hard. One of us, Sheryl, has advised men that if they want to do something nice for their partners, instead of buying flowers, they should do laundry. A man who heard this was asked by his wife one night to do a load of laundry. He picked up the basket and asked hopefully, “Is this Lean In laundry?” Choreplay is real.
Choreplay is real? I hope not.
Wash the dirty dishes, not because there are dirty dishes, but because men will be rewarded with sex for doing something that needs to be done? This is really a thing, and we need to nip this nonsense in the bud. Now I’m not saying that taking chores off your spouse’s plates can’t be romantic or appreciated, but the idea of men doing chores because it will pay off sexually implies that housework is women’s work – and that men doing laundry or dishes is somehow going above and beyond what is expected of them. Basically, it’s saying: Men shouldn’t have to do chores, so when they do they deserve a reward.
It also makes sex into a business transaction (just like the “good old days” when picking up the dinner check equated into a woman having to put out. Hey, I bought you lobster!). It reduces sex into something men want and something women must endure. “Oh hell, he vacuumed, guess I’ll have to give him sex tonight.”
Do men want women viewing sex as a chore? Because that’s the flip side. I would hope not. Sex, at least good sex (and I’m beginning to think that’s rare), is something both people should want and enjoy. It should not be a lie back and think of England, gotta cross this off my to-do list sort of thing, because well… he did do a load of laundry. Buying into choreplay means buying into transactional sex – I did this for you, you do this for me. It paints the picture of sex being something only men want, and something women suffer in order to have the bathroom cleaned. And if men and women start buying into choreplay I see problems on the horizon. Seriously, who wants to equate sex with laundry? And if you find yourself doing this… stop. Just stop.
I remember whenever my father emptied the dishwasher he’d say, “Honey, I did the dishes for you.” Yeah, there’s a generational thing going on here (my Dad is almost 80), but my mother would always, and I mean always, counter with, “They aren’t my dishes.” My Dad did stop saying that, and it concerns me that “choreplay” seems to be moving us backwards instead of forwards.
So, can we please not buy into this choreplay nonsense? No one deserves a reward for doing things that need to be done. And no one deserves a partner who only has sex with us because we washed the dishes.
The New York Daily News Calls McConnell, Cotton, Cruz and Paul Traitors
Sounds about right.
As the Daily News reported, the four lawmakers were among 47 Senate Republicans who argued in an open letter to Iranian leaders that any agreement they may strike would not last beyond President Barack Obama’s administration.
“We will consider any agreement regarding your nuclear-weapons program that is not approved by the Congress as nothing more than an executive agreement,” the letter stated.
The Daily Banter and other outlets noted that the letter could be considered a violation of the Logan Act, which prohibits U.S. Citizens from starting or engaging in “any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof” for the purpose of interfering with a foreign policy negotiation.
“This letter is neither advice, nor consent,” The Banter’s Tommy Christopher wrote. “It’s directly addressed to leaders of a foreign government presently involved in talks with the U.S., and it is designed to thwart those talks. Unless the senators were authorized by the president to address Iran’s leaders in this letter, a case can be made that 47 U.S. senators just violated a federal law that carries a prison term of up to three years.”
Remember when you weren’t allowed to put forth the mildest criticism of a Republican President when he was on foreign soil lest your patriotism be questioned? Oh, the good old days. Personally, I think it’s time to throw these traitors in jail, or, at the very least, kick them out of congress. They are unfit to serve. Republicans go on and on about the Constitution and American Exceptionalism and then prove they believe in neither. Their loyalty towards their country is conditional.
I’ll say that again, their loyalty towards their country is conditional. Let that sink in. They are only patriots when they get their way, and if they don’t they’ll burn the country down. These toddlers are in desperate need of a time out. Actually, toddlers behave better. Republicans are a complete disgrace.
Here’s the front page of the New York Daily News:
Yep, that about sums this group up.
“Free Range” Parents Found Responsible For “Unsubstantiated” Child Neglect
Is it just me, or is this crazy?
Remember the Maryland parents who let their two kids walk home from a park alone and then had to deal with police and child protective services? They heard from the state today. The couple was found responsible for “unsubstantiated” child neglect, a confusing charge that resolved nothing and left the couple possibly more nervous and paranoid than ever.
In December, Danielle and Alexander Meitiv let their 10-year-old son, Rafi, and his 6-year-old sister, Dvorah, walk 1 mile home through Silver Spring, Maryland, alone. The kids got picked up by the police, who then turned the case over to child protective services. The Meitivs, as it happens, are “free-range parents” who have a very coherent philosophy about giving children more independence. They had let their children walk home alone that day only after practicing and felt the kids were ready.
The first thing that sprang to my mind was how, in Delaware, “per state regulation, transportation is provided for students in grades K-6 who reside more than 1 mile away from their school.” But what are the rules in Silver Springs, MD? Well, here they are: “(1) Transported areas surrounding MCPS schools are as follows: Elementary Schools—beyond 1 mile.” So, elementary aged school children living 1 mile from MCPS school do not receive transportation, which means… they can/should walk the 1 mile to school? I read through that link, searching for a rule requiring parents to walk their elementary aged children to school, but couldn’t find it. I guess kids can walk 1 mile to school unsupervised, but not 1 mile home from a park. Consistency, please.
As a parent I made many calls when it came to my children’s independence, and walking home from school or a park was among them. Basically, my theory was: Children should learn how to cross a street before entering college. And I won’t lie, every new thing I let them try made me nervous, but my job as a parent is to raise my children to leave me; to be able to navigate situations that lead to independence. Remember the first time you let your child walk to the corner store? Take the car out by themselves? Babysit a neighbor’s child? Most parents think long and hard about these milestones and base their decisions on the individual child involved. One child may be ready to walk to the park at 10, the other may not be able to handle this until 13. Some adults still can’t handle walking to the park!
So many of these situations depends on the specific child. “Are they ready?” is a common refrain among parents. Parents give these steps much thought – the Meitiv’s even practiced the walk with their children and deemed them ready. As I type this I’m looking at a picture of my then 8 year old son holding his 5 year old sister’s hand and walking down the street to Sea Shell City – all by themselves. We had walked that block (near *gasp!* Ocean Highway) a gazillion times, and that day I let them go it alone. Okay, not really alone the first few times. I had neighbors positioned along the block and had a friend who worked at Sea Shell City monitor them and call me when they left the store. But, by the next summer, the monitoring pretty much ended for my then 9 and 6 year old. Crossing Ocean Highway to Royal Farms came a few years later… but it came. And not everyone agreed with my decision, but it was my call. Today my children maneuver through airports, train stations, subways, foreign countries by themselves with ease. That’s because I let them cross the flippin’ street and go to the park.
You see a lot of this helicopter parenting in urban and highly populated suburban areas. Not so much on a farm in Iowa. I have a niece, just turned 16, whose parents escort her everywhere. I know plenty more people who do the same. When did we stop teaching street smarts? It really is a vital skill that needs to be taught over time, in steps.
My daughter is almost 18, and I still get nervous when she’s out with the car. Mr. Pandora says the only reason he sleeps is because he knows I won’t. Does my nervousness mean I’m making the wrong decision in letting her take the car? Nope. It means I’ve calculated the risk (she won’t be taking the car today due to snow!) and decided that driving, unfortunately, is a necessity in this country – just like being able to walk to school or a park or a corner store or a friend’s house.
The Meitiv’s made a decision based on their children’s level of responsibility. Montgomery County Child Protective Services declared that decision unsubstantiated child neglect (What does that even mean?). If this holds up then I’d expect a law stating that children 10 and younger are no longer allowed to walk to school without adult supervision and that bus transportation must be provided for this age group. Because a 1 mile walk is a 1 mile walk.*
*Yes, I know not all 1 mile walks are equal, so can we please skip that nonsense – especially since states and school districts consider them equal. Unless I’m missing the part that says children living in “bad” neighborhoods will receive school transportation no matter how close they live to the school. Thanks.
Reverend Kilroy Delivers A Sunday Sermon
Last week my phone started ringing and emails/texts poured in. Almost everyone began with: “Have you heard?” Why no, no I hadn’t heard. Today Kilroy puts up a post addressing what’s going on. Go read the post.
Those who sit at the right and left hand of the Red Clay God (Merv) better take a hard look in the mirror. Though school superintendents make many request for school board approval it is the school board who makes the final approval with no veto power on the super’s part. In the big picture the super’s failures are the board’s failures.
[…]
I am dishearten to hear (rumor of course) some board members want to throw Merv overboard midstream (before the end of his contract). Those who think Merv may be the problem are just as much the problem.
[…]
So I urge the Red Clay school board members who are sowing a coup to back off (rumor of course). Think about it, should we demand each board member who approve the Markell priority school agenda even in a water-down version to step-down?
I commented on the post:
I guess the decoder ring is no longer needed!
Yep, the rumors have been flying – and the number of people who contacted me about this last week was stunning. I thought a coup was supposed to happen quietly?
It’s no secret I’m not a Merv fan (that’s not personal), but this covert (overt?) plan leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It’s badly done. It’s also clumsily and sloppily done which is what concerns me the most. The way this was handled doesn’t exactly display effective leadership or inspire confidence.
I also don’t understand the timing? Maybe this would make sense if RCCD had lost the referendum – at least that would be some sort of reason. What is the reason behind this? I have a lot of theories.
I keep thinking that this move doesn’t have much to do with Merv. Do I think it’s time for him to move on? Probably, but I have a huge problem with the way it’s being handled. It seems there’s a replacement already chosen, and if the name I keep hearing bandied about is true then I vote to let Merv stay superintendent forever. 😉
I’m not sure exactly what brought this on, but my bet is that it’s bigger than replacing a superintendent. Many of those who contacted me in favor of ousting Merv couldn’t clearly state their reasoning (some even asked me to help them form arguments for getting rid of him) – which tells me that they are pieces on a chess board and not the actual players. Identify the players and we’ll find the reason.
Know what else I don’t understand? Why I even know about this. Why has a personnel matter spilled out into the general public? This should have stayed within the confines of the Red Clay School Board, and the fact that it hasn’t makes me wonder if this is even the idea of the school board, if this plan even originated there?
Superintendents come and go, but this unnecessary drama along with all the loose lips concerns me. A divided board is fine – it shows thought and discussion of issues rather than a rubber stamping them. What isn’t fine is that I, and many others, found out about this plan in the way we did (I went to a neighborhood party last week and heard about this. WTH?). I was quite surprised by some of the people who reached out to me. I am not what you’d call their natural ally – which tells me that this secret spilled out because there aren’t enough votes to make this happen and they’re trying to build support. I guess we’ll see.