November 7th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
For many teenagers these days obtaining their license is the biggest and most exciting step life has offered so far. Many are excited, some a little worried, but all should be prepared for what having a driver license means. This is where driver education courses enter into the picture. Not only do these courses teach teens to drive, but teach them ways in which to do so responsibly as well. The following paragraphs will highlight some topics covered in driver education courses and show why this type of education is extremely important for teens to obtain.
Teaches Vehicle Laws
One portion of most driver education courses centers around a textbook portion. In this area of the driver education course, one topic that is often discussed involves various vehicle laws that exist within that particular state where the teenager is learning to drive. This is a vital portion of the course as many states require that individuals take a written exam prior to obtaining a drivers license. On these particular exams students will be required to correctly answer questions pertaining to current vehicle laws. Having this intensive guided textbook course which focuses on vehicle laws will enable teens to learn the laws perhaps even more quickly than if they were studying the relative laws on their own.
Teaches Drug and Alcohol Awareness
Regardless of the fact that drugs are illegal as a rule and alcohol is illegal for individuals under a certain age, driver education courses still find it in the best interest of the teenager to promote drug and alcohol awareness and how this can affect one’s driving ability. Many teenagers are aware of the fact that drugs and alcohol can have potentially damaging effects; however, by teaching this in a structured course along with a variety of statistics and videos, it really sends the message out to the teenagers the damage that drinking and driving or doing drugs and driving can cause an individual. Therefore, it is vital that driver education courses stick with this type of course topic.
Vehicle Maintenance
Many driver education courses also have a portion of the course where individuals are taught various topics relating to vehicle maintenance. Along with knowing various vehicle laws and having the awareness of the potential dangers of drugs and alcohol with driving, it is also important for teens to know some basic information regarding vehicle maintenance. Prior to learning how to drive the vehicle, one should know how the vehicle works and how it can be maintained.
Driving Course
The second main portion of the course, along with the classroom portion, is the actual driving part. Once teenagers have gained the requisite knowledge regarding laws, awareness factors and maintenance, it is then time to get behind the wheel and teach them driving techniques. This is another benefit to having a structured driver education course. It teaches teens how to drive in the company of a certified driving instructor. Some driver education courses held by a school district, for example, will provide the actual training portion while in other areas teens will need to engage in this portion of driver education course on their own with a driving school. Wherever this portion of the driver education course is learned, it is crucial that teens take part in it.
Where to Take Driver Education Courses
Prior to signing up with a particular driver education course, it is important for teens and their parents to contact their local Department of Motor Vehicles or other governmental entity responsible for licensing drivers. Two questions which should be asked are whether driver education is required by the state and what forms of driver education courses are acceptable to satisfy that requirement. Once these questions are answered, the teen can then choose a driver education course to sign up for.
There are a few different places where the teen can take a driver education course. The first is through their high school. Many school districts offer driver education courses as part of the curriculum and this may be an option for the student. Another place to possibly sign up for a driver education course is with a professional driver education center where both classroom and actual driving courses will be taught. Lastly, there is a new and inventive way of engaging in a driver education course and that is online.
Online driver education courses are ones which have recently been gaining quite a bit of recognition. Not only are they great ways to learn course concepts but they are extremely convenient as well. One will most likely have to use a professional driving school for the road portion of the course, but with regard to classroom courses, the online version is a distinct possibility. It is highly advisable, however, that one check with their state to ensure that this type of course fulfillment is acceptable in order to meet the driver education requirement.
The previously mentioned topics are some of the wonderful benefits for teens who take driver education courses. Not only will the teens learn how to drive but also they will be taught how to do so in a safe and legal way. When looking for the perfect driver education course for teens to get involved in, just make sure that the one which is chosen is accepted by the state and that it features many of the components listed above. If this type of driver education course is selected, it may make the teen that much more ready to get behind the wheel.
Failure to educate our country’s most disadvantaged students is the most glaring and abiding social and moral problem of the United States. For nearly 20 years, our nation has worked to improve our schools and student achievement levels. The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act was to be the answer to this dilemma by holding all schools accountable for student performance using high-stakes testing.
The error in thinking is the belief that the NCLB test ratings are fair and accurate. The system does not factor out the disadvantages and/or advantages of wealth and demographics, creating an inequity in the rating of schools. Low-income schools must provide programs, such as preschool, tutoring, remedial classes, and bilingual services, to their students, as well as the cost of more administration required by the state and federal grants that make up the largest percentage of their budget. Wealthier schools that primarily depend upon local funding (generally from property taxes) for their budget have few government constraints, few low-income students requiring special programs, and flexibility in how their budget is used. This means wealthier schools can provide more educational opportunities and enhancements (i.e. access to technology, fine arts and music, extracurricular activities, teacher professional training and improvements, and teacher administrative support) that impoverished schools cannot afford.
The Dallas Schools have developed their own rating system that factors out these disadvantages/advantages, putting all Dallas schools on an even playing field. Available funding, government requirements, the educational level of students entering kindergarten, and the demographics of the community are all factored out of the Dallas schools test rating metric.
Under NCLB, all schools across the nation must test children in reading and mathematics annually between third and eighth grades. The state, using NCLB mandated measures for school performance, calculates the percentage of various student populations that annually meet or exceed the state’s academic standards. Otherwise, they must measure the progress of student “groups” towards a universal fixed point.
Dallas schools use a “value added” school rating system that provides more accurate information, measuring individual student progress from a relative starting point. They then compare the scores with the same student’s scores from the previous year. Dallas schools score higher if students on average score higher than predicted by the previous year’s test scores and if the schools’ overall performance is better than that of other Dallas schools within the same demographics. If Dallas schools perform lower than predicted, they earn a low rating.
Herbert Marcus Elementary, part of the Dallas schools system, is the ideal candidate for the NCLB program. It is located in the inner city of Dallas, the building and grounds are run down, classes are overcrowded, and it is positioned on the edge of a grimy industrial zone. With 1,140 students, almost all are from low-income families and two-thirds speak English as a second language. Even the parents average a seventh-grade education.
Under Principal Conce Rodriguez, the school has done everything right in recent years &ndash students wear uniforms, teachers submit weekly progress reports on every student in every subject, an expanded preschool program, teacher attendance incentives, and a large tutoring project, just to name a few. A community liaison, hired by Rodriguez, has increased the PTA membership to 700 (the largest in Dallas schools) and typically 50 parent volunteers daily at the school. Student attendance is at 97 percent, one of the highest in the Dallas schools system.
Under the Dallas schools rating system, Marcus placed 19th out of 206 Dallas schools, a significant accomplishment with such difficult demographics. Under the NCLB mandated rating system, Marcus placed 76th as only “acceptable”, one step away from being rated as failing. Needless to say, the Marcus educators, students and parents are none too pleased with the NCLB rating system. Some teachers have left Marcus from sheer frustration with the NCLB system and gone to wealthier Dallas schools, where they believe their accomplishments will meet with some recognition. A terrible loss to Marcus or any impoverished school, where quality teachers are scarce.
Other Dallas schools are being similarly penalized by the NCLB rating system. Dallas schools that ranked 2nd, 5th, 8th and 16th under the Dallas schools rating system were ranked 94th, 77th, 83rd and 107th, respectively, under NCLB. Additionally, the school that placed third under the NCLB rating system in the Dallas schools ranked 25th under the Dallas schools rating system. This shows the inequity of the NCLB rating system.
Since shortly after its passage, the NCLB has been under heavy attack by Congressional democrats, Texas republican legislators, and teacher unions. Though Dallas schools educators and parents support the high-stakes testing, they see the unfairness of the rating system used. They wish to see NCLB take a cue from the playbook of Dallas schools to accurately measure improvement in student achievement and factor out the demographics.
It was mentioned on a biology blog that archaeological engravings from the Tiwanaku civilization in Bolivia are unlikely to be depicting an ancient astronaut for the reason that, even with an aquatic tail, the creature still looks too much like a human. The underlying argument was that the evolution of life forms is so diverse that it is highly unlikely an alien would come out looking even remotely like us. In essence, this is the opposite side of the pendulum to Hollywood’s consistent imaging of aliens as humanoids.
The biologist ignored the decorative and symbolic imagery added by the Tiwanaku artists and did not consider the given premise of an aquatic alien inside helmeted spacesuit. I have to assume, therefore, the biologist noted that the creature had two arms and two eyes, and since humans have two arms and two eyes, the biologist concluded that this cannot be an alien.
What should intelligent aliens look like? Or, to phrase it another way, what should we expect interstellar travelers who come here to look like? This is not a complete unknown. If the aliens are capable of interstellar travel, they obviously achieved higher technology. What is necessary to achieve technology? My opinion on this is that to achieve technology, a life form would need a complex brain and the ability to see and manipulate objects. This implies eyes, fingered appendages, and perhaps a head relatively large compared to overall body size. The Tiwanaku alien has all these features.
The biologist might counter that the issue is not that aliens have eyes, but the number of eyes. Here on Earth, higher animal forms evolved with two eyes. For example, mammals, birds, fish, reptiles, and insects all have two eyes, but on another planet the number of eyes would be different. There, perhaps, the life forms would randomly have one, three, four, or even ten eyes. Is that true? Is the number of eyes a random event in the evolutionary process?
Astronomers searching for extraterrestrial intelligence are looking for planets similar to Earth regarding temperature and chemical composition because they know life evolved here, so it is logical to assume that life might also evolve on other similar planets. Likewise, with similar planetary history, we might expect the evolutionary process on those other planets to progress similarly to how it progressed here.
Question: Was the evolution of animal life with two eyes on Earth a random event, so much so that we should expect extraterrestrial life to have a different number of eyes? I think not. Why? It is called natural selection or survival of the fittest. Two eyes are the minimum required to give depth perception and concentrated focus. Perhaps early on Earth there were animals with five or ten eyes, but with a brain too small to orientate five directions, such species quickly became extinct. Only two eyes survived. Should we expect something radically different on another Earth-like planet? No. It is reasonable to expect intelligent aliens to have two eyes, just like humans.
It is also reasonable to expect alien life forms to be imaginable from the diversity of life forms we see on Earth, past and present. The Tiwanaku alien has features similar to a fish (fish mouth that seems to be breathing inside a water-filled helmet), features similar to a lobster (sea creature with two forward appendages for manipulating objects), and features similar to humans (large head and fingered upper appendages). Only four fingers are depicted in the Tiwanaku drawings, versus our five, but this easily falls within evolutionary feasibility. The alien’s three-pod aquatic tail is also an imaginable evolutionary development.
I think the biologist’s appreciation for the potentially enormous diversity of life forms in the universe is admirable. For those life forms that develop higher technology, however, it is likely, not unlikely, that they will have something in common with humans.
This article referred to Bella Online Biology comments on the Tiwanaku Alien pages of the CrypticThinking.com website.
“Everyone believes the world’s greatest lie…” says the mysterious old man.
“What is the world’s greatest lie?” the little boy asks.
The old man replies, “It’s this: that at a certain point in our lives, we lose control of what’s happening to us, and our lives become controlled by fate. That’s the world’s greatest lie.”
(An excerpt from The Alchemist by Paulo Coelho. A fable about following your dreams.)
Do you believe you have no control over your life? Are you who you are today, by choice or by fate? Will a change in your actions create a change in your life? Many people have given up on their dreams… they say, “Dreaming is only for the rich. When you have money, you can dream. When you have no money, don’t dream.”
That’s true… not everyone is lucky enough to be born with a silver spoon. If you are lacking in funds, it’s going to be difficult to start living life the way you want to. Money buys you freedom to follow your passions. But you don’t have to give up on your dreams, just because you lack money. Depending on where you are brought up, you will face limitations depending on your family finance, culture, and environment. Some of us are born to have easy lives, while some are born to take a more challenging path. Perhaps the limitations and obstacles you face today are part of your journey — you must overcome them to grow stronger on the path to achieving your goals.
When we are young, we all seem to have clear idea of what we want to be when we grow up. But somewhere along the way, these dreams get buried under the reality of daily living. The focus shifts from ‘living the dream’ to just ‘finding a good job with a stable income’. “Survival first”, as they call it. The sad part is that many people spend much of their lives doing what they don’t like, so they can finally earn enough to start doing what they do like. I say, that’s a great way to bury your happiness and turn into an economic slave. Doing what you dislike, day after day, will numb the sense of joy within you. Soon you will feel that your life has no greater purpose, and there is nothing to look forward to but work, work, work…. You will have forgotten how much fun it is to spend your time doing the things you like to do.
*~The Secret to Living Your Dreams~*
It’s painful if you don’t make enough money to live comfortably. But what’s more painful is if the work you do has no meaning to you. Everyday you can drag yourself to work, perform meaningless actions, and then drag yourself back home. Apart from sleeping, work takes up the majority of our time. So if you’re not enjoying your work, you’re not enjoying your life. And life is so short, isn’t it? We probably have less than a hundred years to make our mark in this world. And you never know… you fail to look while crossing the road and BOOM! You could be gone tomorrow. So why spend your life doing something you don’t like to do? We don’t slog three-quarters of our lives just so we can enjoy one-quarter… we might not live that long. Realize that the essence of your life is happening right now — you are walking a path; making your journey through life. And if the work you do, is not designed to help you fulfill your higher purpose in life, then perhaps you are walking in the wrong direction. No point taking this path… change direction.
For your dream to stay alive, you have to act on it. It’s like a fire that grows brighter and stronger if you fan its flames and keep adding wood. If you leave the fire alone, never doing anything to keep it alive, it will burn itself out. When you fail to act on your dreams, they die.
A little girl called Leanne wants to be a ballerina. But her family is poor and unable to afford the fees of the fine arts dance school. Her father tells her not to dream because dreaming is only for the rich. But her mother says, “Lea, you can be whatever you want to be. As long as you put your heart into it, and never give up. Always hold on to your dreams because when there’s a will, there’s a way.”
Leanne remembered her mother’s words. She paid her way through a college degree in the fine arts, using money she earned from working full-time. She was talent scouted by the Royal Dance and Music Theatre of England, where she began her illustrious career as a ballerina. Earning in British pounds, she made more than enough to support her family and give them a comfortable lifestyle.
Leanne had a choice… to fervently believe in her dreams, and do whatever it takes to achieve it, or believe the World’s Greatest Lie… that at some point in her life, she lost control, and fate took over. She had to have the courage to step up to her dreams, and not give up just because she lacked money. If she listened to her father and put her love aside because dreaming was only for the rich, then she wouldn’t have lived to experience her passion. She would pass on from this world, with the music still left within her… buried under some obscure belief that she could never make money doing what she loved to do.
There is music within you, and you only need to coax it out. The daily grind forces us to forget what we love to do. Imagine you’re retired… You have enough money to live comfortably, but not to splurge. How would you spend your time? What activities would you find purpose in? What would you do to amuse yourself? If you have an idea of what you would love to do but are not doing, then schedule some time everyday to do it. Making time for what you love is just like fanning the flames of your passion — the fire can only grow stronger. It’s what will bring a sense of purpose and meaning into your life; that spark of joy and wonder.
The happiest people are those who enjoy their work. They’ve managed to make money doing what they love to do, just like Leanne. And this can happen for you… if you are willing to reject the World’s Greatest Lie. Realize that you always have control over your actions, and therefore your results. The only time your start to fail in life, is when you stop believing in your ability to make a difference. You don’t need a silver spoon; you don’t need to be a genius. What you need is a sincere belief in yourself and willingness to take action towards your dreams. Believe me, you have what it takes. Just follow what British Prime Minister, Winston Churchill said in World War II: “…never give up, never give up.” And you’ll win the war.
“It is clear that modern medicine has created a serious dilemma … In the past, there were many children who never survived - they succumbed to various diseases … But in a sense modern medicine has put natural selection out of commission. Something that has helped one individual over a serious illness can in the long run contribute to weakening the resistance of the whole human race to certain diseases. If we pay absolutely no attention to what is called hereditary hygiene, we could find ourselves facing a degeneration of the human race. Mankind’s hereditary potential for resisting serious disease will be weakened.”
Jostein Gaarder in “Sophie’s World”, a bestselling philosophy textbook for adolescents published in Oslo, Norway, in 1991 and, afterwards, throughout the world, having been translated to dozens of languages.
The Nazis regarded the murder of the feeble-minded and the mentally insane - intended to purify the race and maintain hereditary hygiene - as a form of euthanasia. German doctors were enthusiastic proponents of an eugenics movements rooted in 19th century social Darwinism. Luke Gormally writes, in his essay “Walton, Davies, and Boyd” (published in “Euthanasia Examined - Ethical, Clinical, and Legal Perspectives”, ed. John Keown, Cambridge University Press, 1995):
“When the jurist Karl Binding and the psychiatrist Alfred Hoche published their tract The Permission to Destroy Life that is Not Worth Living in 1920 … their motive was to rid society of the ‘human ballast and enormous economic burden’ of care for the mentally ill, the handicapped, retarded and deformed children, and the incurably ill. But the reason they invoked to justify the killing of human beings who fell into these categories was that the lives of such human beings were ‘not worth living’, were ‘devoid of value’”
It is this association with the hideous Nazi regime that gave eugenics - a term coined by a relative of Charles Darwin, Sir Francis Galton, in 1883 - its bad name. Richard Lynn, of the University of Ulster of North Ireland, thinks that this recoil resulted in “Dysgenics - the genetic deterioration of modern (human) population”, as the title of his controversial tome puts it.
The crux of the argument for eugenics is that a host of technological, cultural, and social developments conspired to give rise to negative selection of the weakest, least intelligent, sickest, the habitually criminal, the sexually deviant, the mentally-ill, and the least adapted.
Contraception is more widely used by the affluent and the well-educated than by the destitute and dull. Birth control as practiced in places like China distorted both the sex distribution in the cities - and increased the weight of the rural population (rural couples in China are allowed to have two children rather than the urban one).
Modern medicine and the welfare state collaborate in sustaining alive individuals - mainly the mentally retarded, the mentally ill, the sick, and the genetically defective - who would otherwise have been culled by natural selection to the betterment of the entire species.
Eugenics may be based on a literal understanding of Darwin’s metaphor.
The 2002 edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica has this to say:
“Darwin’s description of the process of natural selection as the survival of the fittest in the struggle for life is a metaphor. ‘Struggle’ does not necessarily mean contention, strife, or combat; ’survival’ does not mean that ravages of death are needed to make the selection effective; and ‘fittest’ is virtually never a single optimal genotype but rather an array of genotypes that collectively enhance population survival rather than extinction. All these considerations are most apposite to consideration of natural selection in humans. Decreasing infant and childhood mortality rates do not necessarily mean that natural selection in the human species no longer operates. Theoretically, natural selection could be very effective if all the children born reached maturity. Two conditions are needed to make this theoretical possibility realized: first, variation in the number of children per family and, second, variation correlated with the genetic properties of the parents. Neither of these conditions is farfetched.”
The eugenics debate is only the visible extremity of the Man vs. Nature conundrum. Have we truly conquered nature and extracted ourselves from its determinism? Have we graduated from natural to cultural evolution, from natural to artificial selection, and from genes to memes?
Does the evolutionary process culminate in a being that transcends its genetic baggage, that programs and charts its future, and that allows its weakest and sickest to survive? Supplanting the imperative of the survival of the fittest with a culturally-sensitive principle may be the hallmark of a successful evolution, rather than the beginning of an inexorable decline.
The eugenics movement turns this argument on its head. They accept the premise that the contribution of natural selection to the makeup of future human generations is glacial and negligible. But they reject the conclusion that, having ridden ourselves of its tyranny, we can now let the weak and sick among us survive and multiply. Rather, they propose to replace natural selection with eugenics.
But who, by which authority, and according to what guidelines will administer this man-made culling and decide who is to live and who is to die, who is to breed and who may not? Why select by intelligence and not by courtesy or altruism or church-going - or al of them together? It is here that eugenics fails miserably. Should the criterion be physical, like in ancient Sparta? Should it be mental? Should IQ determine one’s fate - or social status or wealth? Different answers yield disparate eugenic programs and target dissimilar groups in the population.
Aren’t eugenic criteria liable to be unduly influenced by fashion and cultural bias? Can we agree on a universal eugenic agenda in a world as ethnically and culturally diverse as ours? If we do get it wrong - and the chances are overwhelming - will we not damage our gene pool irreparably and, with it, the future of our species?
And even if many will avoid a slippery slope leading from eugenics to active extermination of “inferior” groups in the general population - can we guarantee that everyone will? How to prevent eugenics from being appropriated by an intrusive, authoritarian, or even murderous state?
Modern eugenicists distance themselves from the crude methods adopted at the beginning of the last century by 29 countries, including Germany, The United States, Canada, Switzerland, Austria, Venezuela, Estonia, Argentina, Norway, Denmark, Sweden (until 1976), Brazil, Italy, Greece, and Spain.
They talk about free contraceptives for low-IQ women, vasectomies or tubal ligations for criminals, sperm banks with contributions from high achievers, and incentives for college students to procreate. Modern genetic engineering and biotechnology are readily applicable to eugenic projects. Cloning can serve to preserve the genes of the fittest. Embryo selection and prenatal diagnosis of genetically diseased embryos can reduce the number of the unfit.
But even these innocuous variants of eugenics fly in the face of liberalism. Inequality, claim the proponents of hereditary amelioration, is genetic, not environmental. All men are created unequal and as much subject to the natural laws of heredity as are cows and bees. Inferior people give birth to inferior offspring and, thus, propagate their inferiority.
Even if this were true - which is at best debatable - the question is whether the inferior specimen of our species possess the inalienable right to reproduce? If society is to bear the costs of over-population - social welfare, medical care, daycare centers - then society has the right to regulate procreation. But does it have the right to act discriminately in doing so?
Another dilemma is whether we have the moral right - let alone the necessary knowledge - to interfere with natural as well as social and demographic trends. Eugenicists counter that contraception and indiscriminate medicine already do just that. Yet, studies show that the more affluent and educated a population becomes - the less fecund it is. Birth rates throughout the world have dropped dramatically already.
Instead of culling the great unwashed and the unworthy - wouldn’t it be a better idea to educate them (or their off-spring) and provide them with economic opportunities (euthenics rather than eugenics)? Human populations seem to self-regulate. A gentle and persistent nudge in the right direction - of increased affluence and better schooling - might achieve more than a hundred eugenic programs, voluntary or compulsory.
That eugenics presents itself not merely as a biological-social agenda, but as a panacea, ought to arouse suspicion. The typical eugenics text reads more like a catechism than a reasoned argument. Previous all-encompassing and omnicompetent plans tended to end traumatically - especially when they contrasted a human elite with a dispensable underclass of persons.
Above all, eugenics is about human hubris. To presume to know better than the lottery of life is haughty. Modern medicine largely obviates the need for eugenics in that it allows even genetically defective people to lead pretty normal lives. Of course, Man himself - being part of Nature - may be regarded as nothing more than an agent of natural selection. Still, many of the arguments advanced in favor of eugenics can be turned against it with embarrassing ease.
Consider sick children. True, they are a burden to society and a probable menace to the gene pool of the species. But they also inhibit further reproduction in their family by consuming the financial and mental resources of the parents. Their genes - however flawed - contribute to genetic diversity. Even a badly mutated phenotype sometimes yields precious scientific knowledge and an interesting genotype.
The implicit Weltbild of eugenics is static - but the real world is dynamic. There is no such thing as a “correct” genetic makeup towards which we must all strive. A combination of genes may be perfectly adaptable to one environment - but woefully inadequate in another. It is therefore prudent to encourage genetic diversity or polymorphism.
The more rapidly the world changes, the greater the value of mutations of all sorts. One never knows whether today’s maladaptation will not prove to be tomorrow’s winner. Ecosystems are invariably comprised of niches and different genes - even mutated ones - may fit different niches.
In the 18th century most peppered moths in Britain were silvery gray, indistinguishable from lichen-covered trunks of silver birches - their habitat. Darker moths were gobbled up by rapacious birds. Their mutated genes proved to be lethal. As soot from sprouting factories blackened these trunks - the very same genes, hitherto fatal, became an unmitigated blessing. The blacker specimen survived while their hitherto perfectly adapted fairer brethren perished (”industrial melanism”). This mode of natural selection is called directional.
Moreover, “bad” genes are often connected to “desirable genes” (pleitropy). Sickle cell anemia protects certain African tribes against malaria. This is called “diversifying or disruptive natural selection”. Artificial selection can thus fast deteriorate into adverse selection due to ignorance.
Modern eugenics relies on statistics. It is no longer concerned with causes - but with phenomena and the likely effects of intervention. If the adverse traits of off-spring and parents are strongly correlated - then preventing parents with certain undesirable qualities from multiplying will surely reduce the incidence of said dispositions in the general population. Yet, correlation does not necessarily imply causation. The manipulation of one parameter of the correlation does not inevitably alter it - or the incidence of the outcome.
Eugenicists often hark back to wisdom garnered by generations of breeders and farmers. But the unequivocal lesson of thousands of years of artificial selection is that cross-breeding (hybridization) - even of two lines of inferior genetic stock - yields valuable genotypes. Inter-marriage between races, groups in the population, ethnic groups, and clans is thus bound to improve the species’ chances of survival more than any eugenic scheme.
Date: 04-23-06
With the price of gasoline on the upswing(again, April 20, 06), there seems to be little sign that we Americans are at least trying to conserve fuel, though there are pockets of concerned groups that are making their voice heard, mainly against Oil Company price gouging. At the same time the automotive advertising media seems to be pushing the higher gas consumption Suv’s and cars. Granted, along with trucks, etc., these are the prime fossil fuel guzzlers, but they are by no means the only culprit for our increasing fuel dependency, be it fossil or renewable.
With all due respect to mr. Edison, inventor of our non-directly fueled commercial lighting system, which was design for practicality and therefore efficiency at the time had not been entered into the picture. The goal was only to provide a method of supplying the world with inexpensive, widely available commercial lighting. From this gigantic effort, we know, the incandescent light bulb was born. This achievement was, at the time, a monumental gift to the world…, but the future would reveal some flaws.
This virtually unchanged technology is still the top lighting source used today. For decades, the incandescent light bulb had little or no competition. Over this time, It has maintained the lowest cost per light unit of output(brightness) than any other lighting technology. All of this time its shortcummings were not challenged, or at least not so heavily, until a much newer technology, the LED(Light Emitting Diode) made its phenominal technological advances in recent years…by surpassing it in light output for the power consumed. All that remains for the LED is the cost per lumen of light output to drop to a competitive level. Given the present LED disparity with the incandescent, the total advantages of LED technology far outweighs this because of its longevity of operation, which is over 10 years in constant use(under most conditions), it is virtually unbreakable and because LEDs give off so little heat due to their much greater efficiency and thus lower operating cost, it far outweighs its present day greater price structure.
Consumer Demand For The LED Is The Key
======================================
As the demand levels for this new breed of basic “tear drop” solid state light source increases, the price will come down some more and it will eventually reach that price competitive barrier. Of course, production quantities alone will not be the only influence determining the final selling price of the LED lamp to the “home lighting” market, for example, but its total monetary value to this particular market.
We would certainly hope that the LED would eventually replace most our present day lighting
sources, saving the nation…to begin with untold billions of dollars per year, but even
if this were possible today, just a little over 20 % of our energy consumption is used for lighting, so this alone would not solve our total energy problems, but it is certainly a beginning. It will take a national and multi-national effort to even begin to level off
the world energy needs through the use of Renewables. It could certainly and quickly reach
a point that an all out global effort will be needed to ebb the ongoing crisis and if not curbed quickly at that point, I believe it may reach a point of…irreversability.
“The only purpose of education is to teach a student how to live his life &ndash by developing his mind and equipping him to deal with reality. The training he needs is theoretical, i.e., conceptual. He has to be taught to think, to understand, to integrate, to prove. He has to be taught the essentials of the knowledge discovered in the past &ndash and he has to be equipped to acquire further knowledge by his own efforts.”
&ndash Ayn Rand, “The Comprachicos”
The state of education in New Zealand is a shambles. Parents who are concerned about the future well-being of their children are searching desperately for educational alternatives. The increased demand for private schooling and the dramatic rise in the number of home-schooled children provide an accurate measure of the growing degree of parental dissatisfaction with the current situation.
But unless responsible and well-meaning parents are armed with the philosophical knowledge to be able to choose a rational educational method for their children &ndash i.e., a type of educational method that will fully prepare their children for successful adult life &ndash then it is quite likely that the results will be just as disappointing for them as for those parents who have left their children’s education in the hands of the state.
There is no guarantee whatsoever that private or home-schooling per se will produce satisfactory results. It is one thing to opt out of a state system that not only stunts, but positively perverts a child’s intellectual and moral growth (see Editorial, Turning Minds to Mush, TFR #9); it is quite another to choose a rational alternative. This is why philosophical knowledge, because of its specially close ties to education, goes a long way in helping parents make the right choice.
The objective of this article, therefore, is to provide not only the knowledge, but also an introduction to a particular educational method that produces exceptional results.
The important thing for parents to be aware of is that all educational methods rest upon underlying philosophies. A type of education system that derives its methods and goals from a philosophy that is steeped in irrationality and collectivism will produce a certain type of individual (and society); conversely, a type of education system that derives its methods and goals from a philosophy that advocates and upholds reason and individualism will produce a completely different type of individual (and society).
It follows that in order to choose a rational education for your child, it is first necessary to identify an education method’s philosophical underpinnings if you want him to have every opportunity of fulfilling his potential as a human being.
To begin with &ndash and this cannot be stressed enough &ndash you must know that, ultimately, in order to allow your child to fully develop the potential power of his mind, you first have to know what potential power needs developing. It is only once this power has been correctly identified, and its function properly understood, that it will be possible to go about aiding its development. The power in question, the power that man uses to grasp the world around him, the power that is at the central core of his very nature, is &ndash reason.
Unlike the other animals, man is a conceptual being. It is his rational faculty, his ability to reason, that sets him apart. To possess the power of reason is to possess the ability to conceptualise; it is to possess the ability to build, hierarchically, beginning with the perceptual evidence, progressively higher-level concepts that presuppose earlier concepts. Reason is man’s sole means of cognition, his only means of knowledge. It is this power which has enabled man not only to survive, but also to progress. It is man’s capacity to reason that has taken him out of the caves and put him on the moon.
To grasp this point fully, imagine for a moment what it would be like if you lost your ability to reason &ndash i.e., to think. How would you take care of yourself? How would you perform a simple task &ndash such as tying your shoes? How would you structure your day? The answer to all these questions is that without the power of reason you wouldn’t be able to. You would be in exactly the same position as a new-born baby &ndash helpless, totally dependent on others to look after you.
It is the purpose of education, therefore, to ensure that the helpless, dependent new-born baby makes the successful transition to becoming an independent, mature adult, fully confident of being able to master the world in which he lives. The only way to do that is to provide him with an educational method whose explicit goal is to assist him in such an achievement &ndash by developing his power of reason.
The good news for parents is that there IS such a rational educational method. It is known as the Montessori Method, named after Maria Montessori, the Italian Doctor of Medicine who developed her methods while working with mentally retarded children at the turn of this century. Her results with those children were so spectacular that they caused her to wonder what was holding so-called normal children back to the levels she was attaining with her retarded children.
In 1907, she founded the first Casa dei Bambini (Children’s House) where she applied her methods to children of normal intelligence. Her successes led to the opening of other Montessori schools, and although many intellectuals were (and still are) vehemently opposed to her approach &ndash and even more so to the underlying philosophy of her approach (as they are to anything that provides a foundation for, or aspires to, individual excellence and achievement) &ndash her radical methods were widely acclaimed by the general public.
The reason the Montessori Method is so successful is that it is based on the true nature of Man. Dr Montessori did not have a preconceived theory of education into which she attempted to fit the child (unlike other educationalists such as John Dewey); she did not project a type of individual she wanted to create. Instead, she followed the “inner dictates of the child” to guide her in aiding the child’s natural development to his full potential.
She was fully aware that Man’s nature is that of conceptual being, and that the nature of the young child is such that he actively strives to perfect his conceptual faculty as it evolves. Her method works because it advocates and upholds the advancement of a child’s reasoning power as its foundational and philosophical cornerstone.
Specifically, it is Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism, which upholds reason as Man’s only means of knowledge, that can provide the theoretical foundation for the Montessori Method. Rand herself paid tribute many times to Maria Montessori’s genius in the field of education.
Both Maria Montessori and Ayn Rand saw man as, to quote Aristotle’s definition, the “rational animal.” In his book Maria Montessori: Her Life and Work, E. M. Standing eloquently encapsulates Maria Montessori’s view of reason: “In the first place it is the intellect or reason which sets us free from the never ending prison of the present moment in which animals live, dominated entirely from moment to moment by their instincts.”
In an almost identical reference to reason in her major work on education, “The Comprachicos,” Ayn Rand states: “Deprived of the ability to reason, man becomes a docile, pliant, impotent chunk of clay, to be shaped into any subhuman form and used for any purpose by anyone who wants to bother.”
Both Maria Montessori and Ayn Rand clearly recognised the central role of reason in Man’s life. Whereas the genius of Ayn Rand was to construct a fully integrated philosophy with reason as one of its central tenets, the genius of Dr Montessori lay in the fact that she devised a systematic, integrated educational method which all but guarantees the child’s proper conceptual growth.
Although Dr Montessori’s personal philosophy was a mix of Western religion and Eastern mysticism, her methods automatise in the child thinking methodology entirely consistent with Ayn Rand’s theory of concept-formation. Those who are interested in the more technical aspects of concept-formation are strongly urged to read Ayn Rand’s ground-breaking work, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology. This book has major implications for education, as it provides the key to understanding how a rational mind functions, and therefore how a forming mind should be guided as it goes through the various developmental stages.
Through scientific observations of children (conducted in an environment where the children were free to act spontaneously), Maria Montessori gained first-hand knowledge of the developing stages of the conceptual faculty; specifically, she observed how the children acquired conceptual knowledge.
She recognised their intense interest in the qualities of things; she recognised their capacity to isolate qualities or ideas and their ability to form abstractions of such things. She was well aware “of this tendency of the child?s mind to draw off from material objects their intangible essences, thus building up a store of abstract ideas. These ideas reflect the ESSENTIAL nature of the confused flux of merely sensorial impressions &ndash that ‘big, booming, buzzing confusion’ of which Professor (William) James spoke” (E. M. Standing, Maria Montessori: Her Life and Work).
It needs to be pointed out that “the first five or six years of a child’s life are crucial to a child’s cognitive development. They determine, not the content of his mind but its method of functioning…” (Ayn Rand, “The Comprachicos”). Also like Rand, Dr Montessori understood well the importance to the child of these crucially formative years. In a quote which mirrors Ayn Rand’s thoughts she said, “There are many who hold, as I do, that the most important period of life is not the age of university studies, but the first one, the period from birth to the age of six. For this is the time when man’s intelligence itself, his greatest implement, is being formed.”
To that end, and by way of an introduction, this article will be restricted to dealing with those aspects of the Montessori Method as they apply to the child of 2 &ndash 6 years of age. (It should be noted that Maria Montessori devised her system to educate the child from birth through to twelve years of age.
Montessorians have since expanded on her work to include the teenage years for which, before her death in 1952, Dr Montessori left only a basic outline.)
Dr Montessori’s Aristotelian view of reason (and her in-depth studies of the educational methods of Seguin and Itard) led to the development of her specially designed SENSORIAL MATERIALS which are a feature of all Montessori classrooms. She believed in Aristotle’s dictum that “there is nothing in the intellect that was not first in the senses,” and knew that the refinement of the child’s senses and clarity and precision of his perceptions would affect his ability to conceptualise. By means of a sensorial education she sought to provide the child with the means to exercise his ability to compare, contrast and discriminate, to classify &ndash the goal being the child’s acquisition of what she referred to as an “ordered mind.”
Designed to encourage individual rather than co-operative effort (reason is an attribute of the individual), the sensorial material takes the young child step by cognitive step from the perceptual (concrete) to the conceptual (abstract) level, allowing the “child’s mind to draw off their (the materials’) intangible essence.”
This process is imposed on him by the self-correcting nature of the material &ndash its inbuilt “control of error,” which only ever allows for one correct answer, making it evident to the child if he makes a mistake (teaching him in the process that reality is not malleable, that things have identity); this demands from him absolute cognitive precision, and rewards him with absolute cognitive certainty. These materials are deliberately designed so that all their attributes are the same except for the single attribute that the child is to focus on.
For example, in teaching a child the concept “colour,” the child is introduced to the “colour tablets.” These tablets are all the same size, weight, shape etc.; they differ in one aspect only &ndash colour. Because of the elimination of non-essentials as well as isolation of the quality (concept) being taught, the child must focus on the particular quality being isolated. The child quickly learns to pair colours of the same hue, and in so doing, makes it possible for the Montessori “directress” to label each quality for him.
Later, shades of each colour are introduced, and concepts such as light, lighter, lightest, and dark, darker, and darkest become readily apparent to the child so that “when the child has recognised the differences between the qualities of the objects, the teacher fixes the idea of this quality with a word” (Maria Montessori, Dr. Montessori’s Own Handbook).
The wide range of sensorial materials, which teach concepts such as length, size, musical pitch etc., are placed in the classroom on child-height shelves where the child can reach them without adult assistance (promoting independence).
Within certain limits, the child is then free to work with the material as he chooses. I say “within limits” as (and this is a point of which certain critics of a Montessori classroom should take careful note) the child is free neither to take material from another child &ndash who will be working with it on his private mat &ndash nor to insist that the other child share the material with him (which has obvious ethical implications).
He may not interfere in any way with the work of another child; instead, he must wait until the material is returned to its assigned place on the shelves. The child is also prohibited from selecting materials from the shelves which are too advanced for his level of cognitive development.
In a Montessori classroom the child works at his own pace with the teacher keeping detailed notes of individual progress. This is done to ensure that intellectual progression is based on certainty &ndash not layers upon layers of mental fog; it ensures that the child is not introduced to material demanding higher levels of abstractions before he has a firm grasp of the lower levels abstractions which they rest upon.
For example, the child would never be given shades of colour to grade before being able to match hues; he would never be given a word to read before being able to sound out each individual letter. Why not? Because like Ayn Rand, Maria Montessori grasped the hierarchical nature of knowledge, the obvious implication being that any knowledge presented to the child should follow such logical progression. Instead of ending up as a head full of scrambled and disparate facts, the child’s mind becomes ordered. “The little child, who carries within him a heavy chaos, is like a man who has accumulated an immense quantity of books, piled up without any order, and who asks himself: ‘What shall I do with them?’ When will he be able to arrange them in such a fashion as to enable him to say: ‘I possess a library.’?” (Maria Montessori, The Advanced Montessori Method &ndash 1). He will be able to arrange them when he develops, to use Dr Montessori’s words, an “ordered mind.”
The sensorial materials, with their sequential and hierarchical presentation, are but one aspect, albeit a crucial one, of the Montessori classroom. Like every other feature of the classroom, which Maria Montessori referred to as “the prepared environment,” they serve a specific purpose. At the central core of that purpose is the attempt to assist and guide the child in the formation of his rational faculty.
And while it is certainly true that the primary motive of a Montessori education is to develop the child’s rational faculty, that is not to say, as so many of the system’s critics do, that other aspects of the child’s education are neglected or overlooked.
In fact it is precisely because of the development of the rational faculty that these other aspects become possible. For example &ndash imagination and creativity, which, contrary to conventional wisdom, are a direct extension of the fact that “imaginative creation has no mere vague sensory support; that is to say, it is not the unbridled divagation of the fancy among images of light and colour, sounds and impressions; but it is a construction firmly allied to reality… The creative imagination cannot work in vacuo. The mind that works by itself, independently of truth, works in a void” (Maria Montessori, Advanced Montessori Method).
A Montessori education also teaches the child to take responsibility for his action. This is achieved by giving him clearly defined and reasonable rules to follow &ndash where the consequences for breaking them are both known in advance and consistently upheld (objective law). He is taught not only to make full use of his time but also always to complete work that is begun (instilling in him the virtue of productivity). He is taught to respect the rights of other children by never interfering with their work &ndash unless it is at the express invitation of another child (teaching him that all interaction between people should be of a voluntary nature).
Insofar as the classroom is a microcosm of society, one of the most striking features to any observer of a Montessori classroom is how well the children get along with one another. A typical scene in the classroom is the sight of a number of industrious children happily going about their work, independently or together, in a spirit of real benevolence towards one another.
It is therefore both surprising to and frustrating for Montessorians that by far the most frequent criticism of Montessori education is that not enough emphasis is placed on the “socialisation” of the child. At the deepest root, these critics are philosophically opposed to the Montessori method because they are philosophically opposed to reason. This criticism manifests itself, on an ethical level, in a profound hostility towards independence and individualism. It manifests itself in the attitude of those who love to accuse someone of being “too sure of himself &ndash who does he think he is?!”
Yet this is one of the many positive hallmarks of a Montessori educated child; he is “sure of himself.” It is precisely because he is so sure of himself that he has no desire to succumb to group pressure or obey its whims. Of course, critics then label him “anti-social.” “He needs to be socialised,” they say &ndash knowing full well that what they really mean is, “he won’t sacrifice himself to my (or our) desires.”
John Dewey, the founder of the school of philosophy known as Pragmatism and the father of modern education (known as progressive education), was one such critic openly hostile to reason and independent thought. “The mere absorbing of facts and truths is so exclusively individual an affair that it tends very naturally to pass into selfishness. There is no obvious social motive for the acquirement of mere learning, there is no clear social gain in success thereat” (John Dewey, The School and Society).
The progressive schools, which follow in Dewey’s philosophical footsteps (and whose strands of philosophical thought are heavily entwined in New Zealand’s education system) socialise the child by discouraging individual effort and immersing him in the group, or, to use Ayn Rand’s words, by “throwing him to the pack.”
Montessori helps the child develop socially by aiding each child’s personal development &ndash primarily, by encouraging independence and self-reliance, knowing that these lead to a high level of self-confidence and self-esteem. The progressives, in direct contrast to the Montessorian emphasis on reason and individualism, promote anti-reason and collectivism.
They do so by such methods as only having materials in the classroom which are too heavy for any one child to carry by himself, or by insisting that all learning is done as part of a group project. Or, to use a particularly vicious home-grown example of the application of such monstrous methods, by implying that a cow’s stomach is wherever the group deems it to be. (Don’t laugh, this sort of thing really happens.)
Unlike Montessorians, the progressives don’t teach respect for another’s property; instead, the child is taught that property is communal. In a progressive school, instead of being taught to think for himself, the child is encouraged, in true democratic fashion, to conform to the dictates of the majority. In such an environment it is only a matter of time before truth, to the child, becomes whatever the group decides that it is.
The inevitable result of such socialisation is not a society of capable and productive individuals who think for themselves, but a society of dependents who, to repeat Ayn Rand, are ready “to be shaped into any subhuman form and used for any purpose by anyone who wants to bother.” It does not require much imagination to project the future shape of any society made up of such types. In fact, one need look no further than at most of the current local crop of near-illiterate high-school and university students to get the picture.
But before rushing off to sign your child up at the nearest Montessori school, a strong word of caution. There is no legal way to stop anybody from calling his school a Montessori school. Consequently, there are a number of so-called Montessori schools without trained teachers, without Montessori materials, or without teachers who have even the faintest idea of the Montessori methods.
It is imperative, therefore, that you thoroughly familiarise yourself with both the Montessori Method itself as well as the Montessori school you have in mind for your child.
That aside, a Montessori education comes with our highest recommendation.
Forensic Science is the application of science in forensic studies, the forensic part of forensic science implies that it is to be utilized in some form or another with a court of law and is relevant to legal proceedings. Forensic Science is rapidly progressing to the point that the science fiction of today could well be the science reality of tomorrow.
Forensic Science has been around for many centuries. However, it was not until recently that advances in scientific research and scientific studies made this a true and individual aspect of forensic research. Recent studies and research have brought the field of forensic science to new heights and given it increasing credibility and importance as a deciding factor in many legal proceedings, where forensic evidence often outweighs the testimony even of witnesses on the scene.
Almost everybody has heard of DNA evidence or fluorescing as well as many other recent scientific developments in forensic science. While many of us get our information from television programs such as CSI, the reality is that forensic science is rapidly moving from the realm of television to the broader expanse of the real world. DNA evidence is now an important part of most legal proceedings involving any human body. Whether discussing fibers from hair, clothes or even something so mundane as dust, forensic science can often draw conclusions and point to irrefutable facts that often lead to convictions of criminals who, if not for forensic science, would be free to commit more atrocities.
Fibers can have a telling tale that can only be exposed by the use of forensic science. Carpet fibers are unique to makes and manufacturers. Gunpowder contains microscopic residue that can correctly identify the type of powder, the manufacturer of the shell and much more information. Simple particles of dust, when viewed by using forensic science can place items or individuals at definitive places often down to an exact time frame. Something that we may see as just a bug or insect can tell how long an item has been in a particular location. There are many factors that are explored with Forensic Science. The scientific conclusion offers irrefutable proof and can be an effective tool in the fight against crime.
Advances in science and in particular with forensic science are not only new and fascinating but are constantly improving and being refined. Not only is forensic science a great tool for today, but the future looks bright indeed. An interest in Forensic science may even help the underachiever of today take enough interest in science and related fields of study to turn around and study harder to become the next practitioner of forensic science tomorrow. Forensic science benefits society as a whole in many different ways.
Viewed from space, the Earth appears to have four or five major landmass areas depending on your viewpoint. Despite this, we hold on to the illusion there are more continents.
As we all learned in grade school, there are seven continents. A quick look at a globe, however, reveals this basic assumption is just flat wrong. In particular, how can Europe be considered a continent when there is no clear division with Russia?
To the surprise of many, the Arctic is not classified as a continent. Instead, it is divided up between North America and Asia. Yes, Asia because Russia is considered to be part of it in the seven continents model. Following are the accepted seven continents in alphabetical order.
Africa is undeniably a continent by any definition. It is also the second largest one as a measure of landmass, covering over 11,700,000 square miles and making up 5.9 percent of the total surface of the Earth. As a measure of population, Africa is second most populous continent with over 840 million people.
Antarctica is also considered a continent, if a particularly barren one. 98 percent of Antarctica is covered in ice and it is the only continent neither considered a country nor claimed by any other country.
Based on sheer size, Asia is the dominant continent in the world. It has the largest landmass area and is home to over 60 percent of all humans. Talk about traffic jams! In truth, the measurements on Asia can be a bit misleading. Under the seven continents methodology, Asia extends over much of Russia, the Mideast and even parts of Egypt.
Often referred to as the forgotten continent, Australia is the fourth continent. Incorrectly referred to as an island for significant periods of history, Australia is undoubtedly a continent. That being said, it is the smallest in landmass with just more than 4,000,000 square miles, but has a healthy population of over 20 million people.
Europe is also considered a continent, but there is little geographic evidence supporting this claim. The continental designation is primarily a political and historical development. Regardless, Europe covers an area of 4 million square miles, but is heavily populated with over eleven percent of the world population at 705 million people.
North America is our next continent. Once again, we run into the practical issue of boundaries. Using the seven continent methodology, North America extends into the arctic as expected, but is also considered to include much of Central America. The total landmass is 9.45 million square miles. 514 million people are estimated to live in North America.
Our final continent is South America. Covering 6.9 million square miles, South America covers 3.5 percent of the total surface of the Earth. With a population of 371 million people, it ranks as the fifth most populous nation.
The misleading nature of the seven continent theory has to do with Europe. If the countries of Europe weren’t such powerful entities through history, would we really consider it a continent? Not likely!
The Philadelphia schools, along with other schools across the nation, are concerned with students who do not enter college upon graduation. Many are left with low-paying, dead-end jobs with little prospects for future improvements &ndash keeping many of those students from impoverished homes in the low-income lifestyle.
This has been of concern also for James Nevels, chairman of the state-appointed School Reform Commission that is responsible for overseeing city schools within the state, including the Philadelphia schools. Nevels believes students have been historically underrepresented in the local trade unions, and believes it is time to change that status quo.
Both Nevels and the Philadelphia schools believe that the city benefits, when graduated students are gainfully employed and productively adding to the community in a positive manner. When these students are from low-income families and are allowed to raise themselves out of the poverty level, the community benefits exponentially. Trades offer non-college bound students just the opportunity for such future growth and lifestyle improvement.
In June 2006, a four-year deal was announced between the Philadelphia schools and the Building and Construction Council (AFL-CIO). Politicians, business leaders, and educators alike are calling the deal significantly historical for the city and its future.
As part of a $1.7 billion construction and maintenance contract with the Philadelphia schools, the Council through its local trade unions will provide a minimum of 250 apprenticeship opportunities for Philadelphia schools students, who meet the requirements. Potentially, 425 apprenticeships for graduates could be offered over the four-year period. It is estimated that the majority of the students to qualify will be minorities from low-income families, a truly remarkable shot in the arm for the families, as well as the city. It also means the Philadelphia schools can offer these students more opportunities to learn skills that could potentially lift them out of the poverty level.
The Council will be working with the Philadelphia schools to develop the curriculum. They will host seminars for students to pique their interest and motivate them to apply for the apprenticeship programs. The Council also will monitor the results of the apprenticeships for co-review with the Philadelphia schools.
With nearly 200,000 students currently enrolled in the Philadelphia schools and about 12,000 graduating each year, this program was desperately needed for both the students and the community. It’s expected that a minimum of 62 students will enter the apprenticeship program each of the four years, though there are potentially more apprenticeships available.
This four-year deal between the Philadelphia schools and the Building and Construction Council is truly groundbreaking for the city of Philadelphia. The Philadelphia schools can offer more to their students. The students get an opportunity that may not have been otherwise available to them. The trade unions can build their memberships with young, vibrant workers, as well as build their diversity. The city gets more productive community members. It is a win-win situation for everyone.