Education

Sharing a Computer Screen, if Not a Classroom

Kyle Spencer writes about the use of new technology to help students learn more while in school. Spencer looked at a school in the Bronx, Public School 55, where the first graders have begun to test out a new tutoring program. The school has been having problems getting volunteers to come in and do some one-on-one practice due to the dangerous community right outside the school. The principal, Luis Torres, "sometimes cancels fire drills because of the gunfire he hears outside". So in order to solve this problem, a new program from "Innovations for Learning" has been brought into the school. On it, volunteers from outside the neighborhood can call a student at the school and read a book. The volunteer and student share a screen with a virtual book and read aloud, sounding out any difficult words. Afterwards, students can return to the regular class activities and see real improvement. This tutoring is being tested out in various poor parts of the nation including the Bronx PS5 "where only 15 percent of the third graders passed the state English exam". Yet as always there are skeptics who claim that without a "live" inclass tutor, the children cannot learn as well. The tutor and the student cannot develop a true bond and cannot see the child's expressions and posture. Yet this is good enough for now due to low budgets and safety concerns.

At first I was skeptical as well of the incorporation of certain technological programs to aid in teaching. I've always found it much more helpful to have a teacher right next to you, guiding you step by step through a process. Yet this article changed my mind. If used in the right ways, technology truly can help us advance our education. The 7-year-old boy managed to improve his reading through a tutoring program on the computer. I can see how useful a program such as that can be in a poor, crime-filled neighborhood that scares off many volunteer tutors. I found this article relatable and interesting due to the fact that our school has been improving our technology and how we learn with new databases, programs, and so on. I am also interested in how technology will shape our education in the future. We already have college courses online and apps for studying. Could we soon be learning everything off of a computer at home? I have read about it on books and it is becoming a reality. What I would like to know more on is whether that would be effective and if there were ever tests done to see if learning from a computer is more beneficial than hands on, in class learning.

Education

College Boom in India

Sarah Garland writes about the college boom in the more remote and destitute parts of India. "Of 1.2 billion Indians, one third are under the age of 14", writes Garland, pointing out that if these children attended college in the future, they would boost India to becoming a world power alongside the USA and China. The US itself is falling behind in education as many other countries surpass it. With the rising tuition fees and failing economy, many are dropping out of college. Yet India is surging forward, transforming whole towns and cities like Patna and filling them up with new colleges and institutes. "The universities are turning farfetched dreams of higher education into reality", with programs such as Super 30 helping the poor pass exams to get into institutes. Soon India will switch from striving for more colleges to better quality colleges.

I find it intriguing how many more impoverished countries such as India are aiming high to educate their nation. They are working hard to get to the same amount of colleges and students as there are in America. What suprises me is that though they have a lot of work to do, they are not far from their goal. With other countries improving, I find it interesting that the US is actually falling behind. We are greedy and must pay incredible amounts to get through college only to end up in debt and without a quality job. Other countries like India are lowering costs, creating services to help poorer students get into college yet we are not. But must it be this way? Is America looking to educate future leaders or simply to make money?

Joe Nocera

Over the past few weeks I observed the opinionated columns of Joe Nocera, taking a look at his views on everything going on in the world. He has a background in buisness and finance but covered a range of topics including health care, sports, and medicine. Nocera has a mind of his own and does not choose one side but rather qualifies and forms his own opinions. I was amazed at the research he put behind every column and how he made the reader look at a new side of the argument. Although Nocera writes about the problems of the world such as the failure of cancer treatments and medicine, sports scandals, and failing health care reform, he always brings up the good and shows a positive outlook for the future. Nocera believes in reform in all types of fields and points out what went wrong and how to fix these problems. He is not afraid to put exactly what he thinks out there and though it is just a simple op-ed column, it may inspire others to fix the corruption and wrongs of today.

Columnist: Joe Nocera

Doctor Berwick's Pink Slip

Recently, Doctor Berwick was blocked from being nominated for leading the Medicare program. Nocera believes that he was an intelligent man who had done so much to improve Medicare in the past 17 months but claimed the Republicans hated him for voicing an opinion contrary to their's. Nocera gives a short background on what made Berwick the "most qualified person" and a perfect fit for the job. He writes that the doctor was the "health care researcher at the Harvard School of Public" and "ran the Institute for Healthcare Improvement". Further on he described the health system's dilemma- too much money was being spent on it and used a view of the size of the expenditures: "a budget larger than the Pentagon’s". Nocera also blames Republicans "who blocked his nomination in the usual way. They pored through his old speeches and articles, plucked out a few comments they objected to — he once praised the British health care system! — and announced that they would never confirm him". The columnist reports that the Republicans did not recognize his work and that they will soon realize their mistakes that. According to Nocera, "By refusing to confirm him, Republicans won a pointless victory against the president".

Columnist: Joe Nocera
It's Not Just Penn State

This week Nocera wrote about the sports scandals that have recently been hitting the news. He wrote about how many players get wound up in trouble but when it comes to legal matters they get an easy way out. This is because many teams are a source of happiness for the community and many people count on the teams to play. Many players who are arrested or get in trouble never face disciplinary action and continue on. But Nocera suggests that schools stop the sport for a bit until the scandal is resolved. Too many times has all this been covered up and it is time for change. "If a university-and its community- can't treat players and coaches the same way everyone else is treated, then what is it really teaching?"

Columnist: Joe Nocera
"Why Doesn't No Mean No?"

Many people out in the world are looking for a cure for cancer and many consider angiostatin and endostatinto be the new breakthrough. But this is only in mice and many of these seemingly great new ideas don't turn out as good as they seem. Avastin, a previous miracle thought to extend the life of patients, only worked for certain types of cancer; breast cancer was not one of them. According to the article, there was a a study said that it would extend life for patients by 5.5 months! It was given the green light to sell the drug while more research was conducted. When studied proved this wrong, it was stopped but Medicare continued to cover it. This showed how our nation is buying expensive things that do not even work and that we must learn how to say no to it.

Death Penalty: Synthesis

During the course of the past few weeks of this grading period, I've taken a look at the different opinions on a major debate in America: the death penalty. From what I found, I can say that I am against this penalty. I always found it illogical to follow the old saying "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth". I did not like the idea that we should kill those who murdered another innocent soul; it did not help anyone and the killer did not truly suffer emotionally for what he or she did. My research only enforced this view of mine. I discovered that those in charge of the executions did not always follow through with rules. Other times innocent men and women were condemed to die. Had they been sentenced to prison, they would have had a chance to live. I was also shocked with the way the execution was carried out. There would be a group of witnesses always watching, something I found revolting. How could someone watch another human die from behind a window? A human unknown to them? I would think that an eternity in prison is a much more gruesome way to go. In prison, the killer would realize his wrongs and have to live with that shame. Though it is true that the family may want to have their revenge, but if they kill the killer they are no better than the one who killed their family member. So, until I find proof that the death penalty is the only way to deal with murderers, I shall be against death row.