Teacher evaluation

Nancy’s editorial concerning teacher evaluation is very interesting. She speaks about how a bill has recently been passed that will allow school boards evaluate their teachers on performance in the classroom. Which she completely agrees is a fantastic idea.  She does a great job of explaining everything.

Her opinion that “Teachers cannot be evaluated solely based on the numbers: attendance, passing rates, and test scores” is completely true. She does a good job of justifying her reasoning as to why she believes numbers aren’t everything. I completely agree with the fact that a teacher in a low-funded school district should not be judged and compared to another teacher from a very well off academic district. It is simply no fair to the teacher!

Along with her commentary, she provides a method by which this could be a more fair game. Her suggestion is to have the student’s opinion instead of the evaluation of grades, attendance, and etc. After all, they are the ones who are receiving the schooling, let them be the ones to have a say in these budget cuts.

The new target

Seems to be that women’s health care services are the new target of the Texas House. Recently, multiple budget amendments have been passed, taking away $62 million from family planning services. That is roughly 2/3 of the money they currently have!

One of the well-known family planning services is Planned Parenthood. Many people think of it as simply a place that provides abortions. However, what they don’t realize is that in the past year “these providers used roughly $47.6 million in funds to provide basic health care to a total of 257,895 low-income clients.” These basic health providers are the reason many low-income women are able to receive the yearly Pap smear, STD checks, mammograms, and forms of birth control.

Many people, especially those Conservative Republicans, don’t realize the good of these facilities. The only thing they see it as, is an abortion facility. The reality is with these new amendments these facilities will be left with about $38 million for a two-year time span. Which is equal to $18 million a year and finally leaves them with only $9 million per year. With this money there will not be much help they can provide to women with no insurance. Ironically, I believe this will only lead to a higher abortion rate. Isn’t this what they don’t want?

The sad truth is we will see many more abortions due to the lack of being able to provide birth control methods and we will see many more women being diagnosed with certain diseases too late for treatment. Guess we will just have to wait and see how this huge budget cut will benefit us in the long run. I believe its just heading towards an even worse situation. 

Abortion

In the commentary, "To Abort or to Not Abort That is the Question?" I completely agree with the blogger’s explanation concerning the new abortion bill that is currently in the process of being passed.  In her blog she clearly has a good understanding towards the bill and makes great points. I believe her idea of the mother and father both having to be present for the sonogram is a great idea. Many people don’t consider the father in decisions like these since they’re not the ones carrying the baby. However, a father should have just as much guilt and/or sympathy towards the baby both he and the mother have conceived.

I agree on her opinion that, “abortion is not a delete button.” Many people seem to take abortion lightly as if it were a form of contraception, but its not! It has actually been proven that babies may feel pain as soon as they begin to grow in the fetus. So not only would be killing a poor baby, you would also be putting the child through pain.

I believe the blogger did a great job in her form of structure and her method of persuasion towards the public. She really makes you think about ideas that have not been spoken about in public very much. 

Guns In Class?

So, apparently a bill sponsored by Representative Joe Driver will allow residents with a licensed handgun to carry their weapons onto university and college campuses. Why would this ever be necessary? I can’t even imagine walking into my classroom knowing a class full of armed people could surround me. Not to mention, I would be more terrified for the teacher. They are, after all, the ones running the show in the room.

 A concealed handgun license is a simple process. You take a training course that only takes ten to fifteen hours of your day, take a test, and finish it off by completing an application. That’s all! I don’t know about you all, but to me this does not seem like sufficient training to have just any person walking around my campus with a gun.

So, lets take the most recent incident that occurred on the UT campus as an example.  A 19 year-old student decides to show up on campus with an AK-47, firing shots outside of the library. He then proceeds to move up the building and kill himself.  Luckily, no one else was killed or harmed. However, now lets imagine this law was in effect. Yes, I’m sure you can set up a terrible scenario in your head. When people are put in a terrifying situation where they believe they are at risk of being killed, they will do just about anything to avoid that. Hence, the idea of letting just anyone carry a handgun on campus is stupid. We should be trying to protect everyone, not make a situation more harmful.

Parking Meters

In one of the Texas blogs, Mean Rachel, I came across one of her blog posts called “Choose your own Adventure: Austin Parking Meter-Style.” In her blog she complains about the new parking ordinance that is extending parking meter hours beginning August 2011. Currently, meters operate only Monday through Friday from 9am- 5pm and with this new ordinance it will be operating from Monday through Saturday from 8am- 11:59pm. The blogger makes very good points and sets up scenario’s that are very likely to occur. She states how many people go on dates downtowns, have a bit too much to drink and end up taking a cab home. As of now, unless you are parked at one of the few overnight lots, you should expect your car to be towed by the next day.

According to Mayor Pro-Tem Mike Martinez, “Austin expects to make about $1.5 million a year in additional revenue.” Part of this money has already been allotted towards hiring more meter employees to take extra hours. Now the question is, is this extra money really worth it? It has already been stated a good portion of the money will be for new employees and not to mention the cost of adjusting all of the meters established in Austin. There are way more important issues to be dealt with!

I completely agree with all the points the blogger makes. It is clear she is opposed to this whole thing and she definitely states sufficient points to support her thoughts. Downtown Austin is very economically successful. With this parking meter ordinance it is very likely that it will have an effect on downtown business. By increasing meter hours, it is a given that parking garages will also increase their prices, especially the overnight ones. 

Mandate Sonograms but cut pre-K?

In the Fort Worth Star Telegram newspaper, opinion writer, Linda Campbell recently posted her latest column, “Would Jesus mandate sonograms but cut pre-K?” Campbell argues that the “government has a role in protecting life,” however, why are they mandating sonograms to prevent abortions and proposing tons of cuts towards public education and medical facilities? It makes no sense! Campbell’s argument is directed towards Republicans with the assumption of their Christian religion. She attacks the religion with quotes straight from the Gospel of Matthew regarding how he was always there caring for everyone from homeless to the imprisoned. Campbell also specifically quotes where the gospel states “Let the children come to me…for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.” I believe her intentions were to imply children are supposed to be looked upon with open hands; however, I don’t believe she chose the best quote to support her argument in this section. My interpretation of this quote suggested plain and simply that children belong in heaven. Therefore, the drastic cuts she speaks about, being made towards education, next are not sufficiently supported. Campbell makes a good point towards that fact that the government highly praises unborn children. Yet, when it comes down to caring for these young beings our state’s ratings is amongst the lowest in aiding them and the government continues to purpose cuts towards programs already assisting the less fortunate children. Overall, Campbell says the government should make cuts towards "unnecessary luxuries", instead of taking money away from the education of children and the less fortunate. This argument definitely makes a good point. I can see how there is inconsistency in what is being enforced and what the government is currently purposing.

In Governor Rick Perry's recent inaugural address he claimed, "We always take care of the least among our population, the frail, the young, the elderly." Ironically, that same week he stated this, KXAN news reported that Texas lawmakers reported the new budget with thirty-three percent cuts being made towards Medicaid-funded nursing and rehabilitation centers. Not to mention, the already enacted cuts from the past years of more than 1.5 billion dollars all together. Nursing homes were already is severe danger prior to this new budget. The industry is now requesting they reconsider these cuts before they cause many nursing homes to be closed down, leaving many elderly citizens to be left on the streets. There is a clear contradicting idea between what is being purposed to the public and what is actually being imposed in our community.