Lakewood HS/City School Disabled Students program

[Jim O'Bryan]

DL,
we do publish anything that gets submitted, but we only have limited space and limited issues per year. You can't expect a great story ready for print out of everyone.

For example: When I published my editorial about the dress code last year, I was swarmed by emails from LO editors trying to change the "tone" of the article, and wanting to talk about it over lunch and so on. The Times just pressed CTRL+ALT+P and my teachers loved every sentence of it.

Ivor-

Good news/bad news, eh?

Times have changed at the Times (when I attended LHS and dirt was invented).

I have some ideas about the caution of LO editors, but can't speak for them in this case.

Ivor

Quit your whinning and get writing.

The secret to this project is that "everyone's opinion, is valid." But then does that opinion hold up to scrutiny of the humble masses. This is one reason I balk at "overheard opinion." While it might be valid, where is the owner/ownership to work it through the vetting process.

It is not my city, your city, Ken's city, Gary's City it is our city. Together we can try to chart a course that works, especially if we open the doors and turn on the lights to the process. The same is true with the schools. While I remember your piece, and I do remember speaking with you about it. I do not remember anyone not willing to publish it.

FWIW


.

[Gary Rice]

Hello again Ivor,

I hope that you will be encouraged by all these folks trying to support what you are doing. The more controversial a column, the more difficult it is to decide how it should be presented.

Just a few more general observations, if you don't mind.

First, there is a difference between an editorial and a news article, although that distinction seems to be blurring more and more in the last few years, as so-called "conservatives" and "liberals" have each developed their own news formats.

We are seeing more and more people with agendas trying to influence the public debate. This causes people to question the credibility of what they see and read, and perhaps that's not a bad thing, in the long run.

Beyond the usual precautions of avoiding slander and libel, media people would probably be wise to clearly draw a distinction between presented facts, and their own opinions.

Sometimes, even the media people will change their minds, in light of new information revealed, or a new perspective offered.

I'll give you an example of a perspective that you might not have considered. You might think, for example, that special needs students and their parents would be totally up in arms about having to face the increased challenges of testing, and rigorous academic standards.

Well. no, they're not. At least, not as a unified body.

Huh?

Why not?

Years ago, schools had "level one" classes for some regular education students having particular difficulties with academics. Often, they had their own texts; geared at an easier reading level, and so on. These classes have largely disappeared across the country, due to the perception that education had become two-tiered, and therefore, unequal.

You see, virtually no parent wants to admit that that their child might have limitations. Students don't want to admit it either.

Rather than discussing whether a student may or may not be capable of mastering a subject, I would rather argue for a curriculum rich in diverse opportunities for success. If something does not seem to be working for a particular student, there needs to be creative ways in place for all students to be able to develop their potential. If politicians want to put 4 units of math in high school, why not allow some of that to be practical, or applied to business or vocational situations i.e.-"Math in the workplace"?

But now it's your turn. What will YOU argue? We need your voice!

[Ivor Karabatkovic]

Doug,

Which 5% are you wondering about? I still have my notes.

[DougHuntingdon]

oops 1.5%

thanks

<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>
I must have been dellusional when I thought that telling students and teachers that 1.5% of our countries budget goes towards us to help us get somewhere with our education was a good thing to do. I don't know.
<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>

[Ivor Karabatkovic]

yep, 1.5%, from a survey taken by the National School Board Association in june of 2006. They asked voters how much do they think is being spent on education (they guessed 20%) and then asked how much should be spent, they said about 40%, and then told them 1.5% is being spent.

Dr.Estrop gave me four packets full of information, from newsletters to letters to pamphlets and proposals, and this 1.5% is what grabbed my attention as well as his.

I wonder if that's the 23 Billion dollars that Congress put towards education in this years budget proposal. They said they'd give 42 billion, but only supplied 23.

To answer your question: (my opinion)

To me, 20-30% makes sense. I think since we're a nation at war, there are other things we should get more funding. Military, homeland security, education. If we're safe here, and are giving our troops what they need to be safe there, and are learning and growing here I think we'll be ok. The economy and job market will blow up by 2014 because everyone will be so skilled and "proficient". But it makes sense to fund it more than the 1.5%, because it's a future investment.

It's weird how everyone comes to the US for jobs and opportunities, and American born people leave the country for Latin America, Europe, Asia or Australia.