For this Friday's editorial analyzation, I have chosen the following article from the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/29/opinion/there-has-to-be-a-better-way-to-grade-tests.html?ref=opinion
The article is arguing that the way tests are graded in the state of New York has left the system vulnerable to cheating. Although I do believe the author's exigence is drawn from the recent scandal in my city, I also believe that the author's argument is valid. Requiring teachers to grade their own students' tests days before graduation is not the best course of action for a school district who's goal is to eradicate cheating. As the Atlanta scandal has shown, cheating can and will frequently occur when given the opportunity to, especially when a school's funding is on the line. Teachers and principals don't want their students to fail the Regents exam any more then the students want to not graduate, therefore if New York is serious about preventing cheating, a new system of grading tests must be established. However, any new innovation in the schools' systems of test grading will cost the state extra money, be it a new computer system for students to take tests on, a test scanner that sends the tests to a neutral location for grading, or physical transportation of tests to a neutral location. New York has bigger problems than the possibility of cheating on standardized tests in public schools, and I believe that if the state chooses to address this problem, it will at the very most be placed on the back burner. I suppose that for now, New York will have to rely on the personal integrity of students, teachers, and principals to keep the dangers of cheating at bay.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
Forgetting Ron Paul
The Daily Show pointed out an interesting point: Ron Paul is being systematically overlooked by the media as a serious contender for the presidential race. While I am not one to religiously follow the politics surrounding the presidential race, even I found this puzzling. Why exactly does no one seem to care about Ron Paul? The easy answer is that the media is collectively trying to discredit him as a serious candidate, but I believe the real answer is more complicated. Ron Paul is a candidate who I believe could do very well in the primary, who sees himself as more accountable to the community and to the voters than to his political party, and therefore is a serious threat to other Republican candidates. However, instead of drawing more attention to Ron Paul in an attempt to discredit and make fun of him (as was done with Sarah Palin), some of the talking heads have decided simply ignoring Ron Paul will make him go away. This is not, however, a secret, organized effort by the collective media to remove Ron Paul from the spotlight as a contender to the race. I believe the ignoring of Ron Paul is almost a sort of unspoken rule among political reporters. Out of sight, out of mind. Therefore, Ron Paul is systematically ignored, not by conscience effort, but by coincidence due to like mindsets among media figures. Perhaps if this coincidence continues for much longer, eventually more figures than just The Daily Show will take notice and the elephant in the room will eventually be collectively discussed among the media and other contenders. My hope is that the grassroots movement surrounding Ron Paul's candidacy will continue to grow and he will earn more supporters and eventually more votes in the the race to become the next president.
Sunday, August 21, 2011
First Post!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)