"Educators Advised to Be Cautious on Facebook Profiles"

With the popularity of social networking sites (per the video "The Social Media Revolution" we watched in Ed Tech, Facebook has 500 million people registered) this article doesn't surprise me in the slightest.  I would imagine this is an obvious precaution, since everything you post can be viewed by virtually anyone, but I guess the warning still needs to be broadcast.  While it may not be fair that teachers have to remain a notch or three above the bar when it comes to discretion, this is an intelligent outlook for anyone.  Posting on Facebook (or Twitter, or any other site) is akin to shouting from a rooftop - with a megaphone that will reach across nations.  Plenty of individuals have gotten in trouble at work, with the law, and of course their personal lives with their party pics and insensitive remarks.  It is important for parents to know the people their children spend the majority of their waking hours with are intelligent, caring and above all adhere to similar moral standards.  As a parent myself, I don't disagree.

When Pedagogic Fads Trump Priorities

This article is well timed for us Aspire folks, as we have our Constructivist-Direct Instruction debate pending for next Monday in Ed Psych, and this opinion article is decidedly Direct Instruction oriented.  The author (who, by the way, is not a teacher) speaks very strongly against the "fad" of Differentiated Instruction, siting the lack of classroom based research and inefficiency feedback from educators he spoke with.  When you take pure constructivism from an extreme approach, it is certainly inefficient - teachers attempting multiple lesson plans for each classroom, chaotic assignment structure, unbalanced testing. I must apply my personal life motto to this ideal: "everything in moderation."  Sure, if you try to create lessons for each student learning type, with different worksheets and tests to boot, your life beyond the classroom ceases to exist, swamped with extra work.  But I do believe that using a constructivist, differentiated instruction approach is not only possible, but enriching when used in moderation. 
You don't need multiple plans - but you should incorporate flexible methods in your curriculum.  For example, as a science teacher, when teaching a unit on the periodic table of elements, the direct instruction approach would be to present the table, set students to memorization, then have a test.  Using the differentiated instructionalist approach, the teacher could begin with a box of varying materials, have the students organize them based on properties and qualities (oranges are round, medium sized; grapefruits are round, larger sized, etc), then present the similarities to the period table's structure.  The teacher could then have students fill in a table themselves based on the elements' properties (have them collaborate in small groups) and later compare with the actual table to see how they did.  The lesson is streamlined, but includes multiple learning types so all students' ability levels and learning styles are included. 
Differentiated Instruction is easily possible, it just requires some creativity on the teacher's part.  With the Internet as a resource, even teachers who aren't necessarily naturally creative can locate exciting activities to incorporate into their lesson plans.

"On SAT College-Entrance Exam, Class of 2010 Posts Few Changes"

This article highlights the fact that while more students of diverse ethnic backgrounds (up to 42% this year, from 29% in 2000) are taking the SATs, the achievement gap continues to persist.  Some of the statistics mentioned: reading scores for whites averaged 528, Asians 519, Latinos 454 and African-Americans 429.  A testing group in Massachusetts that criticise standardized testing deemed these scores prove No Child Left Behind has failed.  However, I found the small paragraph in the middle of the article most interesting - it mentions that while scores are correlated along ethnic and socio-economic lines, they also appear to be heavily influenced by what classes the students take.  For example, if a student takes all four years of English they score higher (AP and honors even more so).  Now this surprised me - aren't all high school students required to take four years of English?  Obviously they aren't, if the article mentions this trend specifically.  So shouldn't we start worrying more about getting everyone to take math (same correlations) and English all four years rather than allowing seniors to attend with a partial credit load?  Of course, this is if our end-all and be-all is to increase SAT scores.  Just the fact that there is a disparity at all would have our ethics Professor on her soap box, but maybe we need to look a little deeper into what is creating these gaps.  I want some additional statistics, personally - like high-income African-American and Latino scores, or the average income level of Asians, who consistently fare almost as well or better than whites in test scores, to see if it is more income-based, or a resources gap.

"Texas Board Measure Aims to Curb Islam in Textbooks"

So once again, Texas amazes me with its outrageous stupidity (sorry Professor Liss).  Their board of education's complaint is that the social studies texts contain "gross pro-Islamic, anti-Christian distortions."  I am extremely curious as to what these "diverse reviewers" have labeled pro-Islamic.  Could they be referring to the Crusades, when Christian soldiers invaded the holy land for two hundred years in an attempt to "free" it from the tyranny of the infidels?  I suppose if it mentions the thousands of innocent people that were slaughtered during these struggles and doesn't explain how they deserved it because they were tainting the holy land with their presence one could argue this is a "pro-Islamic" stance.  Another complaint from conservative board member Don McLeroy was that the world history books "contained less coverage of Christians than of Muslims."  Again, I itch to get my hands on this text to see if he literally went through and highlighted each word perhaps, then counted them? Or he's worried that the youth of Texas aren't fully indoctrinated enough during church each Sunday that the focus of their world history text should be their faith?  Shouldn't our goal be to broaden students' minds, stretch their horizons?  Unfortunately the board obviously hasn't read our equity text, "Doing Multicultural Education for Achievement and Equity", or really even read just the title - it speaks for itself against this type of educational whitewashing.  I pity the students who are locked in such an environment, and I hope that the teachers of Texas will unite against this type of Orwellian nonsense and demand texts with a fully cultural outlook.