Adjunct Professors

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/12/09/army.of.adjuncts.ap/index.html

Adjunct professors have become a new staple to college campuses nation wide. These part-time college professors make up almost 50% of most college teaching staff today. On a national average, these adjunct professors are paid about 64% less that professors with tenure. These part-time professors also lack the job security that tenured professors have.

With growing education costs, many Universities are using these adjunct professors to save themselves thousands, if not millions of dollars per year. And because these adjunct professors do not have job security, a university can easily let a few go if funding gets tight.

Adjunct professors are great for Universities, however, is it at the expense of these adjuncts? Many of these professors are simply working as adjuncts to earn their way up into a place of tenure. They want a stable income, and job security. However, so few spots are open for tenured professors, that many adjuncts feel they will be trapped in an unstable job for the rest of their careers.

The adjunct life of low income and un-certainty is often stressful ans difficult to bare. It places a barrier between the great professors of today, and those of tommorrow, stifling a possibly great generation of teachers.

Anarchist Professor Fired from Yale University

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/12/07/yale.anarchist.ap/index.html

David Graeber, one of the world's leading anthropologists, is finishing up his last semester as a teacher at Yale University in the Spring of 2006. He is being given a year long payed sabbatical, but is not being called back the following year. Information has not been released as to why Professor Graeber is being fired. However, it is rumored that it may have to do with his extreme political beliefs.

It is indeed difficult to fathom why such an anthropological icon would be let go. He has taught at Yale University for eight years, and his work on value theory is taught worldwide. However, jumping to the conclusion that it was because of his political standing would be ignorant. If adequate proof can be found to support such claims, Yale University should inded be penalized. People should never be penalized for having a particular political belief. Such freedom is what this country was origiona;;y founded upon. But until proof can be found, we must look at a variety of reasons why Professor Graeber was fired. Graeber himself even suggested that it was due to his persistent tardiness to class and in turning in papers. Whether it be Professor Graeber's fault or not, assumptions should not be made as to why he was fired.

Chicago Restaurant Takes a Stand Against Bratty Kids

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/12/06/kids.behaving.badly.ao/index.html

Restaurant owner, Dan McCaulry, posted a sign in his restaurant that read,"Children of all ages have to behave and use their inside voices". This sign caused a wave of controversy in the Chicago neighborhood in which the restaurant resides. So much so, that it gained national attention. The situation caused the nation to question parent's responsibility for their children's behavior.

The controversy began when residents of the nieghborhood complained that they and their children felt un-welcome in Dan McCaulry's restaurant. They claimed that the sign was insensitive to families and the nature of children. McCaulry claimed that his only intention was to remind people to set limits for their children and keep an eye on them while they were in his restaurant.

As the owner of a buisiness, McCaulry has the responsibility to look after the well being of all of his customers. He must ensure that his customers can enjoy a peaceful meal with out the distraction of misbehaving children. As a waitress, I have witnessed hundreds of families eat in a classy restaurant. There are indeed families who have very well behaved children, who are well versed in polite etiquette. There have also been a number of uncontrolled children in the restaurant. Such children are not only unpleasent to other customers, but they can pose a danger to others. When children run about a restaurant un-supervised they pose the threat of bumping into a waiter with a tray full food or hot coffee.

When in a place of buisiness, even a restaurant, it is the parent's responsibility to ensure their children's good behavior. If parents cannot control their children, they should either get a babysitter, takeout, or go to McDonalds.

Teacher Accused of Giving Liberal Quiz

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/11/25/liberal.quiz.ap/index.html

A teacher in Bennington, Vermont is being questioned by the administration of Mount Anthony Union Highschool about a quiz given earlier in the semester. The vocabulary quiz was said to include derogatory statements about President George Bush and the Republican Party. One of the questions read, "I wish Bush would be (coherent, eschewed) for once during a speech, but there are theories that his every day diction charms the below average mind, hence ensuring him Republican votes." The administration found this to be bias that was inappropriate for the classroom.

Although as a, ahem politicaly "progressive" citizen, I found such antics quite humerous. However, I can understand how such a quiz could cause controversy. In such a time of political polarity, there are plenty of toes to step on. This particualar incident brings up an important issue in this politically heated time. Should teachers be allowed to infringe their political beliefs on their students? Based on the First Ammendment, they should at least be able to voice their opinion. However, such input seems forced when it is inserted into school work. This kind of infringement of personal beliefs can cause distance between a teacher and their students, as well as cause students to feel uncomfortable in their learning environment.

I think that anyone who is truly interested in politics and argumentation should be able to share their views, while sharing the views of the opposing side equally. Such a presentation of information paired with knowledge of deductive reasoning skills would allow students to analyze both sides and make their own decisions.

In the end, Bret Chenkin, the teacher in question, decided to do just that. He claimed that he had no problem throwing in views from both political parties.

Tennessee High School Newspaper seized

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/11/28/studentnewspaper.sieze.ap/index.html

In Oak Ridge, Tennessee, issues of a local public highschool's student newspaper was siezed for suppposedly inappropriate material. This material included an article on birth control, which gave information on the different methods, their effectiveness, and availability. An article on tattoos was also included in the paper, along with a picture of the tattoo, which belonged to an unidentified student.

The school administration claimed that the subjects of birth control and tattoos were not appropriate for highschool students. Based on this notion, the administration has seized the student news paper until changes are made to its content.

This action of censorship was unnecessary and unconstitutional. Firstly, students need to be well informed on such issues of birth control, and having a tattoo. Both are issues that directly affect numerous highschool students, and both issues involve risks. It is important for teenagers to realize the facts about using birth control, and getting a tattoo, so that they may protect themselves adequately. We as a society can not ignore issues that affect our youth simply because we do not agree that sex and tattoos are appropriate for highly students. Whether we like it or not, adolescents are having sex, and getting tattoos. We need to acknowledge this fact and take action to make sure that today's youth can inform and protect themselves from the negative consequences of adolescent sex and tattoos. Such articles do not have to promote such activities, but they should be allowed to inform the student body about them.

Secondly, this censorship falls along the lines of unconstitutional. It is prohibiting the student's right to freedom of speech. And note, this school is public. If it were indeed a private school, it would certainly be given the right to censor material in a school newspaper. However, because this scool is public, such censorship is infringing upon the student's constitutional right.

Sometimes we must set aside our pride, and even our moral beliefs to ensure that our youth is well informed on issues that pertain to them, and that they are given their constitutional right to speek openly about these issues.

Muslims Detained While Praying at Football Game
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/11/02/football.muslim.ap/index.html

Five Muslim football fans were detained during a football game at the Giants Stadium while praying near a central air duct. The fans were questioned by the FBI and were not allowed to return to their seats. They were forced to sit in another section where they were watched closely by three guards. Following the game, the men were escorted to their cars.

The FBI claims that due to former President Bush Senior's presence at the game, suspicious activity was taken very seriously, and congregating near an air duct seemed suspicious. However, the five Muslim men claimed simply to be complying with an important aspect of their religion. Muslims are required to pray five times per day, and these men claimed that they were using the half time break to do so.

Due to this "incident,” the central air duct has been roped off. It makes me wonder, why didn't they do that in the first place? If this air duct is such a risk, why was it left open to the public in the first place? The FBI's argument seems more like a move to save face than a legitimate defense. We as Americans must ask ourselves, would this situation have occurred if a few white men were congregating by the air vent? I think not. It seems that the FBI's actions were based more so on racial profiling than genuine suspicion and precaution. Obviously, if Muslims are congregating, they are plotting to take out the former president of the United States. Right? Excuse my sarcasm, but this seems to be the attitude that many people hold.

Such views are incredibly damaging to our society. We must come to the realization that there are indeed extremist Muslims who wish to harm this country and what it stands for. However, such extremists make up a small majority of the Muslim population. This concept of extremism is no new thing. There have been extremist Christian groups who have planted bombs in abortion clinics, killing and wounding innocent people. Oddly enough though, we don't often hear of Christians being detained for praying in a "suspicious” location. I think it is time that our country puts a stop to unjust racial profiling. Profiling in such a manner hurts the innocent Muslims nation wide. Our country is based on equal treatment of people of all religions. Did we not found this country as a means of escaping religious persecution? Our society should reflect our founding beliefs and put a stop to harmful racial profiling.

Elementary School Sex Survey Claim Thrown Out
http://www.cnn.com/2005/11/02/sex.survey.ap/index.html

A group of San Fransico judges threw out a claim, filed by parents, against a sex survey given in Palmdale elementary schools. The parents claimed that they had "exclusive right to tell there children about sex." They argued that a sex survey given in Palmdale elementary schools violated this "right." The judges ruled that parents indeed do not have exclusive rights to their child's sex education, and turned over the parents claims and petition for monitary compensation.

At first glance, the idea of a sex survey for elementary school students may indeed sound alarming. Many parents may question such an act. However, these parents signed a permission slip that granted their child the permission to take the survey. My suggestion is, make sure you know what you are granting permission to before you sign such a document. Such action should prevent the following from happening.

On another note, why exactly is sex education at a young age a bad thing? There are a number of age appropriate topics lumped into sex education that are important to cover at a young age. Sex education can be censored so that it is age appropriate and helpful to a young child. The school system has every right to ensure that its students are well informed about certain matters having to do with sex. The education system must take a stand to inform students, because many parents fail to do so.

It is very important for the education system to be able to inform young children about sexual appropriateness. Children need to know what kind of sexual behavior is inappropriate. Such education can stop and prevent child sexual abuse. If a child has the knowledge to identify if someone is treating them in a manner that is sexually innapropriate, they can take action and find help or tell a trusted adult. Also, by giving an age appropriate sex survey, a school can keep an eye on students and ensure that children who show a higher than average sexual knowledge are not knowledgeable because they have been sexually abused.

It is also important to allow children the opportunity to understand their bodies, and any changes that it may be going through. Many children begin puberty at a young age, and need to know what is happening to their bodies. Puberty can be a frightening thing to a child if they do not know what is happening to them. Information about this can ease the worries of children entering puberty.

In conclusion, sex education or surveys in elementary schools do not have to be a bad thing. They can indeed be helpful in making a child safer from sexual abuse, and providing information about puberty to ease a child's worries.

LSU Medical School Gets Creative

http://www.cnn.com/2005/EDUCATION/10/21/
katrina.med.school.ap/index.html

Louisiana State University Medical School has taken a most creative approach to “returning to normalcy” in post-Katrina Baton Rouge. They are housing students on the FinnJet, a Finnish ferry currently in the Port of Baton Rouge. While five hundred members of the faculty, staff, and student body camp on the ferry, class has been re-established in a nearby movie theatre prior to the matinee shows.

The Medical School realizes the importance of these future doctors as aids in long term hurricane relief. Such realizations lead them to the decision to take drastic and indeed innovative steps to reinstate class. Such a move exemplifies the ideal of putting the pieces back together. It acts as an example of what all organizations should be doing as the recovery effort continues.

My question is why is it that a university can have so much initiative, while our government recovery lags slowly on? I understand that the scale is much larger. I also realize that many people have been placed in homes and schools in Texas. But it seemed that such moves sailed forward at a painstakingly bureaucratic pace. It is my greatest hope is that our current government, as well as the general public will take notice of LSU’s resourceful and timely approach to the ongoing recovery effort. Maybe they will acknowledge the efficiency of LSU’s efforts and apply such methods accordingly in the future.

Marijuana May Grow Neurons in the Brain
http://www.medpagetoday.com/Neurology/GenerReview

Research teams in Canada recently discovered that a synthetic cannabinoid, similar to the compounds found in marijuana causes the growth of new neurons in the brain, and reduces anxiety and depression. This synthetic cannabinoid is one hundred times stronger than THC, and was administered over a period of several weeks. Scientists hope that this could lead to new treatments for anxiety and depression.
These new findings can further contribute to the argument in favor of legalizing marijuana. Although the drug used in the study was synthetic and given in high doses, it still raises a number of questions about the potential of marijuana. The argument is especially strong considering that marijuana has been previously used in the medical field to treat chronic pain in cancer patients.
If you were to compare the health ramifications of cigarettes and alcohol to that of marijuana, would marijuana truly be severe enough to be illegal? Cigarettes have been proven to be deadly, and alcohol in excess can leave a person in a drunken stupor. Are carcinogens from marijuana any worse than those from cigarettes? Is being high any more dangerous than being drunk? If we allow the legal sale of cigarettes and alcohol, how can we justify making marijuana illegal?
I think that the drug’ healing qualities should at least be further researched, and legalization further considered.

Intelligent Design, Evolution, and the Public School System
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/10/06/evolution.trial.ap/index.html

Once again, the theories of intelligent design and evolution are causing friction in the public school system. Eight families in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania have taken the Pennsylvania Public School System to court over the issue. They complain that references to intelligent design in a student biology book "promotes the Bible’s view of creation, violating the separation of church and state."
Firstly, the Biology book under fire presents the theories of evolution and intelligent design equally. To me, it seems that such a book should be praised, not ridiculed. A truly open minded book should always present all theories involved to create a fair and logical argument. People often become so caught up in supporting "their cause", that they abandon all rational thinking abilities when dealing with such situations. Evolution and intelligent design are both theories, and neither are proven fully! If you do not believe in one or the other, you have the right to hold that belief. However, it would be unfair to remove a theory from existence simply because it does not settle well with some people. References to knowledge should always try to present a balanced argument.
Secondly, references to intelligent design are not necessarily religious. Although it is a popular belief that an intelligent designer could be a divine being, the theory itself does not reference such. The theory also does not use the Bible as a means of proof. Intelligent design is simply a theory that some intelligent being whether it be divine or even alien, created the living creatures on this earth. Such a theory is plausible, and can be logically argued. So, my question is ",why can’t it be presented along side other plausible theories?"
Thirdly, I do not understand why the theories of intelligent design and evolution cannot be reconciled. The two theories can be intermingled. One or the other does not have to be necessarily right or wrong. They can both be accurate. One should always have the opportunity to choose what to believe. If the public school system is robbed of it’s ability to present all sides of an argument, students will never have the chance to choose what to believe or not to believe. If we are force fed knowledge without knowing all aspects of the situation, will our choices be accurate? Are we to become drones, and believe something that is not challenged? We as a nation should stand for our right to knowledge, our future and well being depends on it.

NASA Wastes Millions on Travel
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/space/09/30/nasa.waste.ap/index.html

As I looked through the CNN headlines, I was hardly shocked to see an article on NASA’s wasteful use of tax dollars. As I clicked on the article, I muttered to myself ",What’s new." It seems that we have witnessed NASA’s misuse of American tax dollars for years. The headlines have been littered with stories of million dollar projects that have failed due to easily preventable faults and defects. After so many incidents, I hardly even flinched as I pulled up a new article on the subject.
However, as I read the article I was utterly floored to find that NASA had reached a new low. In this instance they were wasting money, and hurting the overall economy by insisting on providing their own air transportation instead of using local airlines. Not only would using local airlines be cheaper than providing their own, but it would also help boost the financial stability of a business that has struggled financially since September eleventh. I cannot find any way to justify a decision that hurts the economy so badly. Local airlines desperately need business, and our tax dollars are not plentiful enough to be wasted so carelessly.
It infuriates me to know that this government agency is allowed to squander it’s funding, while other agencies struggle to provide basic necessities (ahem, the public school system). I think that regulations should be passed and enforced to ensure that government agencies, such as NASA, should be forced to make decisions that are economic and reasonable. Luxuries, such as one’s own airline system, are unnecessary and financially unreasonable.