#vote #RegisterToVote #USCitizens #NaturalizedCitizens #NativeBornCityzens
In the past few weeks, thousands of people from many countries have become U.S. citizens.
For most, the process took years. But, they say, it was well worth it.
On July 3, 2024, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution covered some of these citizenship ceremonies. In one case, political columnist Patricia Murphy told the story of her cousin from Ireland finally becoming a U.S. citizen.
The privilege of U.S. citizenship is valuable to anyone who comes here from any other country.
Usually, the first thing these new citizens look forward to is registering to vote and casting their ballots.
Many native-born citizens of this country do not take advantage of that right to vote. Every election, be it local, state or federal, is important.
If you are a native-born or long naturalized citizen of the U.S., and are of eligible age, do what the newly naturalized citizens look forward to: register and vote!
Politicians will do their thing. Courts will do their thing. If you don’t like what they are doing, vote them out! If you admire what they are doing, or say they are going to do, vote them in! Don’t let minor mishaps by candidates discourage you from voting. In the upcoming elections, it will come down to WHAT you are voting for, not whom you are voting for.
Our system of democratic government has shown its fragility recently. There are some who want to eliminate it altogether. If you don’t want that to happen, make sure you vote for candidates at every level that have pledged to preserve it.
The preservation of our system of government is more than just a partisan issue, or a matter of opinion. It’s a matter of power. Some would rather have the few control the lives of the many.
If you think voting for candidates who want to disrupt that system is a good idea, you may miss our system of government when it’s gone.
Giving Person X ultimate power today because you like him or her may lead to Person Y, whom you may not like, coming to power tomorrow. An election may not be able to stop that.
Often, a person who gets power this way will find ways not to leave power, regardless of the people’s preferences.
We’ve also recently seen courts, for the first time in the nation’s history, start to take rights AWAY from people.
If you don’t want that to keep happening, vote for candidates at all levels who will appoint judges who will enhance and increase rights, not remove them.
Remember, what you think you have the right to do today may not be available to you tomorrow.
The reason for optimism here is that the people STILL have power to control much of the country’s destiny.
New citizens cherish the right to vote here. It should be cherished by ALL citizens. If you think your vote doesn’t count, it will count more than ever. Don’t sit out an election because you don’t like the choices. Remember, some choices are so much worse than others. As a voter, you have to discern the worst alternative, and vote for the other candidate.
Voting should be made as easy to do for everyone eligible in all jurisdictions.
Still, regardless of attempts to restrict voting, as some want, you, as a citizen, must persevere and do whatever you must to vote at all levels. Damn the long lines and other obstacles. Make sure you register, vote and get your vote counted.
Your future definitely will depend on it.
Peter
Tag Archives: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
IT’S TOUGH BEING A YOUNG ADULT, LOOKING FOR HOUSING
#housing #HousingCosts #YoungAdults #BuyingAHouse #SellingAHouse
It’s not easy being a young adult today, trying to build a life.
As Bill Torpy, columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, points out, the median price for a house in Atlanta today is $405,000. He discussed the perils of young adults and housing in his May 12, 2024, column.
If you are 20-something, married or single, can you afford $405,000 for a house?
With rents on apartments also skyrocketing, it’s no wonder many young people are still leaning on “the bank of mom and dad” for help.
There are a number of issues driving up housing costs.
In decades past, a young person could get an affordable apartment to live in until he or she was able to buy a house. After all, The American Dream included home ownership.
They would buy their first house and live there until they outgrew it. Then, they would sell it to buy a bigger house. They would keep trading up in housing size as needed, until they reached retirement age.
Then, they might sell their bigger house and trade down to a smaller one, perhaps in a retirement locale with the various amenities for older folks.
That pattern is more or less out the window today. Buying and selling real estate has become something of a cut-threat endeavor.
In those old days, a person starting out might offer a price for a house that was a bit less than the seller had asked. The seller, looking for a firm sale, would usually accept. Today, it’s more likely that a buyer will have to bid up from the asking price, and might still lose out.
The demand for housing today is way over what the supply is. Because people can’t make any more land, most property available for building has been spoken for. That caps the supply at a certain level, but the population has grown considerably from decades ago, and keeps growing.
Also in the housing mix are entities such as property management companies, hedge funds and real estate investment trusts that tempt sellers with cash offers, leaving many young buyers out of luck.
Meanwhile, apartments and condos are going up like crazy in some areas.
Often, new apartments mean high rent, and new condos can be overpriced and have high owner fees to maintain common areas etc.
Tiny houses, and housing made from shipping containers also have been trending. These are not an option if one plans to have a family, or even a spouse.
Something else is happening today. Many young adults want everything now. They won’t settle for a fixer-upper, or rooms they view as too small. Many want what they are used to – what their parents have. And, they want it now. They are unwilling to accept something less, and work up to what they ultimately want.
If you are young, and do not want to live with mom and dad for the rest of your life, flexibility is the key. Chances are, even if you buy or rent someplace that’s not exactly what you want, figure on making do until you can save enough to afford more. As you trade up, you may not get everything you want at each stage. But, with each stage, you may get something more.
It’s not always possible in some areas to find adequate, affordable housing. But, if you keep looking, you may run into something you can work with. By the way, try not to get too comfortable living with mom and dad.
Remember, too, that a house is a house. A home is what you make with the house you have.
Peter
It’s not easy being a young adult today, trying to build a life.
As Bill Torpy, columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, points out, the median price for a house in Atlanta today is $405,000. He discussed the perils of young adults and housing in his May 12, 2024, column.
If you are 20-something, married or single, can you afford $405,000 for a house?
With rents on apartments also skyrocketing, it’s no wonder many young people are still leaning on “the bank of mom and dad” for help.
There are a number of issues driving up housing costs.
In decades past, a young person could get an affordable apartment to live in until he or she was able to buy a house. After all, The American Dream included home ownership.
They would buy their first house and live there until they outgrew it. Then, they would sell it to buy a bigger house. They would keep trading up in housing size as needed, until they reached retirement age.
Then, they might sell their bigger house and trade down to a smaller one, perhaps in a retirement locale with the various amenities for older folks.
That pattern is more or less out the window today. Buying and selling real estate has become something of a cut-threat endeavor.
In those old days, a person starting out might offer a price for a house that was a bit less than the seller had asked. The seller, looking for a firm sale, would usually accept. Today, it’s more likely that a buyer will have to bid up from the asking price, and might still lose out.
The demand for housing today is way over what the supply is. Because people can’t make any more land, most property available for building has been spoken for. That caps the supply at a certain level, but the population has grown considerably from decades ago, and keeps growing.
Also in the housing mix are entities such as property management companies, hedge funds and real estate investment trusts that tempt sellers with cash offers, leaving many young buyers out of luck.
Meanwhile, apartments and condos are going up like crazy in some areas.
Often, new apartments mean high rent, and new condos can be overpriced and have high owner fees to maintain common areas etc.
Tiny houses, and housing made from shipping containers also have been trending. These are not an option if one plans to have a family, or even a spouse.
Something else is happening today. Many young adults want everything now. They won’t settle for a fixer-upper, or rooms they view as too small. Many want what they are used to – what their parents have. And, they want it now. They are unwilling to accept something less, and work up to what they ultimately want.
If you are young, and do not want to live with mom and dad for the rest of your life, flexibility is the key. Chances are, even if you buy or rent someplace that’s not exactly what you want, figure on making do until you can save enough to afford more. As you trade up, you may not get everything you want at each stage. But, with each stage, you may get something more.
It’s not always possible in some areas to find adequate, affordable housing. But, if you keep looking, you may run into something you can work with. By the way, try not to get too comfortable living with mom and dad.
Remember, too, that a house is a house. A home is what you make with the house you have.
Peter
WILL OFFICE SPACE UPGRADES BRING WORKERS BACK?
#WorkFromHome #OfficeSpace #PersonalInteractions #jobs #employers #employees
Companies that require office workers face a dilemma.
Since COVID-19 forced many workers to toil from home, some workers don’t want to come back to the office.
Their employers who pay for the office space want more workers to come back, at least once in a while.
Some, like Cisco in its Midtown Atlanta offices, are resorting to upgrading their office space by focusing on improving indoor environmental factors, according to an article by Zachary Hansen in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The article was published April 14, 2023.
In fact, as a new Portman Midtown Atlanta office tower goes up, it may be the last of its kind for a while, Hansen writes in an article published May 13, 2024.
But, will those things entice workers back into the office? Many have gotten used to working from home, or somewhere else. The advantages – no commute, no buying lunch at work and other money savings, for example – outweigh the disadvantages – no office worker interaction, distractions at home etc.
That puts companies in somewhat of a bind. How much office space do they really need? Does having an office building, or office space in general, give a company an identity that makes it worth having? Is upgrading office space to entice workers back going to be worth the investment? Will workers respond by coming back into the office?
These are the decisions of the future, both for companies and their employees. If a company forces workers to come back into the office, will they quit?
If a worker has a great job he or she doesn’t want to lose, will he or she give up the freedom that working from home gives them?
Will being home, with young children, be too much of a distraction for workers? Will they then bear the expenses of commuting, day care etc.?
Of course, many workers dream of having these alternatives. Many workers HAVE to go to work at a specific location. They cannot possibly do their jobs from home. They must interact with bosses, customers, coworkers etc.
But, if there are choices available, is there a way a worker can have it all with some sort of hybrid work schedule?
As discussed here before, if workers can do their jobs remotely, they can essentially live anywhere. They don’t have to be in a high-cost, high-tax locale, even if their employer is.
They can live where they want and still have the job they want.
But, as a society, do we want to encourage such a solitary lifestyle? Of course, essentially working alone cuts down on arguments. You don’t have to sit at a lunch table with someone you don’t like, or with whom you disagree on just about everything.
Still, we all benefit from having personal interactions with people. Some service organizations who meet regularly, even if they don’t require regular attendance, encourage it because club members are deprived of the presence of those who are absent. They see that as a loss.
So, most people will make decisions about where and how they work based on personal preference, unless companies impose requirements.
We will all miss something if too many people do not interact with one another. The workplace is the easiest, and often the best, place to do that.
Peter
Companies that require office workers face a dilemma.
Since COVID-19 forced many workers to toil from home, some workers don’t want to come back to the office.
Their employers who pay for the office space want more workers to come back, at least once in a while.
Some, like Cisco in its Midtown Atlanta offices, are resorting to upgrading their office space by focusing on improving indoor environmental factors, according to an article by Zachary Hansen in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution. The article was published April 14, 2023.
In fact, as a new Portman Midtown Atlanta office tower goes up, it may be the last of its kind for a while, Hansen writes in an article published May 13, 2024.
But, will those things entice workers back into the office? Many have gotten used to working from home, or somewhere else. The advantages – no commute, no buying lunch at work and other money savings, for example – outweigh the disadvantages – no office worker interaction, distractions at home etc.
That puts companies in somewhat of a bind. How much office space do they really need? Does having an office building, or office space in general, give a company an identity that makes it worth having? Is upgrading office space to entice workers back going to be worth the investment? Will workers respond by coming back into the office?
These are the decisions of the future, both for companies and their employees. If a company forces workers to come back into the office, will they quit?
If a worker has a great job he or she doesn’t want to lose, will he or she give up the freedom that working from home gives them?
Will being home, with young children, be too much of a distraction for workers? Will they then bear the expenses of commuting, day care etc.?
Of course, many workers dream of having these alternatives. Many workers HAVE to go to work at a specific location. They cannot possibly do their jobs from home. They must interact with bosses, customers, coworkers etc.
But, if there are choices available, is there a way a worker can have it all with some sort of hybrid work schedule?
As discussed here before, if workers can do their jobs remotely, they can essentially live anywhere. They don’t have to be in a high-cost, high-tax locale, even if their employer is.
They can live where they want and still have the job they want.
But, as a society, do we want to encourage such a solitary lifestyle? Of course, essentially working alone cuts down on arguments. You don’t have to sit at a lunch table with someone you don’t like, or with whom you disagree on just about everything.
Still, we all benefit from having personal interactions with people. Some service organizations who meet regularly, even if they don’t require regular attendance, encourage it because club members are deprived of the presence of those who are absent. They see that as a loss.
So, most people will make decisions about where and how they work based on personal preference, unless companies impose requirements.
We will all miss something if too many people do not interact with one another. The workplace is the easiest, and often the best, place to do that.
Peter
CAN (DO) STUDENTS FEEL SAFE IN SCHOOLS
#SchooolSafety #teachers #students #parents #FeelingSafe #SchoolShootings
Safety in schools is more than just being able to avoid being shot.
Of course, any moment now, someone could walk into a school with a gun and shoot a bunch of students, teachers and staff.
What can we do about it? Not much, short of limiting the supply of firearms – particularly the most lethal and purely offensive weapons — for people who shouldn’t have them.
More security officers in schools will help, as long as they are willing to come face to face with the assaulter(s).
But now, it’s not just the threat of violence in the schools that can concern children. Children used to be able to confide in teachers, or other staff, about things they may have been afraid to tell parents.
Now, in many places, teachers and staff MUST tell parents if children talk to them about, say, their sexuality.
Maureen Downey, education columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, took on this topic in her March 14, 2023, column.
There was a time when school was a totally safe space for kids. Yes, they were supervised. Yes, they had many requirements they had to fulfill. Sometimes, discipline was necessary.
If Child X was bothering Child Y, Child Y could go to someone and report it confidentially – at least in theory. (There may have been some fear that Child X would retaliate if he or she were disciplined).
Of course, there should be cooperation between teachers, staff and parents when necessary. But there are some things kids don’t want to discuss with parents, particularly if they live in restrictive households.
Discussing such things with other students has its own peril. Besides, students usually do not have the adult wisdom to counsel properly.
We want students not only to be safe in school, but also to FEEL safe in school. If they do not feel safe, they won’t learn properly. Despite some schools that strictly use rigor and discipline as an education method, most students are not motivated to learn strictly out of fear. Certainly, fear can get kids to accomplish tasks. But, they are unlikely to truly learn what they need to know that way.
Feeling unsafe in school puts fear at top of mind for students.
So, what is an educator to do under these conditions?
If students are not allowed to be honest with educators about what they are feeling, how is an educator supposed to reach them?
As governments begin to impose unreasonable restrictions on how teachers teach, what they teach, what they can and cannot say to students etc., how and what do these entities expect students to learn in school?
It’s a question that will not be answered immediately. It’s difficult to measure what a deprived learning environment will do to any child.
The good news in all this – or the bad news, depending on one’s perspective – is that if a student doesn’t learn what he or she wants in school, there are other readily available outlets for them to get that information. Students often will fill that learning vacuum via other means.
We can only hope that depriving students of safety, and some education, in schools doesn’t lead to one or more of them, out of frustration, turning to weapons against that same school.
Peter
Safety in schools is more than just being able to avoid being shot.
Of course, any moment now, someone could walk into a school with a gun and shoot a bunch of students, teachers and staff.
What can we do about it? Not much, short of limiting the supply of firearms – particularly the most lethal and purely offensive weapons — for people who shouldn’t have them.
More security officers in schools will help, as long as they are willing to come face to face with the assaulter(s).
But now, it’s not just the threat of violence in the schools that can concern children. Children used to be able to confide in teachers, or other staff, about things they may have been afraid to tell parents.
Now, in many places, teachers and staff MUST tell parents if children talk to them about, say, their sexuality.
Maureen Downey, education columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, took on this topic in her March 14, 2023, column.
There was a time when school was a totally safe space for kids. Yes, they were supervised. Yes, they had many requirements they had to fulfill. Sometimes, discipline was necessary.
If Child X was bothering Child Y, Child Y could go to someone and report it confidentially – at least in theory. (There may have been some fear that Child X would retaliate if he or she were disciplined).
Of course, there should be cooperation between teachers, staff and parents when necessary. But there are some things kids don’t want to discuss with parents, particularly if they live in restrictive households.
Discussing such things with other students has its own peril. Besides, students usually do not have the adult wisdom to counsel properly.
We want students not only to be safe in school, but also to FEEL safe in school. If they do not feel safe, they won’t learn properly. Despite some schools that strictly use rigor and discipline as an education method, most students are not motivated to learn strictly out of fear. Certainly, fear can get kids to accomplish tasks. But, they are unlikely to truly learn what they need to know that way.
Feeling unsafe in school puts fear at top of mind for students.
So, what is an educator to do under these conditions?
If students are not allowed to be honest with educators about what they are feeling, how is an educator supposed to reach them?
As governments begin to impose unreasonable restrictions on how teachers teach, what they teach, what they can and cannot say to students etc., how and what do these entities expect students to learn in school?
It’s a question that will not be answered immediately. It’s difficult to measure what a deprived learning environment will do to any child.
The good news in all this – or the bad news, depending on one’s perspective – is that if a student doesn’t learn what he or she wants in school, there are other readily available outlets for them to get that information. Students often will fill that learning vacuum via other means.
We can only hope that depriving students of safety, and some education, in schools doesn’t lead to one or more of them, out of frustration, turning to weapons against that same school.
Peter
PAPER CEILINGS MEANT TO BE SHREDDED
#PaperCeiling #WorkQualifications #technology #CollegeDegrees
The TV ads call it the “Paper Ceiling.”
In a nutshell, it’s the elimination of some people for certain jobs because they don’t have the proper “paper” qualifications. These people may be perfectly capable of doing the jobs because of experience or other training. They just may not have the degree that the specifications require.
Now Georgia, and other states, are tackling this problem by trying to ease some of the paper qualifications for certain state jobs.
Maureen Downey, education columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, discussed the Georgia situation in her February 14, 2023, column.
As she writes, Microsoft founder Bill Gates never finished his degree at Harvard because his ideas were so time-sensitive that he had to act on them immediately.
With technology, timing is everything. If you wait too long to develop it, it could become obsolete before it’s even created. Or, a competitor will beat you to it.
But, as Downey writes, Gates is a big believer, and funder, of higher education.
The so-called paper ceiling has prompted a generation of leaders and influencers to place a high value on getting a college degree. In fact, statistics show generally that people with college degrees do better economically than those who don’t have one. We also hear stories of people who spent a lot on an education, only to get a job that didn’t require it.
Of course, education of any sort is never a waste.
Where the rub comes is ruling people out for certain jobs they are capable of doing, just because they lack the college degree.
The paper ceiling is a convenience for hiring managers. It allows them to sift and sort through piles of applications more easily by ruling out people quickly.
But college is not for everyone, particularly those who cannot immediately afford it. People have gone into extreme debt to get a degree. But, once they have it, they may, or may not, get the job they want. And, even if they do, they’ll likely spend a valuable chunk of adult life paying off that debt.
There are also many trades and other good-paying jobs that may require technical training, but not necessarily college. These jobs often are in high demand, and workers with those skills can be hard to find.
Some believe too many trade schools have been turned into computer schools, and there are too few venues to train electricians, plumbers and other skilled workers.
Though computers have infiltrated most modern machinery and appliances, there is still a great need for raw, old-school skills.
In short, if you are a hiring manager, don’t underestimate the skills of someone who may not be as well papered as you might like.
If you are a prospective employee, don’t hesitate to apply for a job you believe you can do even if you don’t have the paper credentials. You may have to sell yourself better in your application to overcome the lack of credentials.
Closed minds on either side may blur good potential.
Just as glass ceilings are meant to be shattered, paper ceilings are meant to be shredded.
Peter
The TV ads call it the “Paper Ceiling.”
In a nutshell, it’s the elimination of some people for certain jobs because they don’t have the proper “paper” qualifications. These people may be perfectly capable of doing the jobs because of experience or other training. They just may not have the degree that the specifications require.
Now Georgia, and other states, are tackling this problem by trying to ease some of the paper qualifications for certain state jobs.
Maureen Downey, education columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, discussed the Georgia situation in her February 14, 2023, column.
As she writes, Microsoft founder Bill Gates never finished his degree at Harvard because his ideas were so time-sensitive that he had to act on them immediately.
With technology, timing is everything. If you wait too long to develop it, it could become obsolete before it’s even created. Or, a competitor will beat you to it.
But, as Downey writes, Gates is a big believer, and funder, of higher education.
The so-called paper ceiling has prompted a generation of leaders and influencers to place a high value on getting a college degree. In fact, statistics show generally that people with college degrees do better economically than those who don’t have one. We also hear stories of people who spent a lot on an education, only to get a job that didn’t require it.
Of course, education of any sort is never a waste.
Where the rub comes is ruling people out for certain jobs they are capable of doing, just because they lack the college degree.
The paper ceiling is a convenience for hiring managers. It allows them to sift and sort through piles of applications more easily by ruling out people quickly.
But college is not for everyone, particularly those who cannot immediately afford it. People have gone into extreme debt to get a degree. But, once they have it, they may, or may not, get the job they want. And, even if they do, they’ll likely spend a valuable chunk of adult life paying off that debt.
There are also many trades and other good-paying jobs that may require technical training, but not necessarily college. These jobs often are in high demand, and workers with those skills can be hard to find.
Some believe too many trade schools have been turned into computer schools, and there are too few venues to train electricians, plumbers and other skilled workers.
Though computers have infiltrated most modern machinery and appliances, there is still a great need for raw, old-school skills.
In short, if you are a hiring manager, don’t underestimate the skills of someone who may not be as well papered as you might like.
If you are a prospective employee, don’t hesitate to apply for a job you believe you can do even if you don’t have the paper credentials. You may have to sell yourself better in your application to overcome the lack of credentials.
Closed minds on either side may blur good potential.
Just as glass ceilings are meant to be shattered, paper ceilings are meant to be shredded.
Peter
HUG DAY AT SCHOOL; BE KIND, BUT CAREFUL
#hugs #HugDay #schools #kids #students
Wednesdays are hug days at Cedar Grove High School.
So begins an article by Cassidy Alexander in the Feb. 25, 2023, edition of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Each Wednesday, the article says, each student at the school in DeKalb County, Ga., is greeted by a hug from either a student or staff member.
Most kids really like it, the article says, but if a student is uncomfortable with a hug, he or she gets a fist bump.
The idea for a weekly hug day was conceived because students in the previous couple of years were cooped up at home because of the COVID-19 pandemic. No touching allowed. Safe distances from others was not just encouraged, but required.
With the pandemic mitigated to a good degree, the school believes students should be shown the love they’d gotten too little of during that time, the article says.
In decades past, teachers might have lovingly touched students routinely. But, as allegations of child sexual abuse increased, teachers had to be careful about their interactions with students.
Even if a teacher wanted to comfort a student in distress, or congratulate a student for a job well done, he or she often had to stop short of any physical contact.
In fact, according to the article, a Maryland elementary school banned parents from hugging any child except their own. In 2018, a Carroll County, Ga., parent said her middle school daughter was reprimanded for hugging a classmate.
But, Cedar Grove students said they are glad for the connections. In fact, a student organization called The Love Club was formed to not only set up the Wednesday hugs, but also perform other acts of kindness. Those include helping custodians empty trash and decorating teachers’ rooms, the article says.
The pandemic caused much distress in all spectra of life. The pandemic-mitigation era is prompting people and organizations to rethink how they do things.
More people are working from home. At the same time, more people are getting out to do things with others that they weren’t allowed to do as the pandemic raged.
At Cedar Grove, before the Wednesday hugs, the atmosphere was “very dry.” Alexander quotes sophomore E.J. Colson. Now, the hugs mean a lot, he says. “It starts you off with a loving feeling. It makes you spread more love,” Alexander quotes E.J.
Obviously, as the weekly hugs may be a good thing, the school, and others that may emulate the idea, have to be careful.
One could easily take advantage of a kid at that level. One could easily spread a cold or other contagion. Good ideas and practices can have unintended consequences.
The school has to be careful to make sure that one thing may not lead to something sinister, or unhealthy.
Just as actor Ted Danson offers a hug to a frustrated cellphone customer in a Consumer Cellular commercial, the intention of the hug has to be noble and kind.
When offering a kind touch to someone, know when it is appropriate and know whether the person being touched is comfortable with it.
Apparently, the students at Cedar Grove, for the most part, welcome the hugs every week.
Peter
MAKE TEACHING AN ATTRACTIVE PROFESSION AGAIN
#teachers #PoliceOfficers #ArmedTeachers #ImprovingEducation #AttractingTeachers
Teachers have gotten a bad rap for many years.
Today, however, the problem is getting out of hand.
Now, they want teachers, in some jurisdictions, to carry guns.
Georgia is attempting to get a handle on how to make teaching at the K-12 level attractive again.
Maureen Downey, education columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, took on this problem in her November 22, 2022, column.
Downey cites a working paper from the Annenberg Institute for School Reform at Brown University, which documents the state of the K-12 teaching profession over the past half-century. It analyzes 50 years of teaching, looking at prestige, interest among students, preparation for entry and job satisfaction, according to Downey.
The conclusion is damning: the state of teaching is at its lowest level in 50 years, Downey writes.
To top that off, as Downey writes in her column published November 7, 2023, Georgia wants to arm teachers to curb gun violence. They want to take advantage of the relatively low teacher pay by giving teachers who volunteer a $10,000 stipend for firearms training, and the willingness to carry them in schools, Downey writes. Would you want your kid’s teacher to be armed? Downey doesn’t think it’s a great idea.
Let’s look at the history of teaching as a profession. In decades past, most teachers were women. Since it didn’t pay very much, it was tough for a teacher to make a good living on teaching alone. Although it didn’t pay much, there were good benefits: summers and lots of other time off, good insurance, a decent pension for those who stayed long enough and, in many places, good union protection. That meant job security for as long as a teacher wanted, in most cases.
In those days, parents left teachers alone. Sure, they’d visit during PTA meetings, occasionally volunteer in the schools etc. But, for the most part, teachers had free rein to teach and discipline children as they saw fit. As a kid, if you were bad in school, you often got punished again at home. Parents didn’t question the teachers in those instances.
Then, as widespread economic hardship hit families over the years, people in other usually better paying professions who were losing jobs became jealous of teachers’ job security and union protection.
Gradually, politicians of certain persuasions started blasting teachers unions, and still are.
Today, that resentment is manifesting itself in extreme parental and political interference in schools. Remember, teachers, in general, don’t get paid much. Despite their good job security, there’s only so much many will put up with for the compensation they get. Most teachers like, even love, what they do, providing they have enough latitude to teach as they see fit. When that latitude is gone, teachers will go, too. And they are. Having armed teachers in school may hasten this exodus.
This outside interference is NOT improving education. Kids are not learning what they should learn, particularly in history and science, because of this interference. Arming teachers likely won’t make schools safer. It may even do the opposite.
Other professions, besides teaching – law enforcement , for example – are also relatively low in pay and high in responsibility. They, too, often face far too much outside interference in their work. No one wants, say, a police officer going rogue in the streets. But there’s a vast difference between good oversight and training, and bad interference.
Educators, as Downey points out, are studying the problem of making teaching attractive again. Many studies are shelved and never implemented. Suffice it to say that if we can’t put good teachers, preferably unarmed, in every classroom, the children – and the world – suffer.
If you have a child in school, get involved, but don’t interfere. Most teachers know what they are doing. They are well supervised, and usually have good curricula on which to base their efforts.
Previous generations of children, in most cases, had no difficulty reconciling what they learned in school with what they learned at home or at church, even when some of that knowledge appeared contradictory. It would be hard to believe that today’s children would be incapable of doing the same.
In short, support your teachers, your police officers etc. Hold them accountable when necessary. Be involved in your children’s school(s) and your community. But don’t stand in the way of good and proper education or policing.
Peter
NEW PARENTING STRATEGIES: LESS FIRM, MORE INCLUSIVE
#parenting #ParentingStrategies #children #ChildrensAnxieties #depression
Children significantly are more anxious and depressed than they were five years ago.
So says a March article in JAMA Pediatrics,. The article was quoted in Nedra Rhone’s “Real Life” column published October 6, 2022, in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Much of this anxiety is attributable to the pandemic, but, as Rhone points out, anxiety in children from birth to age 17 has been on the rise long before COVID-19.
In fact, she points out, from 2016 to 2019, children’s anxiety increased 27 percent and depression increased 24 percent, quoting data from a study from the National Survey of Children’s Health.
Parents and caregivers have suffered a steady decline in well-being over the past five years, she quotes from that study.
Shefali Tsabary has advocated for a parenting style that dispenses with traditional paradigms featuring control, fear and punishment, Rhone writes. Tsabary has a doctorate in clinical psychology and specializes in blending Western psychology and Eastern philosophy.
“What children really need from parents is not a laundry list of rules, and overload of shame and guilt or feeling silenced and oppressed. Children need to feel seen, to feel worth and to know that they matter for who they are rather than their accomplishments,” Rhone writes from Tsabary’s work.
There is much to unpack here, but suffice it to say that the old way of parenting apparently is not cutting it with kids today. In past decades, parents told kids what they expected of them. They may have even told them how they were going to live their lives as adults. Kids who fought such instruction were considered rebels, or something worse.
When some parents were children, rigor was all they knew. Disappointing Mom and Dad was taboo, even though Mom and Dad wanted them to be something they weren’t, or did not want to be.
Certainly, children need to be taught right from wrong. After all, some things are indisputably right, and indisputably wrong. But today, right and wrong have much gray area between them. Children should be allowed, with perhaps some limitations, to explore that gray area and decide for themselves what, to them, is right and wrong.
Kids should have some freedom to “be kids,” again with appropriate limitations. As they navigate childhood, they will make decisions for themselves AND accept consequences for those decisions.
Some will want to be like their parents. Some will want to be completely different from them as they grow.
If they want to be different from their parents, or what their parents expect from them, it likely is not from a lack of love of parents.
Parents, therefore, should encourage children to be who they want to be, with appropriate warning about the pitfalls of pursuit.
Perhaps that will make them less depressed or anxious. Parental and academic requirements can be overwhelming. Parents should strive to encourage their children, while trying to ease their burdens. Parents may not think burdens on children are a big problem, but they can be bigger than many realize.
Raising children in an atmosphere of encouragement rather than rigor may keep many from developing conditions that can be debilitating for life.
Peter
NO ONE ASKS STUDENTS WHAT THEY THINK OF BOOK BANS
#BookBans #education #students #teachers #parents
Parents are clamoring for certain books to be banned in schools.
Do students want the same thing?
It appears no one cares what the kids think.
Maureen Downey, education columnist for The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, tackled this subject in her October 11, 2022, column.
“(Parents) often roll their eyes or guffaw when students themselves defend the books, suggesting that while they want to protect kids, they don’t want to hear their views,” Downey writes.
Downey asked students who have attended school board meetings and hearings what they would like to tell adults advocating book bans.
“I would ask them not even to change their viewpoint, but to keep and open mind. Even though I didn’t agree with what the parents were saying, I still listened. They refused to listen. Whenever someone would speak against book bans, they would start yelling. I also wish they were more informed. They were taking so many things out of context.”
That quote comes from Anvita Sachdeva, a senior at Forsyth County High School, outside Atlanta.
The whole debate about banning books and “protecting” kids centers on open minds vs. closed minds.
So many fear that schools will indoctrinate children into believing things that oppose what they are taught at home by parents, at church or in other non-school locales.
Past generations were easily able to reconcile what they were taught in church, at home and in school, even if there were seemingly contradictory narratives.
Why do some parents fear that no longer is the case?
Perhaps these parents so desperately want their children to think exactly as they do. They don’t want them exposed to ideas, religions etc., that differ from theirs.
Parental restrictions may be the purest form of indoctrination.
The other problem is that parents objecting to certain texts take certain passages out of context, thereby condemning the entire work without reading it in its entirety.
Something that may have a good, even wholesome, overall message may have passages that are less so.
That seems like the old forest vs. trees syndrome.
In short, children should be taught to have open minds, for it is a closed mind that prevents innovation. In that quest, they may come across words, attitudes and behaviors they find objectionable. But that’s not nearly as important as raising a child to think for himself or herself.
Parents certainly want to teach children right from wrong. There are certainly words, attitudes and behaviors that are universally right or wrong. But, children are unlikely to become gay, or trans, based on what they are taught in school. Those are not learned behaviors, but are natural feelings.
Exposing children to people, cultures and beliefs that may not sync up with what their parents believe can not only open their minds, but teach them to accept others for who they are.
By doing that, the world will be better. The children themselves will be better people. And, unexpected friendships could result.
That should be the goal of every parent.
Peter
IT’S NOT ABOUT FINDING SOLUTIONS; IT’S ABOUT WHOM TO BLAME
#blame #solutions #politics #DifferencesOfOpinion #CultureWar
“Most Americans could … be considered pragmatic moderates on the majority of political issues. While research (shows) some polarization has increases, it appears to have been exaggerated.”
So writes Gail Sahar, professor of psychology at Wheaton College in Norton, Mass. An article, adapted from her book “Blame and Political Attitudes:The Psychology of America’s Culture War,” was published June 21, 2023, in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
Sahar believes that the basis for democracy assumes people can reason. When we underestimate the American public’s ability to rationally consider issues, we undermine our nation’s foundation, she writes.
“The current focus on blame has emerged as the missing link connecting ideology to attitude across a range of issues,” she writes.
In current political discourse, people not only want everyone to follow what THEY believe in, but also want to blame someone else when things go wrong.
To paraphrase the late U.S. President Ronald Reagan, the U.S. Congress would get more done if they cared less about who gets the credit. The converse is also true. If nothing gets done, the other guy is to blame.
This culture of blame, as Sahar calls it, may arouse strong feelings on both sides of an issue. But, we always find an excuse to blame the other guy. Therefore, nothing of consequence gets done.
What if we all, regardless of core beliefs, focused on what we can accomplish, instead of what points we can score against the other guy?
The result would be incremental action toward the common good. Incremental actions, when added up, can yield real accomplishments.
What would help this process is everyone agreeing on facts. When one side doesn’t get its way, it can tend to say the other side was wrong, or fraudulent, and can tend to invent its own set of facts.
Then, to emphasize the point, they keep spouting this set of “facts” as if it were true, thinking enough people will believe them.
In most instances, there is one truth. Anything to the contrary is, at best, “spin,” or, at worst, false. Once the actual truth is discerned, we can come closer to agreement on what to do, or not do.
Facts can certainly get in the way of a good narrative, or a good conspiracy theory. Although some in power fit the category of wanting to screw, or blame, the other guy, most people want to know the truth, find ways to apply that truth to the problems at hand and find solutions.
Complete solutions may be elusive on first pass. Therefore, incremental solutions tend to produce more agreement.
Most successful people believe in the phrase, “Go big, or go home.”
In today’s discourse, that may be a pipe dream. We will get more done amid differences of opinions and worldviews if we start small. Then, after a time, we can go on to the next small thing. The toe-in-the-water approach may seem pointless to some. But, it may be the best way to arbitrate differences and get to real solutions.
There are big differences of opinion in as diverse a country as ours. It’s difficult to celebrate differences. It may be better to acknowledge them, find points of agreement – or, at least, compromise – and move toward solutions.
The journey toward solutions may be long. But, those who are successful in whatever they do usually find the journey more worthwhile than the destination.
Peter