-> SK> FWIW, I think this is a pretty common response to someone sharing
-> an SK> article, unless at the beginning before the quote you make
-> some big SK> disclaimer about not sharing that opinion.
-> I guess I'm just naive & stupid, because I assume that, unless
-> someone is either claiming authorship or makes an actual statement in
-> favor of a quote, information is information & the author is the one
-> answerable for the information.
I don't think it means you're "niave & stupid", else I am too (I had the
same experience, remember?).
-> SK> I guess it is somewhat reasonable to assume a person would _tend_
-> to SK> post articles that were in line with their own point of view.
-> Isn't that SK> what Chuck Beams is primarily doing?
-> I didn't see it that way, I just thought he was presenting articles
-> with a view toward informing & creating a springboard for discussion.
-> Now I know what Chuck's real intent was, I think I'll start having a
-> go at him. ;^)
I'm sure that Chuck is trying to be informative (why else is he posting
all the info about the foreign ed systems?). However, it seems to me
(and I hope Chuck will correct me if I'm wrong) that some of his posts
(for instance the one about whether to educate children of illegal
immigrants) are posts that back points of view that he has clearly
supported here in the past. Even the posts about the foreign ed systems
do this to a certain extent, as he has over the years argued that
students in foreign nations perform better due to higher standards and
expectations. Rather than just keep repeating his POV he's bringing in
references from outside.
-> Hmmm.  I had a girl this year who was making unnecessary, borderline
-> sexual innuendos to a neighboring student.  When I explained to her
-> that what she was doing constituted sexual harassment, she explained
-> to me in quite a superior way that "only boys can do that."
You know, I just read something about that somewhere...if I could only
remember where. >:{
Bottom line, as you and the counselor both said, girls can get in
trouble for that too. Yes, I think I read something (an article from the
L.A. Times?) stating that schools could be sued by students when they
were sexually harassed by other students at said school and the school
did nothing to prevent it. Yes. That is where I read it. Just this week.
-> New 7th graders have come into my class & become outraged, "But you
-> let a (boy/girl) go last time!!"  So I ask 'em, "The next time you
-> need to use the restroom, do you really want to have to wait until a
-> member of the opposite sex has been to the restroom & back before
-> *you* can go? What happens if nobody needs to for awhile?  *I* didn't
-> _think_ so."
That's the first I've ever heard of THAT one!?!?!? What would ever make
a teacher come up with such a strange rule?
-> however, I have noticed a tendancy in some junior high girls to
-> attempt to hide their talents so that the boys won't ream them.  It
-> continues through to senior high school with some of them.  I think
-> that is one of the main purposes of the girls only classes because
-> different teaching techniques can help both boys & girls.
Exactly. There are _some_ girls who do this, simply because of the image
of themselves that they want to present to boys. I don't see too much of
it going on in my classes. Most of the girls are pretty good students
and good achievers, thank goodness.
Sheila
--- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 10
---------------