I just heard about the Hawaiian public schools losing 17 days this school year so the teachers can keep their jobs and take the needed 8% pay cut to stay within their reduced budget. I think I'm with the Superintendent in saying that if you're really upset that "these kids are losing out on so much school" and "how can they do this when the kids are already so far behind in the nation's school system" - put your money where your mouth is. If school is that critical for students - PAY FOR IT. Having grown up in a house with two public school teachers as parents, I know that everyone thinks they are an expert on education. I am not saying that I have any idea on how to improve education because I am not in that industry, nor do I have any idea on how to pay for a better education system, but I do know that you can't whine about school being so critical to our kids and then do nothing when the budget for it is cut. I do not envy the state government in trying to trim their budgets, but it will be interesting to see if this changes some of the national debate on education.
Obama has talked about extending the school year because our students need more classroom time to learn all that they need to know. And like everything else, the concept sounds good on paper, but you've got to pay for it somehow. Our local school district offers seven period days for their secondary students when the state only pays for five. They can offer the extra classes for students because luckily this area can afford to step up and pay for it. Not everyone is so lucky, but that doesn't mean it's not important to try.
I think the aftermath of what happens in Hawaii will be interesting to watch. It's like when you give your kids choices - they made the choice to reduce the school year - let's see how passionate this makes people and see if they're really willing to put their wallet where their mouth is.
I hate to be a downer on such a cool news headline this morning, but one of the first things that came to mind in this "surprise" decision less than a year into his first term as president is why give a man the Nobel Peace Prize when he's about to announce a troop surge in Afghanistan? And what's that now? It's because of his POTENTIAL to have an effect on the reduction in nuclear arms and his desire for diplomacy? Seriously?
If this is the Nobel Prize for Hope, then have at it, but it's the Nobel PEACE Prize - let's give him a chance to demonstrate some of his plans rather than give it to him to make sure he stays on the right path. I'm absolutely not saying that anything will change in Obama's plans, but this just seems a bit premature.
I'd love to have the attention from receiving this go towards actually achieving his goals. That maybe the Nobel committee had something going for it when it decided that giving Obama the award now would help boost his peace-loving profile to get the plans moving forward that much faster. Would absolutely love it.
Congratulations President Obama on winning the Nobel Peace Prize - if you thought you had pressure on you before to achieve your goals, it just got doubled.
adj. Deep in thought; contemplative.
n.1. Contemplation; meditation.2. A product of contemplation; a thought.