Strollerderby : schools

Get Your Stock Tips from These Kids

JeanneSager — Fri, 29 May 2009 15:27:00 GMT

You might still be content to track the market with CNBC and the Wall Street Journal, but I've got a lead on investing in Wisconsin.

A classroom of mini traders in Neenah, Wis. to be exact.

A group of fifth graders from Neenah more than doubled their money investing in fifteen different stocks, with a target on the big banks. It was all hypothetical money (and their parents are kicking themselves now, I'd bet), but it won them a state-wide economics contest.

The kids started with $100,000 (again, fake bills), and turned it into $203,000 within a period of ten weeks. Their prize is a trip to the New York Stock Exchange.

I remember doing a stock project back in high school (they start 'em so young these days, don't they?), but with picks that were based completely on my favorite things (at the time, The Gap and Tootsie Rolls), I didn't fare too well. But letting kids pick their own stocks was the name of this game - their teacher says he tells his charges he's there to act like a broker, to give advice, but not to make the decisions for them.

But no matter how much research these fifth graders did, do you really think they know any more than the folks on Wall Street? Or is this just a good reminder that the stock market really is a crap shoot?

Lower-Income Kids Moving More Because of Recession

Amy Kuras — Thu, 28 May 2009 17:31:00 GMT

Although I live in Detroit, cradle of the auto industry, and thus have anxiety attacks on a daily basis about what will happen if GM goes out of business, we’ve been pretty insulated from the worst of the recession so far. It’s more because my husband works in academia and I am a freelance writer so it’s not like we had any money to begin with, but I definitely feel lucky that we aren’t facing foreclosure or significant loss of income (knock wood) like so many of our neighbors.

One of the many things that breaks my heart about this recession is the effect on kids. It’s not their fault, they didn’t make any of the irresponsible decisions that helped bring the economy down, and yet they are facing the loss of their homes, significantly reduced standards of living and worse.

Teachers and school counselors are seeing an increase in mobility among lower income families due to the recession, and this was a group that already moved around a lot as their fortunes rose and fell. Teachers tell stories of kids who start school one week before standardized testing begins and are just lost, who are sleeping on a couch at Grandma’s because their family lost their home and needs a place to stay, who face a new school with no friends in the middle of the school year.

I feel so bad for these kids – my family moved a lot when I was a kid and it sucked, and we were, as middle class people, insulated from the myriad other difficulties faced by a low-income family. And I did live through a parental job loss when I was in college, and even then when I wasn’t living at home the stress and anxiety my family was facing affected me a lot.

My only point here, I guess, is be nice, and teach your kids to be too. If a new kid shows up midyear, encourage your kid to maybe sit with them at lunch or get to know them, because chances are things are hard enough for this kid at home and a little kindness can make a big difference.

Who Really Cares if They Have Perfect Attendance?

JeanneSager — Wed, 27 May 2009 18:27:00 GMT

A perfect game only takes nine innings (seven in high school). But perfect attendance takes two thousand three hundred forty days.

That's one hundred eighty school days times thirteen years of school. Of this year's crop of seniors, guess how many have that kind of record? Not a whole heckuva lot.

But for all the kudos due Stefanie Zaner of Maryland for her thirteen years of showing up at school (hey, it earned her a feature in the Washington Post), there are plenty of reasons not to stress yourself out about your kid's not-so-perfect attendance.

As Zaner's teachers attest, she was an extraordinarily healthy kid. She wasn't the kid walking in the door with a high fever and a vomit bag to make it through the day. That's luck (and a hearty immune system). According to the CDC, the average kid gets anywhere from six to twelve illnesses a year (from the common cold to a major bout with a bug). Nearly twenty-two million school days are lost to the common cold alone.

And you know how you stop the spread of all those icky disease? By keeping your sick kid HOME. Hence all those school closures in the face of swine flu, folks.

It's also worth nothing that Zaner called the last two years of her life the most stressful, period. And it wasn't just being a kid looking at getting into college. She said the idea of being "perfect" weighed heavily on her. Credit goes to this incredible kid for not crumbling under the pressure, but if she hadn't grabbed this particular brass ring, would anyone really have thought any less of her? Colleges? Her parents? Her first boss?

If this is something your kid wants to do, and is up to doing, fine. But don't make it your goal Mom and Dad.

Image: Toombs

Black Prom, White Prom for Georgia Kids

JeanneSager — Tue, 26 May 2009 17:30:00 GMT

Hooray for progress! Er, well, maybe not.

Because 55 years after Topeka vs. Board of Education called for the desegregation of public schools, there are still kids in spots around the South who attend segregated proms. White kids have their prom one night. Black kids have theirs another.

It's a story that's getting national attention thanks to actor Morgan Freeman's decision to fund an integrated prom in Mississippi, where he grew up, for one school - helping to desegregate the schools once and for all. The story is the focus of a documentary set to air on HBO in July.

But even while Freeman's alma mater, Charleston High School, has made the jump, there are still plenty of schools left that haven't. Like the Georgia high school profiled in the New York Times late last week. In a place where white kids still throw up their hands and excuse their behavior with, "It’s just a tradition.”

To that, I say, we all know how much teenagers love bucking tradition, don't we? Seriously, hasn't one of these kids watched Footloose? Corny story of a group of teens who brought back the school dance despite the TRADITION of no dancing and no carousing put forth by the town's religious elders? It's a classic of sorts. Almost a tradition.

At least it's as much a tradition as teens bucking their elders by standing up for change. That's what they call progress. And unless kids can get on board, we're screwed.

Image: NY Times

Sixth Grader's Project on Harvey Milk Banned by School

JeanneSager — Mon, 25 May 2009 16:01:00 GMT

Natalie Jones just wanted to get a good grade on her sixth grade project. She didn't know writing about Harvey Milk, a person she said stood up for all people regardless of their backgrounds, was going to make schools officials pull out their "sex education" policies.

Maybe because she's in sixth grade, and she wasn't writing about sex?

The California sixth grader was yanked into the principal's office the day before her Power Point present was slated to be given in class, and complimented by the administrator for doing high school quality work. A backhanded compliment, apparently, because the principal then informed Natalie she was probably not going to be making the presentation the following day.

"She explained to me because he was a gay, that not maybe all the parents might agree with their kid watching that," Jones said in an interview with CNN.

OK, better to pretend the gays just don't exist then? Because, as Natalie's mother, Bonnie, pointed out - this was a project on a man's life. It wasn't about gay sex. Natalie picked the state's first openly gay politician to profile after watching the Sean Penn Academy Award-winning movie (named Milk, by the way, if you've been hiding under a rock and haven't heard about it). She said it's because "he stood for all minorities, no matter what you were." See, nothing about sex, folks.

And that's where Mt. Woodson Elementary School really got this one wrong. Because they picked on a kid talking about a homosexual person not only as though that were something bad but as if that's all he was. Yes, Harvey Milk was openly gay and did a lot for gay rights. But he was also a politician in California. A pretty famous one. And this is a California student writing about an influential figure for a report for a California school.

So they're not only teaching kids that they discriminate against homosexuals and encouraging discrimination, but they're teaching them how to pigeonhole people based upon one part of their life.

The ACLU is demanding an apology from the school district, by the way, and has threatened to file a lawsuit.

Image: Amazon

Parents Blame Obama for Field Trip Snafu

JeanneSager — Sat, 23 May 2009 18:01:00 GMT

When in doubt, blame the president. Hey, it works for folks on swine flu, the economy and apparently for parents from Stafford County, Va. The parents of kindergartners slated for a tour of the White House who were turned away after arriving more than an hour late for their visit are blasting President Barack Obama for not being a man of the people.

The parents of kids from Conway Elementary School told NBC that their kids arrived ten minutes late for a tour of the White House that cost parents $20 per child. But staff at the president's home say the buses pulled in a full hour late, and they'd held the gates for them that long - fifteen minutes longer than they usually allow for late guests.

With an impending visit by members of the Pittsburgh Steelers that day (a visit during which White House staff and the football players put together care packages for the Wounded Warriors program for injured service members, by the way), the White House couldn't accomodate the tour.

The White House staff were the folks who would have had to lead the tour. The same staff who had to prepare for another scheduled visit that day, and in a place that runs like a well-oiled machine (in part because of security issues not faced by many other places on this planet), that's their JOB. But apparently they were supposed to ignore that and just let the kids in.

Said parent chaperone Paty Stine: "Here we have President Obama and his administration saying, 'Here we are for the common, middle class people,' and here he is not letting 150 5- and 6-year-olds into the White House because he’s throwing a lunch for a bunch of grown millionaires."

Because this was the president himself out there telling kids "you can't come in, nanny, nanny, boo boo!" The president who conspired to have Beltway traffic keep the kids from arriving at their destination at the appointed hour. Not to mention the president who could think of nothing better to do that day then rearrange his leader of the free world schedule just because someone didn't plan a cushion into a trip in (infamously nightmarish) D.C. traffic.

Got that? It's the president's fault.

Oh, and that president, by the way? Released a statement saying he and wife Michelle would like to see the trip rescheduled because they feel badly that the children were disappointed. But the kids, er, parents have apparently taken their marbles and run home. They told NBC the end of the school year is fast approaching, and they can't see how they can reschedule.

If your kids' bus arrived at a museum an hour late, would you blame the museum director for not letting them in? What if they showed up at a water park an hour late? A theater? How about blaming the school here folks.

Image: NBC (that Steelers visit)

via Gawker

Schools Say No Pain in the Butt Parents

JeanneSager — Fri, 22 May 2009 14:01:00 GMT

The minute your kid starts some social function - be it library group or school - there's one set of parents you can identify by the wide berth between them and every other parent in the pick-up line.

You know the parents I'm talking about. They complain. About EVERYTHING. Nothing is their kid's fault. And there's no more loaded a question than "how are you?"

But the next time your school administrators whine that they need more parent volunteers, you might want to ask them: do you weed out the whiny parents?

A Maryland school district is in hot water with parents after a board of education member let slip that principals "might not pick PIAs" (yes, that would be pains in the tuchas) to stand on committees and other school organizations. According to the Washington Post, the board was discussing School Improvement Teams, when an argument broke out over wether they're open to everyone or just up to the principal's discretion.

Members of the public charged the district with being secretive about who is on the committees and doesn't advertise for members.

As a parent who has steered clear of the contrary parents as much as possible, there's that knee-jerk reaction to the story that prompts me to say: "well, you wants a pain in the ass on your committee?"

But let's face it, parents who complain have a say too. At least, they should. Because their kids are as affected by the governance of a school as anyone else. You may not like them, but they're still a critical part of the school community.

Dig deeper, and you might find the whiny parents bring an extra facet to school governance that you and I won't bring. Because the contrary view might not be popular. It may not even be right. But it's evocative. And when it comes down to choosing someone to represent my views, I'd like to know there was someone who isn't afraid to speak their mind up there on a board or focus group. Who wants a mouse who will "yes" the school administration to death? Because they aren't going to change a thing.

So listen up administrators. I don't not want to sit next to them at the class play, but the pain in the ass parents are still parents. Which means you answer to them too.

Image: Gifts.com

Is Kindle Coming to a School Near You?

JeanneSager — Tue, 05 May 2009 20:30:00 GMT

The Amazon Kindle has made the jump to academia, signing deals with several textbook publishers to make their materials available via the electronic device.

It's limited to college at the moment, but when you look at how quickly Kindle has spread (from its introduction in 2007 to its move into institutions of learning in 2009), I can't imagine it will be long before the paper bag covered textbooks are a thing of the past.

Pretty soon, our kids could be book-free.

At least books-as-we-once-knew-them free.

Don't believe me? I remember the kids in my classes in elementary and high school whose only exposure to books were the texts they hauled in their backpacks (or, just as likely, left in their lockers).

Frankly, I'm a self-described Internet addict, and yet, I always return to books at the end of the day, to physical paper volumes. I can get my news on the 'net, do my work on the 'net, even listen to my music and watch my tv on a computer. But I need a real live book to slip off and escape into the written word. Maybe I'm just an old fuddy duddy.

I can see the advantages - portability for one (no more aching backs from those overpacked bookbags), the ease of updating a school's resources as information changes (instead of making do, as we did, with textbooks marked with our parents' names at the front, read out to us by our parents' old football coaches) for another. Whether a cost savings could be realized, I don't know (do you weigh the damage to one book by a student against the damage to a machine carrying many books?).

And not having to craft one more paper bag bookcover? Priceless.

Still, I may cry the day my daughter comes home with all her homework shoved away in her pocket. And the Kindle 2 - or some other player that "reads" the books aloud to them? Uh uh, no way, no how. She may be living in "the future" we dreamed about when we were kids, but she's still got to do the work herself.

Image: Amazon

Hey Kid, You'll Soap Your Eye Out

JeanneSager — Mon, 04 May 2009 20:00:00 GMT

So much for good, clean fun. Officials at an Idaho middle school claim they had to remove soap from the boys bathrooms because of vandalism.

Apparently, it's better for the boys to enact germ warfare by not washing their hands than it is to have a little soap wars in the bathroom.

Parents have been protesting the removal, pointing to its incredibly poor timing in light of the swine flu pandemic and health officials EVERYWHERE reminding people to wash their hands to reduce the spread of the disease (not to mention a fair number of other contagious diseases).

The state's education department notes that all school lavatories are required to have soap provided for the kids. Sounds like a pretty common sense requirement to me (see above). So why would a school yank the soap?

I remember some of the bathroom pranks pulled in my school days (by classmates, natch!). Milk poured down the heating vents. Smoking in the stalls. TPing pretty much everything. The school responded with measures that kept us on our toes, including a lock on the door so only a staff member could let a kid in (and they'd do a thorough once-over before you left to make sure you hadn't gotten up to any mischief while you were supposed to be doing your business). Even in an understaffed, underfunded school like mine, they made it work.

But they didn't take the soap. Because soap is point zero when it comes to preventing disease - especially with kids, who are not exactly the most hygenic creatures on earth. Why else would we spend hours teaching them to sing the alphabet song while they scrub a dub dub as toddlers?

So why, oh why, would anyone ever imagine taking soap away from kids is a good idea?

Image:1stInHandwashing

Best Places to Raise Your Kid in America

editors — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:22:00 GMT

Business Week just published their second annual Best Places To Raise Your Kid 2009. This year, they went state-by-state. Towns were judged primarily on school performance and safety, but other criteria like affordability and crime rates were also weighed. So, without further adieu, the top towns to raise your little ones. Do you already live in one them? Should your hometown have made the list? Tell us why! --Andrea Zimmerman

Huntsville, Alabama
Anchorage, Alaska
Gilbert, Arizona
Springdale, Arkansas
Arcadia, California
Fort Collins, Colorado
West Haven, Connecticut
Wilmington, Delaware
Pembroke Pines, Florida
Warner Robins, Georgia
Honolulu, Hawaii
Boise City, Idaho
Mount Prospect, Illinois
Fort Wayne, Indiana
West Des Moines, Iowa
Overland Park, Kansas
Lexington-Fayette, Kentucky
Bossier City, Louisiana
Portland, Maine
Gaithersburg, Maryland
Malden, Massachusetts
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Eagan, Minnesota
Biloxi, Mississippi
Lee's Summit, Missouri
Billings, Montana
Omaha, Nebraska
Paradise, Nevada
Nashua, New Hampshire
Edison, New Jersey
Rio Rancho, New Mexico
New Rochelle, New York
Jacksonville, North Carolina
Bismarck, North Dakota
Columbus, Ohio
Lawton, Oklahoma
Bend, Oregon
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Pawtucket, Rhode Island
Rock Hill, South Carolina
Souix Falls, South Dakota
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Euless, Texas
Orem, Utah
Burlington, Vermont
Virgina Beach, Virginia
Bellevue; Washington
Charleston, West Virginia
Eau Claire, Wisconsin
Casper, Wyoming

Sidwell Parents Say Obamas are Cheapskates

JeanneSager — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:02:00 GMT

First it was the British press all abub about Michelle Obama's gifts to the prime minister's children. Now fellow parents are claiming the president and first lady cheaped out on the gifts they donated for the auction at the school daughters Sasha and Malia attend.

Really? This is what we're worried about in light of the disastrous global economy, a swine flu pandemic that's taking lives and should I even point upward to that ever-widening hole in the ozone layer?

The Obamas reportedly donated a Rolling Stone with a picture of President Barack Obama on the cover, autographed by the president. They also gave a copy of Vogue Magazine with the first lady on the cover, autographed by Michelle Obama. Have you priced a presidential autograph lately? An Obama-signed baseball recently went for $1,500, but hold on to it and who knows - a recent estimate put his signature on a picture at about $6,000. Anything signed by JFK is estimated to bring at least $2,500 at auction. These were hardly dollar store trinkets.

But according to MSNBC, the parents were hoping for something more personal - then President Bill Clinton gave a golf outing with himself while Chelsea Clinton once offered up her own baby-sitting services. Cool experiences? Most definitely, although I will say an Obama autograph can be sold down the line - you can't make any money back on having someone babysit your kids.

And while I understand Sidwell Friends is an exclusive school, as I understand it the cachet of having a president's child attend is a big draw for the school in and of itself. So the Obamas send their kids there AND pay money to send their kids there, and they have to give their own time too? You know, the time OTHER than that used for running a country at war with a crumbling economy?

School auctions are not big in my very rural area, so I'm not familiar with protocol. Do parents really feel that everyone has to give something of equal value? Isn't the point of paying tuition to a school sort of enough anyway?

Image:

Parents Blackmail Their Kids' School

JeanneSager — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:30:00 GMT

So Ray Abril Jr. High School won't win any awards for creativity. Is the name really so bad that parents have to blackmail their school to get it changed?

A majority of parents in the Colton Joint Unified School District voted for the school board to name its new high school "Grand Terrace," but when the school board picked the name of a former school trustee (Abril) instead, they decided they'd boycott a state-mandated test to show their displeasure.

Is that really necessary?

The boycott is expected to earn the school district penalties from the state, which requires the Star tests be administered to at least eighty-five percent of the school population in accordance with the No Child Left Untested, er, Behind, act.

Parents say they're trying to send the school district a message - one parent's direct quote in the Contra Costa Times: "If you won't listen to our opinion about the name of the high school, then you don't get the benefit of our test scores."

Because this is going to make or break your kids' future? I'm all for protesting standardized testing. A number of studies have proven the tests may actually hamper learning, encouraging teachers and students to rely on rote memorization. They're also particularly bad for minority students. These parents, however, aren't complaining about the tests themselves. They're just using them to show they have more power than the board. Said one mom, "If you change the name, if you listen to us, then we will let our children take the test."

Um, that's called blackmail where I come from.

This is the name of a school building. A name that, despite the vote, doesn't HAVE TO be put up for vote in most places. Our local district merged in 1999, and I didn't have a say in what they named the new district. Trust me, I sleep just fine at night. I'd probably sleep better knowing my kid wouldn't be entering the building in a year and a half ready to face standardized tests, but I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

Granted, I don't know much about Ray Abril Jr. He might be a bit of a jerk (although many comments on this news story would note to the contrary). But he's also not Stalin or Hitler. And it's JUST A NAME.

Anyone else think the kids and parents are reversed here?

Image: SB Sun (Colton Unified School)

High School Coach Fired for Appearing in Playboy

JeanneSager — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 19:03:00 GMT

Angry parents managed to make their school fire a cheerleading coach who had posed naked for Playboy. But for all the outrage from parents over this woman who was supposed to be acting as a "role model" to their kids, is anyone surprised the real reason Carlie Christine got canned was because she refused to overlook a few school rules?

According to a California TV station, Christine was fine until a few girls didn't make her squad because of unexcused absences from school. That's when the girls' cranky parents made copies of her centerfold (which is quite nekkid - our big brother publication Nerve has the pictures if you want to see - but you'll have to search for them yourself on Google, they're definitely NSFW) and dropped them on the principal's desk.

Apparently, they wouldn't have cared who was coaching their daughters until they found out no one was coaching them.

Now that word is out, of course, that Christine was Playboy's "cyber girl of the week" and posed totally topless in the centerspread of the magazine. And parents are mad that she was ever allowed around their kids.

I'm on the fence about this one - perhaps more so because of the duplicity of the parents. It's a pity they couldn't be righteously indignant BEFORE they wanted Christine to bend school rules for their kids.

While I would hope that a cheerleading coach, who is supposed to be someone teen girls look up to, would have a little more respect for herself than to do this, I will say she was doing something completely legal (she wasn't on a street corner, folks), and she did it on her own time. She wasn't holding a modeling shoot in the middle of practice. And last I checked, cheerleading coaches don't exactly make a lot of money.

What do you think parents? Should Christine get the ouster or should these parents learn to grow up?

Image: Nerve

(Also of note: Brett points out, over at his site Daddytips.com, that Ms. Christine's online modeling profile says "no nudes." Riiiight.)

Tennessee Public School Computers Block LGBT Websites

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:30:00 GMT

Whoopsie! It turns out that the computers of the Tennessee public school system are inexplicably biased against gay rights. How the heck did that happen? School administrators are completely baffled by the embarrassing snafu, but say that it must be the fault of their filtering service, Education Networks of America.

But the ENA has clearly stated that they are off the hook. "The decisions on whether to block certain websites are made solely by the school districts,” the ENA attorney said. “ENA does not participate in these decisions in any way and is instead simply told which websites to block." Huh. Is it possible that homophobia had something to do with this?

Some of the blocked Web sites include Human Rights Campaign--with such inappropriate messages for kids as, “In a world defined by difference, our strength depends on our common humanity”--and the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network, which creepily “envisions a world in which every child learns to respect and accept all people.” Not all Web pages dealing with gay people were blocked, however. Tennessee schoolchildren are more than welcome to peruse such sites as People Can Change and The Americans For Truth Against Homosexuality.

As Jezebel points out, the silver lining of this rather shocking homophobic agenda is that no one wants to take the blame for it, showing how much public opinion has progressed in favor of gay rights.

Photo: britannica.com

Kids' Art Adorns The Corner Suite

Amy Kuras — Wed, 15 Apr 2009 14:01:00 GMT

The art in your average corporate office ranges from bland to, well, kinda scary. Rarely do you see something in an office and think “wow, that’s cool.”

But if that office contributed to a Philly nonprofit that trades kids’ art for corporate donations for art supplies, you’d be pretty impressed.

Fresh Artists works like this: students give permission to have their art reproduced for he program and it goes into a digital gallery. Donors to the program can choose a piece or several as a thank-you gift. The art then hangs in the headquarters of some of the city’s biggest companies.

Donations are returned to school art programs in the form of grants for art supplies. More than $40,000 was raised in the program’s first year alone.

This is so awesome. Not only is it a self-sustaining way to provide much-needed art supplies to city schools, but the kids (who attend disadvantaged schools throughout the city) get the serious self-esteem boost of knowing their work, with their name on it, hangs proudly someplace other than the school hallway, were people can see it and remark on it.

Founder Barbara Chandler Allen says, "Most charities are top-down: 'the haves' giving to 'the have nots,' This is totally different. We have created a lateral philanthropy. It is vulnerable children giving to other vulnerable children. The adults are there simply to grease the wheels."

What a great idea, all the way around.

When Your Kid's Report Card Says They're Fat

JeanneSager — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 18:01:00 GMT

The "B" on your kid's report card could soon stand for Body Mass Index.

The Massachusetts Public Health Council has OK'd a proposal that will have schools measuring students' weight and height and sending report cards home to parents that warn them when their kids are overweight.

It's actually just the latest in a string of states that measure kids' BMI (eighteen in total do so), and a growing number that are sending the results home to the parents. Dubbed Mass in Motion, the Massachusetts program is aimed at lowering rates of childhood obesity - and parents will have the chance to opt out if they want to.

I am already prepared for the response of some parents - BMI isn't not an accurate representation of whether or not someone is overweight. And they're right. But the breakdown can be helpful, especially for parents who see the pediatrician only once a year with their kids, when it's time for the well visit. Sudden spikes or drops in weight can be signs of illness in kids, signs of depression or drug abuse too. Catch the warning signs early, and you might prevent your kids from future harm.

Parents would also do well to know a little more about their child's health. Studies have shown that parents often fail to recognize that their kids are overweight - be it because they have problems with weight themselves, are in denial or simply don't notice a change because they see their kids every day (where a grandparent who sees them monthly might notice a big difference in that time span).

How would you feel if you got this kind of report? Would it bother you to have the school stepping in?

Image: Go Healthy Go Fit

Charter Schools go Online

JeanneSager — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 15:24:00 GMT

Thinking about homeschooling but not sure you have the chops? What if you could school your kids at home, but leave the actual education up to a "real" teacher?

Charter schools are making the jump to online, where a curriculum is laid out, tests given and students have the advantage of doing it all from home. And, because it's a charter school, the bulk of the costs to parents - from the price of a (loaner) computer to their art supplies - are taxpayer funded.

It's a movement that could expand homeschooling opportunities to parents who have always been uncomfortable with the idea of the burden of their child's education resting entirely on their shoulders but who are equally uncomfortable with the public school system in their area. That's why charter schools are usually created anyway - chartered by parents who want an alternative to the traditional school system that will be open to all kids, kids whose parents often can't afford private school tuition. Taxpayer funded, they're meant to extend choice in education to more families.

But while homeschooling parents have been making use of the internet practically since it began, if they signed on to a particular program, parents have often paid out of pocket. By granting the charter school label to an online school, taxpayer funds come into play.

And parents who've signed their kids up say they're loving it. In a recent Chicago Tribune piece, Michelle Koss, mom of a child with learning disabilities, said this has enabled her daughter to take her time mastering different subjects. Where she was lost in a traditional school setting, Sarah Koss is gaining momentum by working online at home.

As a mom who is pro-homeschool but knows it just wouldn't work for our family, the idea intrigues me most because it would take some of the onus off of me as teacher. I don't have faith in myself to be her educator, but with this kind of help, I could see it working. And knowing my taxes were going to fund it, instead of paying into a school system she would never use, would be a bonus. Too bad it's not available in my hometown.

Is this option available in your area? Would you take them up on it?

Image: Media.Canada

Forget Thank You, Teach Your Kids Netiquette

JeanneSager — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 20:33:00 GMT

Your kids finally have down when to say "please" and "thank you?" Looks like it's time for the next round of manners training: how to be polite on the 'net.

South Korea has launched a program in its schools dedicated to teaching little kids to be nice on the 'net. It sounds like they need it.

Not that South Koreans are particularly obnoxious! But according to research, South Korean kids are among the youngest internet surfers in the world. A group called the National Internet Development Agency of Korea, determined that by December 2007, Korea's "internet penetration rate" of people above age six was more than seventy-six percent. The international average is closer to twenty-two percent for kids six and up.

The nation's heads of education have taken a serious look at cyberbullying and its devastating affects on kids (including notable young TV stars who killed themselves after receiving threats online and a teenage girl who hung herself after her appearance on TV about her challenges with weight drew significant amounts of online snark). Here in America, cyberbullying is said to affect at least forty-two percent of our kids who use the internet. Fifty-eight percent of our kids have admitted to having had mean or hurtful things said to them while online. The same number said they didn't bother to tell their parents when it happened.

It seems smart to start the kids young on being respectful and using good manners despite the anonymity of the 'net. But is this something they really need to teach in schools? Check out this video of the little South Korean kids singing netiquette songs:

They're guardian angels to their internet friends, but what about their in-your-face friends?

Via Lemondrop

Is Pay to Play At Public Schools Fair?

JeanneSager — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 18:29:00 GMT

There's a storm a brewin' in one Pennsylvania school where administrators have suggested parents pay for their kids to take part in extra-curricular activities. With the economy oh so sunny, I can't help but wonder if this isn't a national trend.

Are more public schools going to call for a pay to play system?

You're darn tootin'. In fact, many do. And in states like Minnesota and Arizona, it's written right into state law that they CAN. Ditto Pennyslvania, where a 2002 law stipulated it's OK for schools to charge fees for activities that are not "essential to core education."

But parents at the Dallastown Area School District in Southern Pennsylvania say this will put an undue burden on them - especially for families with more than one child. They point out that the economy is making parents pinch the same pennies as the school district; and they need free activities for their children now more than ever.

There's long been an argument that fees for extra-curricular activites in a public school system do more harm than good. The lower income families struggle to pay the fees while kids from more affluent families are treated to more opportunities. It perpetuates the separation between the classes. It's a valid argument. Except, when I look at my property tax bill (schools are funded via property taxes in New York State), I am more liable to celebrate if I knew my daughter learned to read and write then I am if I know she just got a free t-shirt for playing free soccer.

The crux of the argument lies in the notion of a free education as guaranteed by our Constitution. But is football education? What about yearbook? Or art club? In Dallastown, the school spends $1.3 million a year on extra-curricular activities for their kids. This in a state where ninety-five percent of school districts were found in 2007 to be spending well below what was recommended per student on academics.

Sports and other extra-curriculars are good for kids. They're social activities, for one, educating children on the nuances of a working with others, often adding discipline and rounding out their core education. But think of how many parents can't send their kids to extra-curriculars because they won't make it home in time to pick them up from practice, and you'll see how limited the offerings already are to the general population. That was me - I didn't play one single school-associated sport during my twelve years of public school. The school wasn't expected to step up and help my parents arrange for me to get home from practice. Nor did they supplement my parents' payments for me to play AYSO soccer in elementary school. It was expected to keep me in line from 7:30 to 3:55 and produce a college-ready senior.

I'd prefer to think that every kid - rich or poor - got a good start on reading, writing and arithmetic before I start worrying about whether little Johnny gets to stay after school for extras. Once we have that down, then I'll think about.

So what do you think, parents? Is it fair to force parents to pay for extra-curriculars, even in this economy?

Image: Wikimedia

School Expels Teen for Birth Control Pill

JeanneSager — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 19:32:00 GMT

A teenager who popped her birth control pill during her lunch period at a Virginia school is spending her spring break fighting the district not to be expelled.

The problem? That she did so during school hours. . . specifically, that she took a pill without supervision of the school nurse.

Her mother says she's aware the girl violated school rules, but she's questioning just how far a school should go with its punishment. Two weeks suspension and recommended expulsion for taking a legally prescribed drug? Does that sound fair?

It's a problem for plenty of parents in America - not birth control per se - but medicine. Kids take a lot of it - just this week, a study showed the precipitous rise in the number of kids who require medication to control their blood pressure and diabetes. And those are just two diseases. What about asthma, allergies, ADHD? Not to mention your standard headache or menstral cramps which could use an over-the-counter fix. All legal drugs, and not always feasible to take at home. Some medicines require several dosages in a day, for example, spaced out over time. Others require kids take them at the same time of day, every day. And a headache doesn't come on to suit the school schedule.

Meanwhile, schools are steadily trying to fight the tide of youthful prescription drug abusers in the America - a number that's up fivefold in the twelve-to-seventeen bracket in the past decade and a half. They call for students to take all medicines to the nurse's office, where the school health official is charged with handing out the prescription drugs to the students at the appropriate time in the appropriate dose.

It's what the girl in Fairfax should have done, what even her mom admits she should have done. Unfortunately, it doesn't work for every kid. In part because some school districts refuse to condone over-the-counter medications because they do not come with a doctor's note that can be kept in the nurse's office. And in part because kids need medicines at different times during the day; times when the nurse's office isn't always open. Some schools have cut back on the availability of nursing staff too, sharing one nurse for several buildings - so kids end up handing their medicines over to office staff, who parents argue are often even less informed about the proper use of the medication than the kids themselves, who have been taking the drugs for years.

And school districts have gone overboard. The Washington Post article that shares the Fairfax family's story cites a since-overturned law from Maryland that required a doctor's note for kids to put on sunscreen. Really? Because we'd rather the kids all end up with skin cancer over a legal substance that's available over the counter in any Wal-Mart in the country, for sale to anyone of any age?

With birth control too there's the worry that being so strict on teens dulls the efficacy of the fight against teen pregnancy. Wouldn't we rather our teens were taking the pill than skipping it? And despite the school's claims that this wasn't about what kind of drug but the fact that it was a drug, period, I can't help but wondering if they would have threatened explusion over, I don't know, aspirin? I'm not defending the girl in Virginia for her actions - birth control pills are to be taken at the same time every day, but there's no reason she couldn't have been on a schedule of taking them in the morning before school or at night.

She was wrong and deserved to be punished, but isn't expulsion for a LEGAL drug a little much? Do you feel the schools have gone too far in reaching into our medicine cabinets?

Image: AC

Worksheets Die a Green Death, Kids Celebrate

JeanneSager — Tue, 31 Mar 2009 14:34:00 GMT

Oh what I wouldn't have given to skip worksheets in grade school. The totally useless (in a kid's mind anyway) busy work handed out by bored teachers to get us to sit down and shut up.

I guess I was just born a few decades too early. Sigh.

Teachers are saying bye bye to the worksheet in an effort to both cut costs and cut their carbon footprint, and today's kids are loving it.

They write their papers on a computer, read books on the computer, even do their homework on scanned PDFs available via the Internet. The teachers are finding themselves spending less time at the copy machine (or less time sending their assistants to the copy machine) and more time for classroom instruction or preparation for instruction. And the kids, they say, are more engaged. Used to cell phones, Wiis and constant electronic connections, being plugged in inside the classroom has meant better student engagement.

And, of course, there's that cost issue - even in better economic times, schools across the country could always used more money. Now, the financial issues are dire in some districts - where teachers have sold ad space on testpapers, administrators have called for kids to bring their own toilet paper and all classroom appliances have been yanked.

With kids learning about Twitter and Wikipedia in England and these efforts, are you worried our kids will never be able to unplug? Or are you just happy to see a greener planet that costs you less green?

Image/Source: Boston Herald

School Says No Touching - Ever

JeanneSager — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:01:00 GMT

Want to make a bunch of middle school kids with their hormones a ragin' really crazy?

Tell them they can't touch other. No high five. No bumping fists. No noogies. And definitely no holding hands - nope, not even locking pinky fingers.

Administrators at a middle school in Connecticut have put out a strict no touching policy in an attempt to cut down on "horseplay" among the students.

In theory, I get it. Kids in middle school are rough on each other - and the kid who was kicked in the groin at the school a few weeks ago was in some serious hurting (I'm a girl, and even I think about the kick in the 'nads and cringe).

But middle school kids don't live in a theoretical world. They're at an age when they literally crave touch. They are starting to get an itch for sexual exploration - even though they're not ready for sex (no matter what they think). So they tickle. They hold hands. They hug. And since they're still little kids, they also tussle, slap five, roughhouse.

Some of them take it too far, obviously, which is where discipline comes into play. Lay down common sense rules, and kids respond. If they don't, they face the consequences. Like punishment for kicking a kid in the groin.

If they weren't respectful enough of the rules NOT to get violent, is a no touching rule really going to stop them? Or is it just going to make a roiling mess of pre-teen hormones go beserk?

Part of the socialization of school is learning to respect one another's personal space. When a pre-teen boy gets too close to a pre-teen girl, she should be developing the wherewithal to tell him to back off. Boys too should be learning where the lines are drawn. Because in the real world, there is no "no touching" rule. We walk past our co-workers, and thanks to years of growing up around other kids, now when we can put our hands on their shoulders to scootch past to get a the coffee machine, now NOT to put our hands on their butt when we do it.

You know where the no touching rule is going to put most of these kids? In detention.

Image: VariousandSundry

Brit Kids Learn to Twitter in School

JeanneSager — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:25:00 GMT

I racked my brain for a way to write about this in one hundred forty characters or less. Sorry, can't do it.

But in deference to the subject matter, I'll be brief.

Twitter and Wikipedia have been added to the curriculum at schools in Britain.

Oh, you want more? OK, then. The proposal is to have kids leave primary school with a familiarity with blogging, Twitter, Wikipedia and podcasts. They'll have to have fluency in using a keyboard and spell check . . . in addition to handwriting and actually learning to spell.

But it's not all about technology. The proposal also calls for less usage of calculators and more of a focus on life skills, including learning to handle peer pressure and develop relationships.

The teachers union has jumped all over the proposed changes, accusing the government of going with trends instead of evidence-based studies of how kids learn and what they need. "Computer skills and keyboard skills seem to be as important as handwriting in this. Traditional books and written texts are downplayed in response to web-based learning," said John Bangs, head of education at the National Union of Teachers.

As a writer who does a lot of her work on the Internet, I can't say I disagree with the plans. I love traditional books, I sit down with my daughter and read them every night. But I get my own news on the Web, and I expect she will too soon enough. I can't see a future where she won't need keyboard skills or the ability to navigate the net.

If this were your child's school, would you be protesting the changes or cheering them?

Image: Twitter

Kids Sing Religious Song, Parents Sue

JeanneSager — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 13:35:00 GMT

There are songs that mention religion, and there are songs that are religious. When a song is named "In God We Still Trust," and features the words "Bible," frequent references to "Him," and the word "believe," wouldn't you think that falls into the latter category?

Apparently, it doesn't matter. At least not to a Florida public school where a third grade teacher was training her students to sing the song by country group Diamond Rio for their end-of-year program. The kids had the song memorized when one made mention of it to Mom and Dad. When the parents complained, the teacher told the kids they wouldn't have to sing it if it violated their beliefs, but told them they would be excluded from participation in the program. Sounds like punishing kids for their beliefs to me.

The superintendent yanked the song just before the parents filed a lawsuit, which they filed anyway, looking for compensatory damages because (according to the suit), teaching the song "amounts to religious indoctrination and interferes with the parents’ right to raise their children according to their own beliefs."

I'm not a big fan of lawsuits, but what's upsetting here is the defense from the school. They're acknowleding they're aware of separation of church and state, but they say a religious song is different. The lawyer for the St. Johns County School Board said choruses are traditionally exempt from the rules against public prayer in school. According to a report in a Jacksonville newspaper, the attorney said, "Courts have held that a choral curriculum can be expected to include religious songs because a significant percentage of choral music is based on religious themes or texts."

In general, I agree. I sang Hanukkah songs when I was a kid in school, and I'm Catholic. It never bothered me because they were historical (and honestly, I thought the festival of lights was pretty cool!) and not heavy on religious rhetoric. There was no "we will believe in X, Y and Z."

But this isn't an old song with a passing reference to religion. It's a song released on an album in 2006 by a contemporary band. And it talks heavily about believing and following God (click here to watch the music video and see for yourself). And if the teacher told kids who didn't believe that they couldn't participate in the school program, that's religious persecution.

What do you think? Are the parents overreaching or are they right to be upset?

Image: AnswerBag

How to Say No To the Kid Selling You Something

JeanneSager — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:06:00 GMT

Let's face it, no matter how bad the economy gets, there's always going to be a kid knocking on your door with something useless to sell.

For Scouts, for church, for school, for the poor starving children in Ethiopia (so they can finally get a break from Mom harping on about cleaning their plates).

And, if you're anything like me, you buy it all. Because you . . . just . . . can't . . . say . . . no. But there's a set of columnists over at Slate who say you can say no to charitable giving without feeling like a total tool (OK, I added that), and they're willing to tell you how.

Written in part by a former staffer at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, who had to say "uh uh" thousands of times over to worthy charities who were lining up for grants, the piece advocates pumping up the asker . . . and then saying no. Basically their suggestions are to validate the person fundraising by telling them how important their work is, and how much you value what they're doing.

OK, that might work for adults, if you can figure out how NOT to sound like a patronizing SOB. But with kids . . . it just ain't gonna work. Why?

For starters, there's that cute factor. As my colleague Brett says, if you want to sell something to him, send a little girl knocking on his door. That's why schools and churches use kids to sell. They KNOW we don't want to disappoint kids.

And that's the second part. Kids don't want to hear that they're doing a great job. They want results. It could be seen as an unfortunate result of our instant gratification society, but a part of me is happy to know kids want to succeed and they are learning to stand up for themselves. The words "you're doing a great job," ring hollow for a child who has been told that they need to sell 10,000 boxes of sugary treats in order to get their school a new set of swings. If you're not buying, they're that much farther from their goal.

And kids like goals. They like the big picture. They're not quite as good at the smaller one, like the size of your paycheck this week or the comparatively huge number on your mortgage bill.

My advice? Honesty. Not brutal honesty, but honesty all the same. Like, "I'm sorry, I just bought from Timmy down the hall." or "I'm sorry, I am full up on wrapping paper this week." Sometimes cutting them off at the pass works, setting a limit like "I'll buy if you have something under $5." If they do, great. If not, well, at least you set a limit that priced you out of that $50 raffle ticket. You were honest.

The important thing is the follow through. Don't say no to one kid then buy from the next one - word always gets around. Don't say, I have only $5 to give and then rack up a $50 tab - they'll know you're a soft touch.

Not that there's anything wrong with being a soft touch. I can't say I've ever passed a kid and said an outright "no." But I have skimped out on my purchases, picking the $7 box of candy and NO MORE before.

As long as it's the kid asking and not their parents, I'll probably say yes. But I don't have to like it. As I told my babysitter's granddaughter, "Don't ask if I WANT to buy some Easter candy for your trip to sleepaway camp. Ask if I WILL buy some Easter candy for your trip."

Image: Childrens Dayton