Ramblings of Noah Arney

From this article at the Seattle Times.

New data from a large government survey show that by every measure, the decade long decline in sexual activity among high-school students leveled off between 2001 and 2007 and the increase in condom use by teens flattened in 2003.

The article also comments on previous reports saying

…that one in four teenage girls has a sexually transmitted disease and that the teen birthrate has increased for the first time in 15 years…

And further

“Since we’ve started pushing abstinence, we have seen no change in the numbers on sexual activity…. The other piece of it is abstinence education spends a good amount of time bashing condoms. So it’s not surprising, if that’s the message young people are getting, that we’re seeing condom use start to decrease.”

And finally

The proportion of teenagers reporting having sexual intercourse rose steadily through the 1970s and 1980s, fueling a sharp rise in teen pregnancy. The trend reversed around 1991. At the same time, more sexually active teens started using condoms and other forms of contraception. Together, the trends have pushed the U.S. teen-pregnancy rate to historic lows.

Well. It seems that abstinence only sex-ed has had the opposite effect of what was hoped for. Instead of continuing to decrease the teen-pregnancy rate it has helped to increase the rate by providing poor information on any paths other than absolute abstinence.

It is impossible to force someone to your way of thinking. I agree that reminding students that abstinence is the only fool proof way of avoiding pregnancy is a good thing. However, you cannot assume that everyone who hears that message will be abstinent. Thus it is important to teach students about as many working methods of birth control and STD prevention as possible, and also how well they work.

Ok everyone, it’s time to start teaching students about sex properly. Yes, abstinence is good, but not everyone will follow that path. Thus we must teach students how to protect themselves.

The only way to completely avoid death when riding a motorcycle is to not ride one. But since a lot of people enjoy motorcycles, perhaps we should teach how to ride one safely as well.

I came across an interesting tidbit today at the Washington Times.

Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, chairman of the conservative Republican Study Committee, sent a memorandum to colleagues in advance of today’s conference meeting, where party leaders and rank-and-file members are expected to clash over the party’s direction.

The memo called for the party to adopt the following action plan and reaffirm conservative principles, including fiscal restraint, lower taxes, family values and national security:

You can take a look at it here, but I’m going to post my favorite bits.

AN ACTION PLAN FOR HOUSE REPUBLICANS: BOLD, SIMPLE, AND DIFFERENT THAN THE DEMOCRATS (yes, that’s realy what it was called.  I didn’t make it up.)

1) THE END OF PORK-BARREL SPENDING

House Republicans are committed to ending pork-barrel spending… We also pledge to uphold any future veto of a non-defense spending bill that is pork laden and does not lead to a balanced budget.

They want to cut back an all non-defense spending.  They are going to push for a balanced budget in all aspects, except military spending… doesn’t that meant that they’re not going to be pushing for a balanced budget at all?

4) A FAMILY-FOCUSED, PATIENT-CENTERED HEALTH CARE SYSTEM

House Republicans will reform and improve our current health care system, by 1) providing a refundable health care tax credit to every American to purchase affordable health care coverage,

Hmm… poor people normally don’t have to pay income tax.  Now lets assume that the tax credit amounts to 10% of your taxes back.  So, let me work out the math.  10% of nothing is… now lets see… carry the one… oh, nothing.  Which would mean that a tax credit for health care would give those who can’t afford health care because they don’t make enough money absolutely squat.  Great plan.  Worthy of Catbert.

5) AMERICAN ENERGY INDEPENDENCE THROUGH INCREASED EXPLORATION

House Republicans are committed to increasing American energy supplies to lower prices and reduce dependence on Middle Eastern Oil by allowing energy exploration in Alaska and the Outer Continental Shelf, as well as the development of cleaner coal technologies and alternative fuels.

Ok… I”m fairly certain that they’re joking here.  They are going to achieve energy independence through drilling in the protected areas of Alaska, and burning more coal… instead of clean sources like hydro, wind, tidal, and solar.  Or maybe reducing the amount of energy used by the country.  Hmm… lot of forethought there.

6) A LEGAL FRAMEWORK THAT ALLOWS US TO PREVENT TERRORIST ATTACKS

House Republicans are committed to preventing terrorists from attacking America. House Republicans will empower our intelligence agencies to intercept terrorist communications with sources outside of the United States without the lengthy process of getting a warrant that could jeopardize the ability to thwart an attack.

Yes, because what we need is more power for the intelligence agency which already abuses the power it has.  I think we should get them black shirts, I think it would really give them something to live up to.  I’m always a bit leery of those who would gladly give up my liberties for me.

7) A MORAL APPROACH FOR PARENTS TO PROTECT AND EDUCATE THEIR CHILDREN

House Republicans are committed to supporting parental rights, by 1) ensuring that a child cannot be transported across a state border for an abortion without the consent of a parent or legal guardian, and 2) empowering parents to maintain control over their family’s personal education decisions.

I’m not sure what they mean by “child” in the first part, but it seems odd that it is a parent’s right to determine if their child will have a child.  Are we talking 13 year olds here, or 17 year olds?  In regards to the second point, I feel that I should state my opposition to what they are implying.  It seems that they are supporting the voucher system, where you can go to any public or private school and the government will pay a certain amount toward the schooling.  This is a problem for two reasons.  First, it is the government stepping back from their responsibility to ensure that all of the youth in their country are being educated enough to participate in a democracy.  Second, when you think about it, it’s like saying that a doctor’s opinion of a medical problem isn’t as valid as a parent’s.  If the government doesn’t feel that they can adequately address how education should be done, maybe they should leave it to the professionals.

I originally posted this on a Ning site that we use for classroom discussions in my Educational Psych class.

Today there was an interesting discussion in the English/social studies prep room at ****. Someone brought up how grades were posted, and that most teachers posted them by student number (essentially alphabetically). One teacher though posted them that way and then highlighted in one colour those getting As, and in another colour those failing. A second teacher posts his grades sorted by grade. This lead to a discussion of the purpose of grades. Grades seem to be a motivation for students. But what we decided on was that it wasn’t just the grade, it was the competition for the grade. Competition was the motivator, not grades. I brought up that I felt it was doing a disservice to the students to assume that they can’t be intrinsically motivated. I said that in a Pass/Fail system students may start to loose their grade focus, and instead compete for doing individual assignments better than others, giving students for whom competition is the motivator more frequent chances for reward from their competition, rather than competing solely for the final grade.

It’s an interesting thought about what motivates our students to do well. I think that if grades are the main motivator, then we as members of the education system have failed them.

But really, think about it. What is the purpose of a grade?

Why do we give students grades?

Wait, no, that’s not it.  I understand why we give students grades, what I don’t understand is why we use the traditional A through F system.

It seems to discourage cooperation, and provide yet another thing for students to make fun of each other over.

I believe that we should go to a Pass Fail system, with a few alterations.  I don’t mean that we should get rid of numerical marking.  I think that many people use this correctly.  Numerical marking allows students to see where they are in comparison to the standard.  What I do not agree with is when it is used to see where students are in comparison to others.  A pass, then, should be 60% and higher (perhaps even 70%?).  This way in order to pass you must actually have achieved a level of ability that will allow the students to move to the next level of classes.

Grades should be used to help students, not to label them.

 Provincial exam marks have taken the place of actual GPA in deciding if someone can attend a particular university, so why bother with them?

Perhaps it is in fact to encourage competition.  Maybe people believe that students wont work hard unless there is a grade attached?  I believe that students will always find a way to compete, and that our focus on grades has simply made that the reason for competition.

 But in reality we’ll see how my opinion changes as I work in the schools.  Maybe I’ll find the reason for grades.