About Me

Name: Lady Logician
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Phoning It In

Q Comp is Governor Pawlenty's plan for merit based teachers pay. Because the plan rewards excellence in the workplace and (as a result) no bonuses to employees that do not meet the criteria of doing your job well, the teachers union has been dead set against Q Comp.

Well the state of Utah has implemented a plan similar to Q Comp. The reaction, from media and teachers alike, has been anything BUT similar to the reaction to Q Comp.

Deseret Morning News:
. . . the current 'one size fits all' approach doesn't offer enough incentive. It's time teachers who are worth their weight in gold get paid that gold. Just as it's time for teachers who simply 'phone it in' to be bucked from the horse so true professionals can run the show.
Salt Lake Tribune:
For the first time, Utah school districts are seriously considering how they can distribute bonuses or pay raises to teachers based on how well they do their jobs.

. . . That would benefit not only dedicated, talented teachers but also their students, as mediocre teachers would sharpen their skills in order to earn more money.


The Salt Lake Trib takes it one step further.

. . . [But] there are two myths that must be dispelled before merit systems can be effective. The first is that there are no mediocre or poor teachers in our schools. The second is that, even if there were, there is no way to differentiate between them and the excellent teachers. Both these myths have been used by teacher association leaders to undermine past efforts to adopt effective merit-pay plans.

These are the myths that Education Minnesota and their related teachers unions have long perpetuated. The Salt Lake Trib is right - merit pay for teachers will IMPROVE the system. It would make schools better for all children - regardless of what district they are in. The time has come to quit protecting the teachers that are just "phoning it in". Our children deserve better than this.
Tags: education  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Teachable Moments

So one of the many "mom" things I have been dealing with this week is the Junior Logician's viewing of "An Inconvenient Truth" in his 8th grade Science class.  Their science class has been talking about "global warming" for a few weeks now.  Today, the Junior Logician brought home two sheets - one a page for the kids to calculate their carbon footprint and the other a sheet entitled "Reflections on 'An Inconvenient Truth' What Am I Willing To Do??"  I have to admit that I was curious as to how he was going to answer.  While we have never directly talked about the issue, he has heard my radio programs talking about it from time to time.  While several of his answers were spot on, there were a couple of things that I do need to work with him on - mostly taking shorter showers....sewer and water charges being what they are and all.  The one answer that I did get a chuckle out of was his answer to the suggested action "Eat Less Meat".  His simple answer to that was a very emphatic "NO!"

While filling out the carbon footprint calculator, he had to ask about certain energy saving appliances that we have in the house.  It was nice because it gave us the opportunity to talk about ALL the reasons for having low-flow toilets and Energy Star appliances (cost savings and energy savings).  It also gave us the opportunity to talk about the pros and cons of things like compact fluorescent bulbs and the like.

Yeah, I could have complained about the propaganda as many conservative parents do.  However, I prefer to use these moments to teach the Junior Logician how to apply critical thinking to the propaganda.  It is a skill that will serve him well over the next few years.

Tags: education  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Global WHAT?

Yesterday I commented on the "20 Things You Can Do To Stop Global Warming" handout that the Junior Logician came home with.  Today I found a couple of stories that I may send him to school with.  The first comes from Fox News and it reports that (shades of 1970) we may be headed into another Ice Age.
 
Sunspot activity has not resumed up after hitting an 11-year low in March last year, raising fears that — far from warming — the globe is about to return to an Ice Age, says an Australian-American scientist.
Physicist Phil Chapman, the first native-born Australian to become an astronaut with NASA [he became an American citizen to join up, though he never went into space], said pictures from the U.S. Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) showed no spots on the sun.
He said the world cooled quickly between January last year and January this year, by about 0.7 degrees Centigrade."This is the fastest temperature
change in the instrumental record, and it puts us back to where we were in 1930,"
Chapman wrote in The Australian Wednesday. "If the temperature does not soon recover, we will have to conclude that global warming is over."
Of course critics said that Chapman "cherry picked" the data....a charge that never really seems to gain much traction when it is leveled at the global warming zealots!
 
The second comes to us via the Idaho Statesman and it reports that there is a new anthropogenic global warming denier....and he comes from a very unexpected direction.
 
Greenpeace founder Patrick Moore says there is no proof global warming is caused
by humans, but it is likely enough that the world should turn to nuclear power - a concept tied closely to the underground nuclear testing his former environmental group formed to oppose.
 
Needless to say, this call for nuclear power has not gone over well with Moore's former mates.
 
His critics, like Andrea Shipley, executive director of the Snake River Alliance, say he has simply sold out.
"The only reason Patrick Moore is backing something as unsafe and risky as nuclear power is he is being paid by the nuclear industry to do so," Shipley said.
 
Sadly, the charge that someone who changed their mind on an enviro issue has "sold out" is a very common one.  However, Ms. Shipley's charges that nuclear power is "unsafe and risky" ring hollow when you consider that nuclear power generation IS the cleanest, most environmentally friendly power source out there and it has been much safer than it's detractors fear.
 
When one looks at the 1991 report by the United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation, (UNSCEAR) one would see that the routine generation of nuclear electricity releases only negligible amounts of radioactive materials to the environment. "The average dose any individual in the world receives each year from all of the activities in the peaceful nuclear fuel cycle is less than 0.1 percent of the inevitable exposures he or she receives from natural radiation sources, such as cosmic rays and radon emitting building materials" ( Trudeau 59).
 
If these enviro-groups were serious about stopping carbon emissions and were serious about cleaning up the environment, they would back nuclear power.  It is safe for people and the environment and is a guaranteed source of cheap, plentiful energy.  Since they don't, one has to assume that their goals are not to guarantee cheap, plentiful energy for all nations....which leads one to assume that they really want us all to go back to pre-industrial times which is not good for those living in poverty now.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (4) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »