Neo-Liberalism

After reading about what Neo-Liberalism means, I now understand a little bit about what Wisconsin is going through. Walker with his Neo-liberal type of plan for or state, I believe, is not going to help and is just going to keep people resisting this plan. An article dealing with Walker and his Neoliberalism, states some more reasons why this bill is not going to help: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=23664. This article states that the budget repair bill will do just the opposite of that. For example, the bill would include selloffs of state power generation facilities,so in no-bid contracts notoriously prone to insider dealing. How is that going to benefit our state? From Walkers proposed bill, it makes me not want to become a teacher in Wisconsin for the moment. All people that fit into the status of middle class are basically getting the wrath of this bill. People that are also struggling to find a job and make money before this bill will probably be in the same boat, or even worse from this bill. This neo-liberal way of thinking means it takes away the governments help dealing with things like welfare and food stamps. Sure, some people that are involved with these programs don't deserve it, but I believe that the majority of people need it at times until they get back on their feet. It doesn't mean that these people are lazy or irresponsible, but maybe the job they do have isn't enough for their family to live on, or there is only one income that is coming into the family. In my opinion teaching is one of the most important jobs there are in the world today and to take away our voice as a result of this bill is not right. Teachers have a right to speak up in their unions, and hopefully it was always for the students best interests.

Standardized testing

I had to read a chapter for class about curriculum, and one aspect I took from the article was the part about standardized testing. I searched on the Internet for an article regarding the negative effects on standardized testing and found this article called, "What Are Some Criticisms of Standardized Tests?(http://www.wisegeek.com/what-are-some-criticisms-of-standardized-tests)" This article goes over how standardized testing does not show the full potential of a student. For example, from a multiple choice test, a teacher can not see where a student went wrong in say a math problem. So, a student could of just made a silly mistake and got the answer wrong but essentially knows how to do that kind of math problem. If we could see why the students are making the mistakes, teachers can find ways to help the students with the areas they are struggling with. How can a multiple-choice test show you reading comprehension if it is between four different answers, and if you are not sure you could just guess and hope to get it right? Maybe you got lucky and got it right, or maybe you got it wrong because you didn't have enough time during the timed tests to go back and see which answer would fit best. Speaking of the pressure of finishing a test in time, there is also a ton of stress a student goes through before doing these tests. Students know how important these tests are and they essentially don't want to disappoint anyone if they were to do bad on a test. A school should not be a place where they have to worry about test scores, but a place where they can expand their knowledge without worrying about if the information they just heard will be on the big test.

Unequal opportunity

Hey all!

While looking into readings about inequality in America's school system, I found an article dealing with unequal opportunity: Race and Education (http://www.brookings.edu/articles/1998/spring_education_darling-hammond.aspx).  This article talked about how minorities are not getting the same opportunities as other students in school.  There is a gap in standardized testing between white and non-Asian minority students.  I found this article interesting because it related this gap in testing to the ridiculous book, The Bell Curve, where it states that if a students are continually getting low test scores that it is not the schools fault.  It means that the students achievement is part of their genes, culture, or lack of effort and will.  That makes no sense to me, and no one should believe that a person's genes or culture means that they are not as smart as the other students around them.  Everybody is unique so everybody has different strengths and weaknesses.  Schools with more opportunities and better teachers will probably have better test scores than other schools that don't have the same opportunities and teachers.  The curriculum is also different between the good and poor schools meaning that students are not all at the same level on the learning scale.  So to say that a person has low test scores because of their background is absurd.  The article goes on to say from a study done they took some 7th grade at-risk students and put them in a honors class to see how they would do.  The students performed significantly better then the other students showing that it is not genes or a person's culture that makes a successful student.  Those students weren't put in the class because of a standardized test either.  I think that also goes to show that a students intelligence shouldn't be determined by a test.  Testing also doesn't help show a student what they are worth either.  Just because a student doesn't do good in a subject doesn't mean they are not smart.  I believe all students deserve a chance and should be in classes no matter what testing level they are at.