Divide and conquer in educating students

Home » Opinion » Angelina Gervasio

Sunday, August 31, 2008

Comment

By ANGELINA GERVASIO

Not your average kid

For a while now, Americans have been complaining about how the country’s students compare poorly to the students of most other countries, even Third World countries.

So far, not many solutions have been suggested, or they just don't fit with our PC modern society.

I am almost positive it has something to do with America's new way of taking a lot of things like school to the absolute extreme. In most schools, students are placed in one big group of kids in their respective grade (mostly based on age than actual capabilities), and that is just about as separated as it gets. Students are not categorized by how well they do or how fast they learn, instead all must fit inside a one-size-fits-all box.

There might be many politically correct reasons for this, one of them for sure is that they do not want anyone’s feelings hurt (students and/or parents alike) by being placed in a "below average" class based on performance and level of responsibility (not doing homework, English is not the primary language, illness kept the student out of school, for example).

I am also certain if everyone was separated based on how fast or slow they learn, children in either category would learn more because they don't have to wait for a slow learner to "get it" or wind up left behind because they are slower learners and got frustrated because they couldn't catch up.

The faster-paced learners would be happy and do great in school because they would be going at a faster speed and wouldn't grow bored and uninterested in school.

Those faster-paced students wouldn’t be bored because the teacher teaches one lesson one day on, let’s say, three digit multiplication, and by the end of the day the fast paced learners “get it” and are comfortable with it.

The slower-paced learners would do better in school because the teacher would teach the lesson until everyone got it, ideally around the same time. Schooling might take a little longer for them, but in the end they would grow up to be successful.

I would be very grateful if schools were separated this way. If this was how, or close to how our schools were divided, I am positive the U.S. would “conquer” and be back to the very top at least in the matters of education.

Angelina Gervasio is a seventh-grader at Redwood Middle School. She writes on a variety of topics when her mom says she is caught up on her homework. She can be reached by contacting the Register's Multimedia Producer, Dan Ross, at dross@napanews.com or 256.2264.

75 comment(s)

vocal-de-local wrote on Aug 21, 2008 12:58 AM:

" I wholeheartedly agree with you! "

cab e-girl wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:59 AM:

" Angelina-very nicely written. You bring out points that educators have been afraid to say for decades. Grouping the smart kids together would likely put our students back on top again, the focus would once again be education. Putting the kids who learn slower together would likely be beneficial to them as well, because they would get more attention and time to learn the subjects, two things they desperately need.
I vote for Angelina when she finishes her education as principal of any Napa school! "

Cadence wrote on Aug 21, 2008 1:20 PM:

" Funny, Angelina, many moons ago your ideas were the norm in California. I know because many moons ago I was a student in California.
California then had big classes, spent less per pupil than it does today, and I for one NEVER met or had even heard of a teacher's aide. And yet California's educational system catapulted the state to world class status in the trades, in academia, and in creating a vibrant economy.
The beginning of the end was the mid-60's ideas to place students into schools and classrooms based on skin color, not ability. The students became mere pawns in political correctness run amok.
Parents soon saw the light and those who could sought more appropriate schools and classes for their kids. (My own parents found my school in the Catholic system.)
The rest, unfortunately, were caught up in the California educrats' death spiral "

Bill wrote on Aug 21, 2008 3:49 PM:

" Oooo, I believe that is called "white flight." Not a very appropriate response at the time and has largely manifested itself as an on going excuse for the degradation of public schools.

Skin color and political correctness in the same breath? As if there never was a systemic unfairness in education denying access based on color, race, ethnicity or national origin. Angelina appears to be speaking of a system that was always a one size fits all solution and never adapted to the modern world.

Addressing ability in all its variety regardless of a political laundry list of misdirected blame might be closer to a reasonable observation.

It is my observation that two segments get the lions share of attention and fostering in the educational system, those who excel naturally showing immense promise and those who act out and show little promise. The rest (the majority) are left to fend as best they can. "

a teacher wrote on Aug 21, 2008 8:02 PM:

" Separating students by ability usually works well for the top students, but not so much for the lower end.

Personally, give me a class of students who passed the previous class. I get too many 7th graders who didn't pass 6th grade. "

funnyme wrote on Aug 21, 2008 11:20 PM:

" teacher,
Why then students are being "advanced" to the next grade when they have not acquired the knowledge to actually belong there?

Bill,
"...Skin color and political correctness in the same breath?..."

Uh?
One has nothing to do with the other in Angelina's suggested solution. It's about personal achievement.

Cultural? Perhaps.
I was able to attend a ceremony where the top 5% kids who scored the highest in the nation were recognized and awarded (Language Arts and Math). Surprisingly enough, a vast majority were a second generation of immigrants (Johns Hopkins University Center for the Talented Youth).
Smart kids come from all over the world...If only given the chance to exceed expectations instead of persuading them to be humble and stay down. "

Bill wrote on Aug 22, 2008 12:04 AM:

" Funnyme, read the Cadence comment if the seel trap does't shut on the skin color and and political correctness I can only hope that a certian defensive poster's reading and comprehension is better than the funny papers. "

cab e-girl wrote on Aug 22, 2008 12:38 AM:

" Bill- Cadence is opposed to separating students by skin color, he would like to separate by skill set and the ability/willingness to learn. "

a teacher wrote on Aug 22, 2008 7:23 AM:

" "Why then students are being "advanced" to the next grade when they have not acquired the knowledge to actually belong there?"

Good question, especially since the law says that they should be retained if they fail a class. It also says taht they should be in a different class, one meant to address the students deficiencies. However, that costs more money, so...

I also suspect it's a political can of worms. To say that California schools are failing is only partly true. Our scools are succeeding with Asian and White students, but not with Black and Hispanic students. Imagine what those classes of retained students look like and where those classes will predominantly be. It's a protection racket, neither parents, politicians nor us teachers want to look at the reasons we are failing those populations. "

Bill wrote on Aug 22, 2008 8:37 AM:

" Cabby gal, then he/she should say so instead of "The beginning of the end was the mid-60's ideas to place students into schools and classrooms based on skin color, not ability. The students became mere pawns in political correctness run amok."

Students were always "placed" by skin color the attempt to rectify that is not the cause of educational problems as is suggested by this comment.

The neighborhood you live in did and still does determine where you go to school and the classes you take. Those with exceptional ability have always been given a most favored status even though they achieve in spite of a broken system.

The cookie cutter approach failed long before the fashion of blaming the political correctness of the 60's made it stylish to link an attempt to correct an injustice to systemic failure. "

Cadence wrote on Aug 22, 2008 12:28 PM:

" to Bill:
Maybe you weren't around in the '60's, or maybe you lived in an upscale area and were unaffected.
The achievement gap was alive and well then. No STAR testing, but there were other tests. Educrats noticed that many of the lower performing classes had disproportionate numbers of minorities (this was the '60's, remember, so you may decode "minorities" as meaning African-Americans.) In addition, in the '60's it was true that many students were wrongly pre-judged and funnelled into shop and less academically challenging paths based on race.
As the busing years unfolded, unintended consequences arose. Time magazine was forever examining "white flight." Suburbs blossomed as this occurred, along with increased road congestion. In my own case, my assigned high school was to be 12 miles from my home via city buses, buses that would pass two closer schools.
Many lawsuits later, political winds shifted and race was no longer the marker for expected poor performance. Instead we decided the problem was disparate socio-economic backgrounds.
No matter what the current rationale is for poor performance, hindering and delaying our brighter students serves no purpose other than to squander a resource and extend America's increasing reliance on foreign brain power. As of 2006, numbers of foreign grad students in both engineering and computer science outnumbered US citizens in these fields and this trend continues and no, it is not all due to the falling dollar as grad school lite fields are still predominately American students. "

Cadence wrote on Aug 22, 2008 12:38 PM:

" I continue to read that the US faces a shortage of math and science teachers. Logic tells me math and science classes will have to be sizeable; there aren't enough teachers. It is even more important that in a class of 40 as opposed to 20 or 30, like-abilitied students be grouped as the teacher simply cannot devote enough one on one time to each of 40!
I believe educrats are missing a huge point here: yes, we absolutely must have and must demand equal opportunity for students. Demanding and hoping for EQUAL OUTCOMES is simply out of educrats' control.
Had I been coached for 20 years by Bill Walsh, I still couldn't have played football as well as Joe Montana.
Should Joe have been forced to practice and play only at my level of competence? "

cab e-girl wrote on Aug 22, 2008 1:18 PM:

" Bill, I agree, skin color should have nothing to do with where a child goes to school, nor is placement by skin color in the 60's responsible for our failing schools. "

John Richards wrote on Aug 22, 2008 2:01 PM:

" You said "Smart kids come from all over the world...If only given the chance to exceed expectations instead of persuading them to be humble and stay down. "

Maybe, maybe not. One has to wonder why students of Chinese extraction do so well in our schools, while other minorities don't do so well? I don't think you can blame the schools or the teachers for that difference. "

Bill wrote on Aug 22, 2008 7:19 PM:

" The blogs originator is much closer to the crux of Americas educational problem by suggesting that a one size fits all system simply does not only address her perceived problems but the problems of all students within the system.

Theorizing that there was a specific point in time where political correctness damaged the system is technique used frequently in the blogosphere known as belling the cat. There by warning all that anyone who opposes the PC argument is really a fellow traveler of those advocating a dumbing down of the system to serve a hidden social agenda.

Another cyber technique is to challenge the experience and knowledge of the poster with implications that they are either elitist as in coming from an affluent neighborhood or lacking the specific experience of a certain time period. All supposedly evidence that the opinion presented is worthless, clever but not always successful.

It does not address the cookie cutter system that forces all children through the mold. No where is it addressed that not every should or must attend university or be doomed to unfruitful lives. The idea of catering to a select group skin color or ability is not conducive to changing the mold. Everyone must be addressed and that unfortunately is expensive but not as expensive as ignoring it. Today we a have a choice break and replace the mold or build more prisons which will prove more costly not only in monetary terms but in societal terms. "

cab e-girl wrote on Aug 22, 2008 8:24 PM:

" Actually Bill, she is suggesting that one size does not fit all. She would like segregation according to one's ability. She is absolutely correct. Kids that can't speak English should not be thrown in with high achieving kids until they can speak English and can keep up. Look at how well children from Asian cultures adapt to our classrooms. They learn to speak English and advance to the top. Obviously our society needs to put more value on education, buy slowing down the kids that want to learn and succeed is ludicrous. "

vocal-de-local wrote on Aug 22, 2008 11:43 PM:

" Scholastic levels in the form of "grades" such as 7th, 8th grade etc., should be a thing of the past. We need a set curriculum which students can move through as quickly or as slowly as they choose. Such a system will give ownership to the learning experience. Sure, we will have some people graduating at age 13 and some graduating at age 27. So what! I suspect that such a system will quickly motivate people to become smarter very quickly! Those who are "true" slow learners (not just low motivated learners) will rise to the surface in a very obvious way. Those who are slow learners due to "motivation" issues will rise to the occasion. "

a teacher wrote on Aug 23, 2008 12:22 AM:

" The question is: who decides? Us teachers don't do a good job, we're not objective. More tests? I truly don't know.

Then, try getting this past parents. Try telling some parents that their child is not going to college. "

Bill wrote on Aug 23, 2008 12:55 AM:

" I see Cabby, my lead sentence was poorly put. It was meant to imply that one size fits all does not address her precieved problems or those problems experienced by other students. My apologies for that.

It is my contention that being PC has nothing to do with the problem. Vocals ownership idea is a sweet twist. you are also correct that any solution will be an expensive one perhaps more expensive than we are willing to realize.

I also doubt that segregation according to ability would be a good policy. Do you propose group of eliete, mediocre and totally behind the curve classes? this has been attempted in the 50's and 60's with little success. Sorry for the rehtorical question. "

Bill wrote on Aug 23, 2008 1:04 AM:

" Cadence,

Many posters have an experience and knowledge pool sufficient to justify their claims with out resorting to the “I know because I was bussed or I am a teacher or my child’s experience qualifies me” which it most certainly does. Most share the same American educational experience in varying degrees including private and public schools. We are not yet that separated. Each ones experience serves to validate their opinions but that alone does not make a valid argument.

Is personal experience and knowledge the question Cadence? If so I will shower a little light. I am intimately familiar with the 60’s having graduated early in that decade from an American high school within 60 miles of here with a large black minority population, not Vallejo; in fact it was the only school in the county that boasted any significant minority population. In a community that could be considered so affluent it could not prevent a black dentist from purchasing a home, though it tried, a progressive community where the n word was used casually even out side of the clubby Legion hall.

PC? I have seen PC up close and personal, The PC of separate but equal right here in river city. I have witnessed what the local paper termed a race riot at my high school. You don’t need a sign reading white only to practice PC. All this at a high school scoring in the 99th percentile of the Iowa tests (the dominant accredited marker of the times), a school that had grave doubts about hiring the first black teacher in the district, with possibly the first Hispanic teacher in the district.

This is all a “back in the day’s story” and substantiates nothing much less the PC blame game. "

funnyme wrote on Aug 23, 2008 8:27 AM:

" John Richards,

"...One has to wonder why students of Chinese extraction do so well in our schools, while other minorities don't do so well? I don't think you can blame the schools or the teachers for that difference..."

I DO NOT blame teachers and/or schools for that difference at all.
I pointed out that "cultural differences" exist. When the high achievers are "separated", Asian, Hindu and Caucasians are among the majority and yes, it makes you wonder what they are doing different. "

Angelina Gervasio wrote on Aug 23, 2008 9:06 AM:

" cab-e-girl-
Thank You. My point exactly. As early as second grade I noticed that one group of kids looked bored beyond belief and others looked like they had just been stuck into a sixth grade class.

I can still see similar things going on today in my school. "

steph wrote on Aug 23, 2008 11:09 AM:

" Angelina--it gets a LOT better in high school. You'll have plenty of challenge there, and you'll see segregation by ability.

My son had a taste of "regular" class this week--in a district (State?)-mandated class--where he was treated to two girls chatting loudly to each other as the teacher was leading class. Apparently, they were just begging to be challenged, and when one poor child finally asked them to be quiet, he fell victim to their ploy. "Oh, did you just 'shoosh' me?" and on and on it went. Well, my son is happy to have classes mostly full of children who are eager to learn, taught by teachers who match them with a meaty education. I'm really quite impressed.

As for now, enjoy your friendships. I do think the "standards" for middle schools fall a bit short academically. But that's just my experience. And I believe a lot of that has to do with lack of segregation by ability. On the other hand, my children have made some great friends who may not be as academically "advanced" as they are, but who have other talents. There is plenty of time and opportunity for achievement outside of middle school. "

steph wrote on Aug 23, 2008 11:12 AM:

" I don't worry about my children's education; I know they'll get good ones, because we have high expectations and are fortunate enough to have had access to very good schools and universities. On the other hand, I do believe that we, as a nation, could and should do more for those who have not come from a tradition EVER of educational excellence. Our continued neglect of the poor is expensive, indeed. "

a teacher wrote on Aug 23, 2008 11:45 AM:

" I hesitate to bring this up, Angelina, but perhaps you will recall your original letter that started your career as a blogger where you felt that too much money was being spent on schools. What you are suggesting is expensive in that it requires more teachers. ow do you reconcile your fiscal beliefs with your educational philosophy? "

plasticpinkflamingo wrote on Aug 23, 2008 10:48 PM:

" I agree with diehard4 - ooops, Angelina from personal experience.

It was many years ago (would you believe so many that we had to evade dinosaurs on the way to and from school back then?)

My mother taught me how to read before I went to kindergarten. So when I was in first grade I was bored waiting for the slow kids to read to the class. I could read the whole book before they got off the first page. But the teacher didn't want us to read ahead so it was almost torture to sit there.

The point is that I would have been better off moving ahead with other advanced readers. It didn't help me to just sit there, and it didn't help the slower readers to have to listen to us advanced readers when our turn came because they just couldn't keep up, raising their frustration level.

This scenario played out many times throughout my school days. Once in awhile I would be one of the slow kids on a certain subject. High school was better because once you got your required classes you could pick something interesting and challenging for your electives.

I keep telling myself that's why I took two years of Latin (yes, they taught Latin in high school - amo, amas, amat - I told you this was 'old school'). I tell myself I took it for the challenge and not because my brainy smart and pretty girlfriend was in the class and she challenged me to take it with her.

Whew! We broke up and I didn't have to take the third year - I was one of the 'slow' students in that class! "

Angelina Gervasio wrote on Aug 24, 2008 9:45 AM:

" teacher-
sorry I haven't responded to you...I had a comment yesterday but the computer deleted it when I didn't get the "Image Verification" right. Anyways...

Last year a kid in my class asked the teacher if anyone could get held back. The teachers answered: Maybe one kid in the entire school (Around 1,250 kids go to Redwood) might get held back. Maybe. They don't like to hold kids back because they get teased by everyone because they got held back and that hurts their "feelings" and "self esteem".
If I were that kid that would make me do better in school the second time around so it doesn't happen again. Just like the graffiti kids. Their parents have to pay if they get caught, so it's not that big of a deal to them.

As for how to tell their parents that their kid won't go to college, simply explain that in order for society to thrive, there need to be a variety of people to do the different jobs. Construction, for example. An architect can design a building and an engineer can figure out how to build it, but if there are no carpenters to build it, the building will never exist. As long as any one person does his job well, he is just as valuable to society as the next person, regardless of rank. "

Angelina Gervasio wrote on Aug 24, 2008 12:37 PM:

" As for needing money to hire more teachers, you could use the $1.5 million we wasted replacing the perfectly good desks that we had before. I don't know how much a teacher makes yearly, but f that's not enough I'm sure we could find more wasted money somewhere. We could get rid of the free lunch program. Around 99% of the kids that I've seen give the cashier a dime or just show them their student ID and walk on through are wearing Pac Sun, Aeropostale, Hollister, or American Eagle stuff, which is pretty expensive. "

Angelina Gervasio wrote on Aug 24, 2008 2:43 PM:

" OGreatPinkOne-
Sorta sounds like me, with potholes instead of dinosaurs though! ;) "

cab e-girl wrote on Aug 24, 2008 7:52 PM:

" Who is going to decide? Well taking into consideration that most parents don't like to hear that their child is not going to be in the top classes, a formula of some sort could be used, where the child's prior year teacher has input, coupled with scores on standardized testing that are already being administered, along with some basic common sense like does the child speak English? Has the child had disruptive behavior patterns etc? None of these things would be a definitive yes or no, but a combination of may qualifiers. And if a mistake is made, the child is simply moved into the appropriate level. "

Cadence wrote on Aug 25, 2008 7:45 AM:

" Angelina's article talks about separating (OOOO, don't want to use loaded words like "segregate") students according to ability. She sees this might reduce boredom for some students, reduce frustration for others.
I pointed out that her idea was the norm in California years ago. My "beginning of the end" refers to the beginning of the end of that policy and I pointed out that the policy was ended in the belief that the policy itself was racist.
Per a google search, I find that the term "politically correct" was first used in the US during the (ahem) 1960's.
I stated that when the system was alive and functioning, California was a leader in both the trades and academia. I thought my use of "trades" was sufficient to note that students with both aptitude and liking for hands-on, mechanical work were indeed often (often by choice) placed into strong shop classes, into business math, business English, etc. Sadly, girls were arbitrarily excluded from many trades shop classes.
The system did indeed make California's educational system a state asset, and I believe the demise of the system was mistaken and that delaying academically inclined students wastes a state resource.
Grooming students for gainful employment was considered critical and just as different applicants suit different jobs, so did different students suit different classes.
When I interview high school graduates for employment, I SEE the results. I have been intermittently hiring since 1980, and in my anecdotal experience, the qualifications of applicants has steadily declined and no, I do not work for WalMart.
I also pointed out that eventually socio-economic disparaties replaced race as educrats' preferred explanation of disparate educational results.
Educrats have yet to solve the latter problem, but I don't believe expecting equal performance is realistic where humans are involved. "

Cadence wrote on Aug 25, 2008 10:03 AM:

" I wasn't in the express lane classes and therefore I had to google "bell the cat," and I find a recurring definition: "to perform a very dangerous or very difficult task; - taken metaphorically from a fable about a mouse who proposes to put a bell on a cat, so as to be able to hear the cat coming."
I think I understand the concept. I do not, however, see how it morphs into "theorizing that there was a specific point in time where political correctness damaged the system is technique used frequently in the blogosphere known as belling the cat." "

Bill wrote on Aug 25, 2008 11:09 AM:

" The mice or mouse tied a bell on the PC 60's cat to discredit any progressive thought that could be seen as originating in that era. Hear the sound of that Bell? just another hippie with fried mental capacities not worth listening to. "

elb wrote on Aug 25, 2008 4:14 PM:

" Let me preface this by saying that I know we are blessed to have a child who excels, and regardless of my frustrations expressed, I do have empathy for those students that have a difficult time, for what ever reason, while in the classroom.

That being said, our daughter who does happen to excel on several levels seems to constantly have her education dumbed down to accommodate the lower level, and or ill-behaved students.

In fact, there have been many times throughout the years that she has had to actually carry the burden of teaching these students, hoping they will rise to the occasion and not sink her group project grades.

I can't stand it that her teachers are always putting her with the not-so-smart children. It's not my daughter's job to teach those students, it's the teacher's job to teach them, though I have tried to make, even this mockery a learning experience and encourage her leadership skills, but who's her example?

The result? My daughter's education is constantly being slighted because she has to put up with slackers, or simply incapable producers.

In my opinion, she's been dragged down more than the other students have been brought up.

But none of that matters now does it? Because in the end... the cattle all seem to meet somewhere in the middle don't they? And the educator's numbers always seem to land somewhere around the mark called, "You get to keep your job this year." "

Cadence wrote on Aug 25, 2008 8:10 PM:

" OK, lemme see here. The cat must be Political Correctness. The mice are saps who will be eaten by the cat, thereby becoming quite dead, albeit progressive. To prevent this, the mice wish to place a bell around the cat's neck so they are alerted to its arrival and can safely scamper away.
That about cover it?
If I were a mouse, I'd love the bell idea: safe, harmless, no toxins involved.
However, like I said, I sat in the cheap seats and my interpretation may be wrong. Fables? Huh? We only got as far as fairy tales.
I, for one, understood and hugely enjoyed the cautionary tale of The Emperor's New Clothes.
Bill, you have illustrated my point perfectly. I didn't belong in the same classroom as you, and you may thank your lucky hippie stars that I wasn't there! "

funnyme wrote on Aug 25, 2008 8:37 PM:

" Cadence,
Thank you for pointing out exactly what it is.

At the present time a lot of us can see that the emperor is totally naked, even though the pc people are trying to change the term of being naked to "clothing deprived due to some challenges involving his uncontrolled feelings". "

Cadence wrote on Aug 26, 2008 8:24 AM:

" Thanks, funnyme!
I think elb's assessment of his/her daughter's educational experience is too, too true for many of our more capable students. The system does NOT value and seems to delight in locking down fully functioning intellects, to the ultimate detriment of society.
p.s. - I look forward to your next DUI analysis! "

elb wrote on Aug 26, 2008 9:21 AM:

" Thanks Cadence for understanding the heart behind my rant.

After rereading what I wrote I do want to make it clear that I understand it is the "systems" problem and not so much the teachers who are doing this to our children. I spoke of the teachers because they are who we have had firsthand relations with throughout my daughters education, but I know they are, in most cases, trying their best, and I do thank them all for that.

I also appreciate, Cadence, that you mentioned this ultimately becomes a detriment to our society, because I had that thought when I began writing, but lost it somewhere along the way.

My daughter is certainly not an Einstein. I am an appropriately proud parent, but not unrealistic, either. Still, I have wondered throughout the years, what she might have missed out on, or how much of her potential might have been chiseled away because of a system like ours.

That being said, I recognize fully my responsibility as her parent and have tried to supplement along the way where I felt the system may have been selling her short. "

Cadence wrote on Aug 26, 2008 10:26 AM:

" elb, I recall my daughter being sent to "help the kindergarten teacher" one afternoon a week during fifth grade.
I was told this would help my daughter?! I ended up spending too many fifth grade evenings drilling my daughter on her multiplication tables as I felt they were critically important but her teacher claimed "no time, I have too much paperwork," etc.
When my child left the public system and entered Justin Siena, she was nearly one full year behind freshmen who'd attended Catholic elementary school! And yes, she had very respectable grades during her public school tenure.
Now, my daughter is no Einstein either, and she needed (and I had paid state taxes since forever for) every available minute of teacher time. She did NOT need to be supplementing the district teacher's aide ranks!! Nor did she need to be delaying the more adept students.
Angelina's commentary is so dead-on correct that it, sadly, will never be realized by the educrats. "

funnyme wrote on Aug 26, 2008 11:47 AM:

" Cadence, elb,

Why is it that a PROBLEM that is so clear, so obvious, and its solution seems a lot simpler than the educrats (love it!) want us to think it is has not been solved in forty some years?
The public school system is not producing the greatest minds, the private schools are -for the most part, I suppose (Our leaders and most successful people seem to come from Private Schools).
I had my daughters in "multi-age" classes, and as long as they were on the lower grade they would thrive immensely (kindergartener in a k,1,2, a 2nd grader in a 2-3). If you knew my daughters (well, you actually know one) you would determine right away that they love to learn and are up for the task, and so are many more kids we've met through the years but are not given the chance to succeed because the system does not allow it.

I love VDL solution. It makes so much sense from a parent's point of view.
"teacher" (the blogger in these comments) says the solutions are expensive.

The way I see it is if you have 22 elementary schools, 5 middle schools, 4 high schools and one Junior College in Napa County you should be able to do some mix and match and offer the parents the possibility to accommodate their children (high achievers, low achievers, ESL, etc.) and really HELP them succeed.

How about opening NVC to whomever is capable of taking some of the classes they offer with no minimum age?

What does it take to change the failed system?

Vouchers for Private Schools?

Who will ultimately take responsibility and say "it's enough!"?

Is it our District Superintendent? the Governor?...the US President? "

steph wrote on Aug 26, 2008 3:31 PM:

" I don't think the system is "failing" our highly motivated children. I think it's failing the kids who can't keep up--these are the kids who ultimately drop out or graduate from HS with no desire for college AND no career training. I don't worry about my college-bound kids. They've gotten an excellent education. Could it have been even better? Sure. But at who's expense? These kids usually have the very motivated, higher-educated, generally more prosperous parents who can afford extracurricular education, like travel and music and sports training.
There were times where my children were a little bored, but they're ok, and they're making up for it in high school. Are there wasted opportunities? Probably, but what are we really asking for? 15-year-old astrophysicists or brain surgeons? Adulthood can wait.
It's the kids who are stuck being poor, whose parents have failed them, and whose creaky old expensive education is failing them that concern me the most. What about the really brilliant children who are forced to go to substandard schools because they were unfortunate enough to be born to neglectful or uneducated parents in poor neighborhoods? A mind is a terrible thing to waste...and it happens with alarming frequency. Our politicians who say they are pro-education should be ashamed of themselves. I say we need to raise the floor. The ceiling is high enough in most cases, and grows infinitely high with time, in this land of opportunity. Ah, I think we're lucky here in Napa--those of us who will take advantage of our good opportunities. I'm telling you, the teachers at Napa High are EXCELLENT! I'm sure it's the same at Vintage and JS. "

a teacher wrote on Aug 26, 2008 3:52 PM:

" funnyme: First off, Private schools do not do better than public schools overall. SOME private schools (the more expensive ones) do better, but there are public schools that match the best private schools and there are privats schools that frankly should be put out of business. Over all they do about the same.

The problem with VDL's solution is child developement. There is a qualitative difference in the way that 6th, 7th and 8th graders think. There are exeptional students at either end of the spectrum, but in general, they don't think the same way. I would certainly agree that we should make the system more flexible to accomadate the exceptions. I frequently have to figure out solutions for my exceptional students.

As for the expense, unfortunately, teaching is labor intensive. For example. In my school district we math teachers have been telling the administrators that we need more time with struggling students (the research says time on task brings the biggest improvement in learning). They've given the English department double periods for English and Reading and they have gotten results.

Unfortunatly, in order to teach Math you have to be a certified Math teacher, with English, Social Studies teachers can teach English classes. There is a huge shortage of Math teachers. If you are qualified to teach math (you need to have an equivilant of a BA in Mathematics), you are qualified to work in Information Tech and make much more money. We can't afford to hire more teachers, let alone math teachers and so it's 50 minute math classes with the same old results.

Almost all solutions require more teachers and thus costs more. "

steph wrote on Aug 26, 2008 4:50 PM:

" But, see, teacher, I think there could be immense value in putting our talented students to work tutoring those who struggle more. A fellow student could motivate those who simply need inspiration (not all who "struggle" have cognitive difficulties, right?) or could even motivate those who think differently from the teacher, or who just think at a different pace. What do you think of that solution? As a parent I would back that solution 100%. I'm right now trying to interest my oldest child in tutoring. If only for selfish reasons, I believe tutoring might be valued on a college application as show of leadership or community service, not to mention the pure joy of being responsible for helping someone get to "A-ha!" and showing one's academic talents, and on and on. I say, put those "smart" kids to work, and help build a better community.

I'm with you on the private vs. public schools. The private schools aren't held to the same standards, responsibilities, restrictions as public schools, and yet they do a darn fine job in most cases, again, with the kids who are there to learn. "

steph wrote on Aug 26, 2008 5:54 PM:

" I mean the PUBLIC schools do a darn fine job in spite of all the hindrances. Private, too, probably, but aren't they heralded enough. "

elb wrote on Aug 26, 2008 6:08 PM:

" Steph,

My daughter has been "working for years" with little to no benefit, even to her detriment, helping her teachers to bring the struggling students up to par.

All this has done is drag her education down. Her time in the classroom is as much her time to be taught as it is any other student's time. It is not fair to 'work' some children while 'teaching' others.

If she could have been in a classroom with students at her level, I believe wholeheartedly that she would be much further along than she is today.

As for tutoring, now that she is in high school and has a spare period and has developed good time management skills and would like to earn a little money of her own... I am all for her tutoring a student on the side, but I can never, in good conscience, owing to personal experience, condone 'putting our children to work' in the classroom when they are there to learn themselves. "

a teacher wrote on Aug 26, 2008 7:15 PM:

" Steph: Having students tutor or "teach" can be a good teaching technique. When you teach you have to figure out how to explain the subject which can lead to a deeper understanding.

But...

Using a student as a classroom aide because the teacher can't figure out how to deal with an advanced student is unacceptable. "

pharper wrote on Aug 26, 2008 10:19 PM:

" I attend New Tech high, and recently members of the Tours New Tech group, which I am part of, took a trip to the New Tech Foundation, which is in charge of handling the creation and support of New Tech Highs all over the country. I learned some things: one of the main objectives of the school is to train us for the real world--college isn't the real world, although we are also prepared for that. The philosophy (and it's working; our scores were some of the highest in the district, not to mention we have a 98% rate of graduation and over 90% of our students go on to higher education) is that putting everyone in the same class is more like the real world. In a business environment, it's unlikely that EVERYONE will be former "gifted and talented" students, and some will no doubt be the people who slacked off and managed to skate through high school and college. Separating the "fast" students from the "slow" students isn't the way life works, and a school shouldn't work that way either.

So often, these “slow" students fall far behind because people see them as less than the cream of the crop--therefore, unworthy of the privileges the gifted students gift. Programs for the "good" students are typically much better funded than supplemental programs are for those who need it. While I agree that students shouldn't be beholden to teaching the students who don't learn as fast as they do, it's not actually detrimental to the education of these fast learners, unless it takes away from their personal time or learning time--they say that teaching someone else is one of the best ways of learning. "

pharper wrote on Aug 26, 2008 10:21 PM:

" I also believe that instead of forcing students to repeat a grade, supplemental classes should be given so that student is ready for the next grade--isn't that what summer school is for? Low self-esteem is a valid reason for not holding a student back; when a student feels unable to learn, they won't. Instead of holding them back, give them the tools they need to succeed in the next grade--forcing them to repeat and entire grade won't solve much of anything. Everyone is entitled to the same education as everyone else; people who don't want to learn won't, and separating people based on their achievements or speed of their learning won't change that. "

funnyme wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:16 AM:

" Have you seen RMS campus lately? OMG, it looks gorgeous. I first saw it a couple of weeks ago when I went for the "Orientation Night", and last night was "Back to School Night". What a nice, fun, energetic and intelligent crowd the teachers, counselors and principal are. I am absolutely impressed.
You see I didn't really have the chance to meet them last year (I transfer my daughter to begin the third trimester at RMS), so we were "outsiders" for a while.
We were informed by the Math teacher that next school they are going to SEPARATE the students by "creating" different levels based on their test scores. The top 34-40 will go to group "a" the next 35-40 to group "b", and so on. This way each one of the teachers can really focus on teaching ALL of the students in their group how to achieve excellence.

Brilliant!

This year, the students won't have to "teach", nor get bored while they "wait" they are given smart and fun problem solving strategies to work/play with meanwhile.
It sounds exciting, we'll see. I am looking forward to it. I am grateful for the effort RMS is making to accommodate EVERYBODY's learning need. "

funnyme wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:17 AM:

" Have you seen RMS campus lately? OMG, it looks gorgeous. I first saw it a couple of weeks ago when I went for the "Orientation Night", and last night was "Back to School Night". What a nice, fun, energetic and intelligent crowd the teachers, counselors and principal are. I am absolutely impressed.
You see I didn't really have the chance to meet them last year (I transfer my daughter to begin the third trimester at RMS), so we were "outsiders" for a while.
We were informed by the Math teacher that next school year they are going to SEPARATE the students by "creating" different levels based on their test scores. The top 34-40 will go to group "a" the next 35-40 to group "b", and so on. This way each one of the teachers can really focus on teaching ALL of the students in their group how to achieve excellence.

Brilliant!

This year, the students won't have to "teach", nor get bored while they "wait" they are given smart and fun problem solving strategies to work/play with meanwhile.
It sounds exciting, we'll see. I am looking forward to it and I am grateful for the effort RMS is making to accommodate EVERYBODY's learning need. "

funnyme wrote on Aug 27, 2008 6:29 AM:

" pharper,
In the real world, people will "discriminate" against you based on your attitude, behavior, character and ultimately on your knowledge of certain subjects. That's how you would get a job, buy a car or a house, or even get a husband/wife. And a lot of times you will get disappointed and your feelings will get hurt, and your self esteem will get so low that you will need a spatula to pick yourself up (some people will go for "prozac" however).

You say:

"...Everyone is entitled to the same education as everyone else; people who don't want to learn won't, and separating people based on their achievements or speed of their learning won't change that...

No, it will not change it, but it will certainly give better chances to the ones who WANT to learn and WANT to succeed and WANT to be part of our civilized (capitalist) society.

I have met a few people who have a PhD, and decided to become farmers just for the love of it and its satisfaction. They needed determination to make that change. Being a grape grower, vintner, wine maker is not an easy task.
Ask them! "

elb wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:27 AM:

" Funnyme,

I want to point out that the word, "discriminate" does not always have to have a negative connotation behind it.

For instance, if I am going in for open heart surgery at the Queen, I really hope that someone was able to "discriminate" or "differentiate" between surgeons before actually assigning one to me.

Do I want the better of the two or three or four surgeons available to me? You bet I do.

Are the other surgeons who were not selected now dealing with disappointment because they were somehow differentiated out of the running?

At some point we can't keep worrying about people's "feelings" and whether or not they are going to head out into the world with their shoulders high or low.

Sometimes people have to take responsibility for themselves and if society could recognize that THERE ARE NO SMALL ROLES when it comes to making the world go round, then we might come to better appreciate those children who aren't necessarily cut out to become surgeons, but instead know how to change the surgeon's tires on his or her car so they can actually get to the hospital on time to perform my open heart surgery. :-)

This is just one more of the reasons I believe the "No child left behind" is a horrific lie to impose on our children.

We can't all be doctors. Someone has got to change the doctor's tires, massage those kinks, and mop the floor after surgery...

There are no small roles in society, only under appreciated ones. "

funnyme wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:57 AM:

" elb,
I couldn't agree with you more.

Discriminate is not a bad word and not always comes with a negative connotation! "

a teacher wrote on Aug 27, 2008 12:04 PM:

" Us liberals usually wind up being accused of elitism. Frankly, I can't hink of a better way to ge an elitist society than by segregating students the way that is being described. "

funnyme wrote on Aug 27, 2008 2:34 PM:

" a teacher,
Following your definition of elitist society in this blog and its relation to liberals I'd have to say I like "this" kind of liberals :) "

anticommie wrote on Aug 27, 2008 2:42 PM:

" a teacher wrote on Aug 27, 2008 12:04 PM:

" Us liberals usually wind up being accused of elitism. Frankly, I can't hink of a better way to ge an elitist society than by segregating students the way that is being described. "

Its qiute simple, really. Liberal Democrats dont want to better the education system. Well most POLITICIANS dont want education to get better. The reason? They would have nothing to argue to the public to be elected into office. Think about it. Over 50% of California's budget goes into our school system, and yet the younger generations are nowhere as prepared for work or higher studies after highschool.

I am young enough that I feel for these student, granted it is their fault as well. There is nothing wrong with rewarding students that have a higher intellect. The Socialsit Left wants everyone to be the same, so they can preach "it's Okay, the Government will pay for everything you need." "

Angelina Gervasio wrote on Aug 28, 2008 6:33 AM:

" steph-
Two words. Not. Happening. THe advanced kids will just wind up giving the below average kids the answers out of frustration that they're not listening to them or are fooling around. The advanced kids will still be bored (and frustewrated now too) and the below average kids will still be below average.

At the school I spent the first two trimesters of sixth grade at, I was pared with some way below average kids to do a very big project because I was supposed to "help them out". I wound up begging the teacher to please, please, please not grade it as a group project because the other "members" weren't doing anything and I couldn't finish the entire project myself. That's what happens when you group the advanced kids with the below average ones.

elb and anticommie-
Great points. The libs and dems are so absorbed with manipulating everything (racism, discrimination, the feelings thing), just look at bil's posts, that they don't seem to notice that America is becoming a sinking ship. I came up with a solution to put us back on top in the matters of education and all they worry about is hurting someones feelings when they put tem in a lower class. Gimme a break. "

Cadence wrote on Aug 28, 2008 7:31 AM:

" ateacher wrote, "Us liberals usually wind up being accused of elitism. Frankly, I can't hink of a better way to ge an elitist society than by segregating students the way that is being described. " I believe ateacher is referring to filling classes with like-abilitied students and then teaching to each classroom's different ability level.
The National Institute of Mental Health posits "New imaging studies are revealing—for the first time—patterns of brain development that extend into the teenage years. Although scientists don't know yet what accounts for the observed changes, they may parallel a pruning process that occurs early in life that appears to follow the principle of "use-it-or-lose-it:" neural connections, or synapses, that get exercised are retained, while those that don't are lost." In its brief essay, the NIMH describes waves of new gray matter growth followed by "pruning" of unused capacity.
How can you, ateacher, or anyone at all justify NOT wanting to provide adequate intellectual stimulation to EACH AND EVERY developing brain in order to maximize "use it" connections and minimize "lose it" connections?
I understand we who disagree with you are supposed to recognize the selfish error of our ways and succumb to flat earth ideology for the good of the state because you have waved the dreaded "elitist" card in our direction.
If potential brain power were gasoline, we would be doing everything in our power to stretch its utility to the fullest.
But since this is just about plain ol' human potential - well, I guess we just don't need no stinking differences, do we? Recognition of differences makes us elitist.
We can solve problems just fine as we are. Now take a look around you and see exactly how well THAT idea's working out. "

pharper wrote on Aug 28, 2008 1:31 PM:

" Angelina, you may have offered a "solution," but that doesn't make it the right one. The reality is, lowered self-esteem can affect a person's ability to learn, particularly if people refuse to believe in them and help them understand the material. Forcing them to repeat a grade they already don't understands doesn't teach them anything except that no one cares enough to help them move on. The below average students aren't necessarily (in fact, not all that often) the 'slackers." Just because they don't understand the material or don't have the highest grades doesn't mean they're messing around or refusing to pay attention. It's the attitude that people with low grades or who don't understand the work are just not paying attention that really affects their ability to do well. Instead of a program that glorifies those who don't have trouble getting it, how about an equally well-funded program for students who have trouble getting it--optional, of course, and one that allows more 'advanced" students to come in and share their knowledge--again, optional.

It's a little worrisome that a seventh-grader uses words like "libs" and "dems" in order to speak disparagingly about them. My political party and political views haven't put me in blinders; I simply don't agree with you. I respect that you don't like what the "libs" and "dems" have to say, but saying that they (we) don't notice the problem is unfair.

The reason you had trouble with the group is probably because of the way the grouping system was set up, not because you were in with students who are below average. At New Tech High, most work is done in groups--and graded as group work--members who slack off are fired from the group and have to go it alone. "

pharper wrote on Aug 28, 2008 1:37 PM:

" Group work is a great way of learning and engaging others in learning; like I said before, one of the best ways to learn is to teach someone else. When people who understand the material are in even proportion to people who don’t in a group, the members of the group can learn a lot, both from teaching and from being taught—and the end result is usually fantastic.

Much of the time, students with low grades or who don’t understand the material come from homes where their parents don’t care about their education, or where there are no people capable of teaching them. Abandoning them because they don’t get it and have no support won’t solve anything—it will only make thigns worse.

Assuming that because students are below average, they’re not smart or don’t want to learn is an elitist attitude, and won’t get anyone anywhere. Segregating students will only result in low self-esteem among the kids at the bottom of the tier, and an elitist attitude at the top. The above-average students will reap the benefits of funding, better teachers, and bigger opportunities, whereas the below-average students will get sub-standard education because of the assumption that they aren’t smart enough or don’t care. We might as well create classes for those who will be allowed to succeed later in life because they were put on pedestals, and those that won’t be because they were never given the opportunity. "

Bill wrote on Aug 28, 2008 2:20 PM:

" Pharper, exemplifies the direction of the future or what the futures direction should be. New Tec high is a reinvention of the old polytechnic high abandoned decades past. He or She has already shown sufficient insight as an individual. There is a difference in offering an individual choice and dividing them from the rest of society.

These types of schools should be incorporated into the main campuses and not treated as satellites or vice versa. The idea of modern vocational training does not preclude the opportunity of a university or college education or advancement skills in any of the arts or sciences.

We should be promoting the variety of choices not lock stepping children to a drill mode where the few succeed and the devil with the rest, advancing not only basic skills but developing real world social skills outlined by pharper. "

a teacher wrote on Aug 28, 2008 3:35 PM:

" I haven't been able to comment as much as i would like to on this subject. School has started and I'm extra busy this year. PHarper pretty much summed it up for me.

I would add the following. Most students that would be retained have far more problems than merely motivation. Setting up a system that assumes that poor students need a "sift kick" to get it together is going to produce a larger number of drop outs. No one wants to be a 20 year old sophmore in high school.

I don't see the need for "grades", that is the level we put students into. I like the idea of combining classes, Kidergarten/first grade classes for example. Perhaps in middle school we should just have a list of requirements to move on to high school and classes to address them. That way advanced students can jump ahead and slower students can take more time. My guess is that most 11 year olds will be in 6th grade level classes, most 12 year olds will be in 7th grade classes, etc.

Restructuring our schools to be more effective requires a lot of work. It won't be cheap, either. It will be money and time well spent though.

I would echo PHarper on her comments to you, Angelina. It has taken me 52 years to get to my opinions. I find it demoralizing to argue with someone so set in an ideology at such a young age. And I can't be as hard on you as i would some one older. You should give what Pharper said some thought. "

pharper wrote on Aug 28, 2008 4:17 PM:

" Thank you, Bill and teacher! It's my fourth and final year at New Tech High, and I really think that going there has given me great insight into what our future should be. "

winemd wrote on Aug 28, 2008 5:57 PM:

" Pharper, I understand what you are saying, and students of different acheivment levels should not be kept totally separate. But you say "Forcing them to repeat a grade they already don't understands doesn't teach them anything .." But what does sending them ahead to a grade where they will understand even less, because they don't understand what came before, do? That doesn't seem like it would help them at all. It seems like it would cause even more academic frustration. "

winemd wrote on Aug 28, 2008 6:17 PM:

" Also, i don't have a problem with a young person having developed opinions, and I applaud Angelina for putting herself out there in this way. I think the point about speaking disparagingly of the other side is a good one and applies to both sides. It is a good thing to stick up for your opinions. It is a good thing to listen to well-reasoned arguments from those who disagree with you and truly try to understand the argument, even if you disagree. Many intelligent people are conservative, and many are liberal. "

Angelina Gervasio wrote on Aug 29, 2008 7:37 AM:

" winemd-
Thank you. I can't stand it when people refuse to debate with me because they know I have a better point or they don't want to risk seeing a 7th grader having a better point than them. It's like a king saying they don't want to go into war with an attacking country because they feel sorry for them.

teacher-
It may have taken you 52 years to form an opinion, but that is no excuse to degrade mine without a valid argument. You are not living as a kid in a school today as I am. Do you have any idea how many times someone has tried to brain wash me? The libs and dems are sinking America whether or not they realize it o want to. Everything in their eyes is racism. You have to let everyone play your game on the playground whether they're mean or not because if you don't, their feelings will get hurt. If you're not white, you are automatically better than them. If you displease the people of another race, you are racist. Don't tell people what grade you got, if it's better than theirs, it will hurt their self esteem. I have plenty of reasons to be opinionated teacher.
I can take any blow, too. Please don't stop debating with me only because I am young.
After all, I am not your average kid :) "

pharper wrote on Aug 29, 2008 12:25 PM:

" Angelina, I don't believe anyone is degrading your opinion. I'm sixteen; I'm every bit as opinionated as you. I'm a strong believer in the power of youth to change the world. However, we do have the right to challenge each others' opinions, and to argue our points. Saying that yours is better is degrading to OUR opinion. If you truly believe what you're saying, I respect that, but saying that your point is better or more important than anyone else's is a bad way to debate. The "libs" and "dems" are not sinking the country; trust me, it's a mutual effort. Both sides have their strengths and faults, and both do different things to improve (and to hurt) our country. There is no right or wrong political party or belief; it's all opinion.

There's nothing wrong with being politically correct, either; not wanting to offend others isn't "white guilt" or anything else of the sort, and it certainly isn't inherent only to Democrats. Excluding other people for no reason isn’t nice; it's not a habit we should teach our children. I recognize that not everything in this world is nice or fair (it's the nature of humanity) but that doesn't mean we shouldn't teach those values on the playground and in our schools. I believe (as do most Democrats that I personally know) that all people are created equal; no one race or ethnicity is better than another, so yes, i try not to offend others. You can't deny that there has been plenty done to keep people of a different color or background from succeeding, so learning to treat everyone as an equal is a skill that yes, we should teach on school grounds. "

pharper wrote on Aug 29, 2008 12:30 PM:

" Bragging about your grade isn't kind or respectful either; telling someone politely (or even offering to help them improve theirs) is perfectly fine, and no one’s saying it isn’t. I think you may be chalking up ideas you don’t agree with to Democratic or liberal views, and that’s not a very objective standpoint. Being able to see the other side is a skill inherent to debating and to expressing one’s opinion thoughtfully and relevantly. You’ve presented your side of the issue, and all of us have read it, thought about it, and responded to it respectfully. Rather than accusing people of being “libs” or “dems,” perhaps you should take the time to read our suggestions. There is always a compromise.

As well, the only problem anyone had with your having an opinion was some of the perceived abrasiveness. The words “libs” and “dems” imply a certain scorn for people with those views. It isn’t having an opinion at a young age that anyone’s worried about, it’s being so set in one’s ways that the other side isn’t visible that’s worrisome.

I hope you haven’t taken anything I’ve said to be an insult. I’m glad to see other young people expressing themselves intelligently. I do hope, though, that you can see past your opinion and maybe take the suggestions of others to heart. =D "

Bill wrote on Aug 29, 2008 1:23 PM:

" Seeking a debate and expressing an opinion are more often than not two very different things.

Framing the context has everything to do with intelligent and critical writing. Making a challenging statement containing demeaning terms is definitely opinion but does not foster debate. Using further statements of opinion as support sustains the validity of the opinion only in the mind of the author. It neither convinces or informs.

It could not even be considered a good exercise in rhetoric but a good example of demagoguery. What many people may term as their argument is merely arguing in the vernacular where by their opinion is fact for them and should be accepted as fact by the person they are attempting to argue with.

To carry on an argument, dialogue or discussion common ground must be established and a willingness to listen and not just hear the opposing argument. No common ground is possible if the thesis statement immediately disparages the subjects and accuses without substantive evidence of support in accompanying statements.

Opinion and accusation is what sustains these blogs and almost everyone posting exposes the juvenile in them. I would like to believe, Angelina, that your efforts would be to hold yourself to a higher standard.

So far you have expressed your opinion but is it really argument as in presenting a premises and supporting it in a manner to convince, or is it merely an exercise in the English language designed to exhibit great proficiency and a string of opinions as a support for your own feelings no matter how valid or unsubstantiated.

Logic, argumentation and even rhetoric are nearly lost arts especially in cyberspace. "

a teacher wrote on Aug 29, 2008 5:03 PM:

" Angelina, I wasn't degrading your opinion, you are entitled to it and I applaud your efforts in your "blog". However, I stick by what I said. I don't see how someone your age has the perspective, or experience to render some of the judgements that you have, espceially about your peers.

Ms. Harper IS your peer and I think you should at least consider her advice. "

candlelight wrote on Aug 31, 2008 10:46 PM:

" I am concerned that the Register is setting Ms. Gervasio up for undue criticism. Although the debate that results from her misinformed postings is interesting, the apparent ego boost that the newspaper is giving this child who now claims she's "not your average kid" seems wrong and misguided.

I am sure her parents agreed to let her do this, but it seems to have a tinge of child exploitation to me. "

vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 1, 2008 12:22 AM:

" pharper, young people like you give me hope for the future. Keep up the good work. NVR should provide you an opportunity to have your own blog.

Btw, when people begin throwing words like dems and libs out there in a derogatory manner, the debate is over for me. I'm just not going to allow myself to be pulled into the same old same debate. It's boring and redundant. "

Cadence wrote on Sep 1, 2008 8:14 AM:

" This is supposed to be a free country and the last I heard, this freedom includes freedom of thought.
Hold on to your independent thinking style, Angelina! Keep using your own brain power!
Attempts at enforcing one dimensional belief systems by often self-appointed thought police have, in other parts of the world, led to filling prisons and gulags with non-believers. But even those draconian measures aren't completely successful.
I am full of admiration for a 7th grader who is so deftly poking holes in bureaucratic, pc nonsense. Well done, and good for you! "

winemd wrote on Sep 1, 2008 10:58 AM:

" Truthfully, I am glad that young people such as Angelina and pharper are both getting involved and they both give me hope for the future. I don't agree with either of them fully on every issue, but both of them are engaged in the conversation, using their brains and formulating their own opinions, even though those opinions are so different. Being courteous and learning how to disagree respectfully is also very important, no matter how opposite the viewpoint. Pretty much all of us have been guilty of snarkiness on message boards at one time or another, but in general, it is better to debate civilly. Bill expressed it very well above. "

funnyme wrote on Sep 5, 2008 6:37 AM:

" Candlelight -
Just because Angelina has a different opinion than yours doesn't necessarily mean she is misinformed or wrong.

A fresh look from a different perspective at old problems is what will set our younger generation on a path of success.

Sorry, but I don't see a "tinge of child exploitation" but rather an opportunity to expand her learning experience in the community where she lives, and for that I thank the NVR. "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: