In lieu of recent protesting and more specifically, the “riots” in Baltimore, let us take some time to think back on the birth of our nation and the struggles that people had to endure for the American Revolution. We do indeed have a history of violence in this country. There were protests, riots, and looting. Remember this? Sons of Liberty
President Obama has pledged 1 billion dollars for early childhood education; the federal government along with corporate sponsors are going to help kids get a leg up in life.
“The effort being led by the First Five Years Fund will challenge the private and public sectors to spend more on early childhood education. Among those supporting the campaign are The Walt Disney Co. with $55 million, the LEGO Foundation with $5 million and the J.B. and M.K. Pritzker Family Foundation with $25 million.”
Some questions to ponder are: How significant is this? and Does it bother anyone that there is a corporate sponsorship of the earliest and most basic formal education of future children? Is this a trend that we will continue to see in the future?
President Obama made it a point to talk about his plan for increasing access to pre-school initiatives for states across the nation as part of educational reform. State-funded pre-school has been a long-time topic of interest and emphasis for democrats over the years.
“However, more recently, the idea of government funded pre-school programs have become a bipartisan issue with red states such as Oklahoma and Georgia being seen as the model for providing opportunity and access for this educational endeavor.”
Being the skeptic that I am (well can sometimes be), I wonder about the source of the change of heart? Is it because they finally realize that providing access to pre-school gives many underprivileged children the opportunity to be on a leveled educational playing field? (AKA, part of the push for educational quality reform). Or, do they feel that it provides a good educational foundation giving children the opportunity to begin learning necessary educational and social skills from a young age? Or, dare I say it, is there some sort of hidden agenda involved?
As an educational professional I can see how important pre-school (particularly pre-kindergarten and head start) programs are and the benefit they would bring to many young people. I am not sure if this idea of “universal pre-kindergarten” will actually work out for us, but I am happy that many elected officials (regardless of political party) are making strides in providing more funding and programs to benefit the masses.
In an article recently passed on to me by a friend, I read about a new “student development model” that was implemented at the University of Delaware. The model was said to be a “student centered- values education model” aimed at social justice education and implemented by Resident Assistants through the department of residence life. My take on it is that having been reviewed by the American College Personnel Association’s Commission for Social Justice Educators, leads me to believe that good intentions were at the forefront of the program although some of the details on its utilization and results are alarming. With that being stated, let me expound on my thoughts. First of all, I would hope that the there are specific learning outcomes grounded in theory which form the basis of the program. Secondly, I would hope that the needs assessment or some other crucial assessment/instrument has bee utilized in order to ascertain the issue that the program seeks to resolve. Is there truly a need for this model? To this extent? etc. Thirdly, I would hope that both the trainers (most likely community directors/coordinators or other professionals) are well versed enough to properly train, advise, and supervise the Resident Assistants (RAs). Next, I would hope that the RAs have undergone extensive and continuous training, including experiential learning, student development theory, identity theory (for themselves), as well as counseling skills, etc. in order to truly help and not hinder the development of the students in the residence halls.
What comes across alarming to me are the definitions used for training, use of labels such as “treatments” for the program, and the mere idea of putting something so heavy on RAs. Although by definition in many regards they serve as peer educators and peer advisors, they are also seen as peer role models to students. This brings about many potential issues and not to mention a vast amount of cognitive dissonance from many students already undergoing transitions and issues that are faced with the acclimation to college academics and college life. Additionally, the tactics said to be used in order to gain participation from students and/or “treat” them for their lack of participation and willingness to disclose information are also alarming. Educated, trained, and experienced professionals in student affairs and counseling would be best suited for any programs/models of this nature. Indeed for me, at first read, this is particularly disturbing. However, more information is needed for my true understanding of the matter at hand and I plan to further investigate. To read the article, follow this link : http://thefire.org/article/9865.html or visit the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education website and search for the article “Please Report to your Resident Assistant to Discuss your Sexual Identity–It’s Mandatory!: Thought Reform at the University of Delaware.”
We love what you stood for, and you will be missed, but never forgotten.
This is an awesome post for the cartographer in you!
Maps that will help you make sense of the world
my personal favorite:
now if someone would just overlay all these maps so we can see how they are connected…
Additional Information and details on the information provided above can be found at http://obamacarefacts.com.
I recently came across an article in the International Business Times regarding Female Genital Mutilation that I found to be quite interesting. The UNICEF (United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund) gathered data over the last 20 years to create a comprehensive report on statistics regarding female genital mutilation. Female genital mutilation also known as “FGM/C includes female circumcision or genital cutting, clitoral or labial excision, sutures, cauterization and symbolic piercings and pinpricks”.
The report focused on 29 countries (with the majority being in Sub-Saharan Africa, as well as Egypt, Iraq, and Yemen) where FGM/C is concentrated and continues. There are currently laws against FGM/C in at least 24 of these countries, but surprisingly, the practices still continue. In fact, three of the countries (Somalia, Guinea, and Djibouti) with laws strictly prohibiting FGM/C have the highest rates of practices for women ages 15-49. Statistics from the report also showed that there are 14 countries where at least half of all women are engaged in FGM/C practices.
More interesting than the numbers on modern practices are the approval rates of women and girls in countries where FGM/C practices exist. According to the report, 50 % of women Mali, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Gambia, and Egypt support FGM/C practices while a large percentage of women and girls in 19 of the 29 countries studied believe the practice should end. Discrepancies were noted within the report. Moreover, it is also important to note that serious risks associated with FGM/C practices have been reported and include a range of serious health problems from infection, to infertility, and death.
For more information regarding FGM/C and to view the actual report, visit the UNICEF official website at www.unicefusa.org . You can also visit the Orchid Project’s website at www.orchidproject.org for more information on the history FGM/C practices and other resources.
This picture illustrates the concentration of FGM/C practices. Source: www.orchidproject.com
