Foreseeability

To start out, I wish to say that I have no problem with the idea that teachers and school administrators have a special duty to foresee situations which could be potentially dangerous. I think that is a very good expectation to hold up. For myself, I think I'm fairly good at it. I can see a million and one ways in which an activity can go wrong and decide if the risk is worth it. (Example, playing wall ball. I know that there are splinters on the wall, and that sometimes the grass is slick. However, I know that my children are also aware of this and are use to running on the slick grass. Therefor, I allow it. However, dodge ball. I know my boys tend to be more energetic then necessary and have little self control when it comes to throwing the ball. thus I see a child getting hit in the head and sustaining a major injury. Therefor, I do not allow the game to be played.)

My issue with forseeablility is how teachers are suppose to have these skills. Most teacher preparation programs do not have students out in the schools untill their pratical skils section (aka, Student Teaching or Internsip). If they have the unforutnate situation as to have been unable to work with children outside of that time they have no chance to practice these skills. How do first year teachers then develop this skill quick enough to prevent a liablity suit leveled against them? I realize that there are protections in place (namely, the word 'reasonable'), but could a court not say that the new teacher in question should 'resaonably' have been taught about general situations which would cause harm?

I have major problems with the subjectivity of the law. I realize that there is no other way to phrase it so that there are more streamlined ways of dealing with liablity suits but the whole set of rules simply puts a bad taste in my mouth.

Quick and Dirty Math

Lets start with a link. Algebra Help: The Math Video Tutor

Sounds good so far, right? I mean, who of us little people couldn't use a little help when it comes to our Algebra skills. "The Math Video Tutor - Fractions Thru Algebra is a 10 hour course that will fully help a student master all of the core topics in Pre-Algebra and Algebra 1." Why don't the schools implement this, I mean, why waste all that time in the classroom teaching math skills when we can get it in ten hours from a DVD. Someone tell the teachers! They can spend most of their year drinking coffee in the lounge rather then actually having to deal with those pesky students.

Also, "There are no traditional lectures of background material that won't help you solve problems and improve your skills." Background material? Who cares about background material? If you can cross multiply fractions, who cares to actually understand what is going on? You'll pass the test and go on with life!

Okay. I'll drop the sarcasm. A friend sent me this link saying he'd been thinking about getting this to help with his math skills. It took me about thirty seconds to figure out that this was a complete waste of money. Yeah, this'll teach you all the shortcuts you forgot from High School, but if you never understood why the short cuts worked how will you know when to apply them? If you understand that the bottom of a fraction is the number of pieces in a whole, and the top is the number of pieces present in that whole you'll have a start of understanding. You'll realize that you can divide up work between people, or how to know how much food to give another person (if you're in the service industry). You can see how your profits are and then be able to do the math to figure out if you are doing well or not. If all you understand is how to do the math then you miss out on the application there of.

Responding

Here is a question for all of you to chew on. What is the proper response when you're talking to someone and they say, "I was just at a funeral." Is it, I am sorry? Or Did you know the person well? or Are you alright?

They all seem misplaced.

Cursive

So. I'm suppose to be writing every day. Today, I've decided the topic is cursive.

I was taught cursive. And for one HORRIBLE year, I had to use it on EVERYTHING. I could not turn in an assignment unless it was in cursive. When I got out of elementary school they thankfully discontinued this practice. Rather then attempt to make my writing 'pretty' I go for legible. When I cannot read someone's writing I grade much more harshly on what I can read. I would rather chicken scratch print then lovely unreadable cursive. Having never felt any desire to practice it I find that now that I am once again required to prove that I CAN write in cursive I am having great difficulties. My school journals will now be cursive written, though it takes me twice as long to use cursive then to print.

I still like print better.