Morality of Frog Dissection

In my high school biology class, we were instructed to dissect worms, frogs, and pigs. It was disgusting. It smelled horrible and there was slime everywhere and quite frankly, I didn’t give a damn how similar our organs were or what I could learn from it. However, I did not morally object to the actual act of dissecting these animals; I was assured that they had not been farmed for the purpose of being killed so we could dissect them. I was told that they died naturally and were preserved. Perhaps I am just naïve and being duped, but I cling to this assurance anyway. Many people, however, object to the dissection of animals in schools regardless of the way said organisms are obtained. They insist that schools should switch to computer programs that allow students to digitally dissect frogs and other organisms instead.

Do you think such a switch would be realistic? Where do you stand on the grounds of dissections in schools?

Response to Shelby Giaccarini: School Food

Shelby asked, Should we be required to provide universal free lunch to all students?

I really think putting a universal free lunch for students into effect in public schools would be a huge mistake. It would be an incredibly expensive venture, considering how many kids are in the public education system. In order to do that, taxes would have to be raised—something that nobody wants in today’s economy. Yes, it is true that some kids can’t afford to buy lunch and don’t eat during the day because of it. That is unfortunate. But I think a better idea would be to try and set up some sort of need-based aid for those kids.

Besides, if lunch were being provided to students for free every day, the food would suck because they’d be buying and making cheap things.

Question in response: Should schools be serving only nutritional food, or merely providing a nutritional option along with others that are not as healthy?

Punishment in Schools

There is a wide range of punishments that have been used in schools throughout the ages. Catholic nuns use rulers to hit the knuckles of their students. Teachers in one-room schoolhouses would take a stick to the behinds of children in the early 1900s. Dozens of kids wrote hundreds of lines in English grammar schools. There’s time-out, detention, suspension, expulsion. Psychologists have been studying for years the effect of punishment on both behavior and the developing psyches of kids. Different findings are published and people continue to debate. So here’s my question for you.

How harsh should punishments within the educational setting be?

Response to Kim Pincus: Learning in Groups

Kim asked, How important is it that students enjoy their education and should this be a goal in teaching?

I think it is very important that students enjoy their education. The more they enjoy learning, the more active and attentive they will be in the classroom. This is why students often earn better grades when teachers have a more hands-on teaching style; students are more invested so they learn more and receive better grades. When teachers are boring, students fall asleep, zone out, day dream, etc. Basically what I’m trying to say is that the more interesting the material is, the more interested the student will be. I think it should be the teacher’s job to make the material interesting and engage students in learning. Therefore, yes, I believe this should be the goal in teaching.

My question in response would be, Do you think it is possible to make any subject fun to learn, or that there are some subjects that are just doomed to be boring?

Equal Pay for Equal Work?

So I have a little problem with the educational system. And it goes like this. Females are more often given the job of teaching at a non-college level, whereas males are more often given jobs as professors at colleges. As if this isn’t bad enough, women are still getting paid less than men for teaching at every level, from elementary school to college. Why is this still happening? In my opinion, women and men should be getting equal pay for equal work.

Question: Why do you think women are still getting paid less than men? Do you support this? Why or why not?

Response to Drew Warner: Think Inside the Box

Drew asked, Are we afraid of exiting the box because of our fear of changing social structures?

I think he brings up an excellent point. So much of what humans do on a day-to-day basis is done simply because people have told us all our lives that is the way things are supposed to be. All through history, people’s actions have been dictated by what society deems acceptable. You can see this especially well when looking at gender issues or issues of sexual orientation. It is also evident when one examines anything from trends in clothing throughout the ages to the trends is what works are chosen for an art museum. I often worry that humans are becoming incapable of thinking for themselves—can only follow patterns and orders.

Sometimes what the world needs is a change in the social structure. Think of all the things that would never have happened if someone didn’t stop and think to themselves, “You know what? This isn’t okay with me and I’m not going to let it happen.” Slavery would never have been abolished. Women wouldn’t have the right to vote. Arranged marriages would still be taking place. So many artists would be unappreciated or even oppressed.

We cannot stop the world from changing. It’s going to happen whether we like it or not. So we might as well contribute and do something to help it change for the better. :)

Question: What is one thing you were never taught in school that you wish had been a part of the curriculum?

Multi-Lingual Education

In many countries all over the world, students are taught more than one language starting at a very young age in primary or elementary schools. I remember when I lived and went to school in Texas, they started a basic Spanish program when I was in fourth grade. It was integrated into the curriculum for all the grades but kindergarten. However, I know this is unusual and most kids in the public education system do not start studying other languages until middle school or high school. At that stage, there is typically only a requirement of two years of language classes. In other countries, they study different languages throughout their entire public education, all the way until college.

My question is: Should American schools be more focused on teaching students different languages? Should we be teaching languages at an earlier age?

Response to Courtney Martin: Education

When talking about whether students should be picking what they study in their classes versus being assigned certain curriculum and prerequisites, Courtney asked: My question is what do others believe about blending the two? What is a good balance if there is any?

I believe that our education system should be set up like an upside-down funnel. In the beginning—elementary school—the education should be broad and universal. The majority of the work should be assigned by the educational system. As students get older and pass through the grades, education should start to become more specialized to give the student a chance to explore specific interests they have. In high school, for example, there should be some core requirements; students should have to take a certain number of social studies credits, math credits, etc. but students should for the most part be in control of what within those areas they are studying based on the interests they wish to pursue. College would be the tip of of the funnel. I believe that in college students should be in almost full control of what they study and the activities they pursue based on their career choices and extracurricular interests.

My question in response is: We all have different “strong suits,” things we are better at. We also have things we struggle with. How should it be handled if a student is struggling with a particular subject matter?