Positivists believe that questionnaires are very reliable and that is the main positive goal. However, interpretivists reject the view of questionnaires as they claim it isn’t valid as the respondent on has ‘yes and no’ answer questions and they don’t go into depth with the answer. In Item B it says that ‘parents are accustomed to supplying information to the school’ therefore questionnaires would be the best way to conduct this as they can be given out on a regular basis and don’t need a formal meeting making the parents feel intimidated and not giving completely true answers. Because questionnaires collect information from a large number of people, the results stand a better chance of being truly representative. However, some parents might feel that the questions being asked are too personal and might feel like they are being judged by the school, but although questionnaires may ask personal or sensitive questions; parents are generally under no obligation to answer them.
People comprehend information differently and a person should not assume that all people will “get the joke.” Even amidst laughter sometimes people can take the information they hear, however absurd it may be, and believe that it must, at the very least, contain some truth. When this happens, prejudices and all that comes with them can begin to take root in people’s mind. · What are your perspectives on prayer in schools? What are the diversity issues involved? I do not have a personal problem with having prayer in school, but I do understand the argument against it.
But I think, if people could be extraordinary on a regular basis, he wouldn’t have any examples. We would all be free thinkers in our own right and wouldn’t need schooling. He gives examples of ideas for solving these issues, such as,”… encouraging the best qualities of youthfulness—curiosity, adventure, resilience, the capacity for surprising insight.” I think at times it almost sounds like he’s just advocating letting children run care free. Don’t worry about the future, just be who you are and develop at your God given ability level. He also refers to public education as being, “Mass schooling of a compulsory nature…” citing it would 1) Make people good.
The school board has to take these factors into consideration when planning and discussing the rezoning of students. During the negotiation process the issue of ethics and culture and the impacts it will have on the students cannot be taken for granted. The school board has to stand firm on their decisions and not allow economic status to gain power. Public schools are for all students not just the wealthy. The parents should view that a diversity school can help the students for the real world.
But if we are a country of democracy why should someone be forced into reciting or doing something they don’t feel believe in. I think the schools should write their own pledge relating to the education side of things. Having your own voice and being heard is a big part of our culture today. I think the children who didn’t recite the Pledge were somewhat outcaste. So the kids who didn’t say it were perfectly identified as different.
Eventually, the biggest problem will be to find a balance between making the much-needed progress and to try not to overwhelm everyone else involved such as teachers, parents and especially the students. There is much debate in the United States over the implementation of no child left behind, as well as its goals and methods. Teachers, administrators, parents and concerned citizens nationwide have a wide range of strong opinions about the effectiveness of this law. Many believe that no child left behind is a constructive law that will help to develop equal education for all students (NYSUT, 10S). Others completely disagree with no child left behind, feeling that such a strong focus on standardized testing is not effectively assessing what students can actually do.
Theories are constantly replaced or updated due to the self-corrective nature of science. The ideal scientists do not assume the truth beforehand; rather, their conclusions derive from the simplest and most plausible explanation of the data, and those conclusions may still differ. Yet alternatives should only be taught in public schools as far as they yield to a proper approach to the scientific method. This set of criteria will be used to address the debate over Intelligent Design’s presence in the curriculum of publicly-funded schools. The phrase “evolutionary theory” is actually misleading because it implies there is only one comprehensive model.
I believe Stimach’s essay followed the criteria of a successful argument by persuading me with strong details throughout the entirety of the argument. I think this argument would be a useful teaching tool to put in the textbook, Writing Arguments, because the author backed up her claims with reliable sources and responded to opposing views. Her argument was organized and she gave three specific reasons why students shouldn’t get married in college. Quality Sources One reason this is a good argument is that Stimach uses multiple pieces of factual evidence to support her claims. She moves from one topic to another with ease using facts from other sources frequently.
It is natural for people to make them and if people take that with the grain assault than the hell with them. I think that everyone deserves a second chance and we should not be judged because of that. Religion is something that I don’t think will make or break you but you have to have faith and know right from wrong. I really feel strongly on this question because I have been in situations where I have been judged because of my schooling and background. I don’t feel that it is fair to do that to
Will children be educated enough to understand when making self-serving, society-serving or morally-based decisions, or is today’s educational criteria a form of brainwashing to help our current government stay in power? “Conflict theorists argue that the real purpose of the public school system is to reproduce and maintain the existing class structure in our society.” (123) In several sections of the book, I disagreed with the notion that education best serves society; I believe it should be the other way