Comments for Mr. Pfoutz's blog

Comment on Energy Efficient Schools…It is About Time. by brcamper

brcamper — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 21:29:30 +0000

Eric,
I actually read this article. I think I read that the amount of energy produced by the students is estimated to be able to generate enough energy to supply a small house. As future PE teacher any way to motivate people to workout and be healthy is OK in my book.

Comment on Energy Efficient Schools…It is About Time. by Portier

Portier — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 21:24:27 +0000

I have lots of stored energy that I would be happy to donate on a treadmill!

Comment on Energy Efficient Schools…It is About Time. by sgmjoea0844

sgmjoea0844 — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 21:08:45 +0000

Eric,
Here I go again!! Crisfield HS built a wind turbine about 18 months ago with grant money. I was really surprised to see it spinning away one day while using the HS track. I was also keeping my ear to the ground to find out what I could about effectiveness, deferred energy cost, etc. To my dismay after nearly a year of operation someone discovered that the meter was defective and the unit had basically “spun its wheels” for nearly one year after installation. Apparently nobody bothered to check it out sooner but I hope the turbine is working properly now. There I was looking for an opportunity to say something favorable about Crisfield HS but was denied even that!!
I’m all for nature helping out with energy costs, particularly in our public schools. Stay tuned for an update. Joe A.

Comment on Evolution in the Classroom…Beating the Battered Horse by rdroyer

rdroyer — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 14:23:00 +0000

As a science teacher of 30 years, my husband would agree with you completely. I have learned from him that it is not only the curriculum that you must deal with on this issue, but as a teacher you will also need to interact with students and parents who disagree with evolution. He has learned how to be sensitive to their beliefs, respond to student comments with sensitivity, yet at the same time teach what he knows to be true.

Comment on Evolution in the Classroom…Beating the Battered Horse by psportier

psportier — Thu, 02 Apr 2009 15:08:29 +0000

How many creationists have received flu shots? Why would a creationist need one? If there’s no evolution, then viruses don’t evolve! I’m with ya on this. But to play devil’s advocate (for creationsism, that’s a pun… ) Thomas Aquinas would argue that we know God through his effects. In other words if God is the cause, and of course we can’t know God face to face, then we know God through the effects in a cause and effect scenario. The effects are the world around us which is certainly studied. The papal agreement with evolution I think comes from this and Aristotle’s idea of a “first mover”. For Aristotle, perhaps there’s not an intervening God(s) but there must of been something to create it all and set it in motion. When you follow the chain of “…well, where did that come from?” then eventually you arrive at a first creating or first mover. Aquinas would argue back that if God is all around us then God is not an intervening God, rather his effects are merely manifestations of God’s presence. The pope and Aquinas would say that God designed evolution… Do with that what you will.

Comment on Evolution in the Classroom…Beating the Battered Horse by Jim

Jim — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 17:03:51 +0000

Eric, well said. I have always believed that religion should have no place in the science classroom. What is really frustrating is when opponents of evolution try to put forth an alternative explanation and call it science, like intelligent design. They confuse the lay person even more about what science is and muddy the waters. Unfortunately, upon careful examination such theories put forth by creationists are in fact not science. I’m definitely excited about being able to educate students on what science really is!

Comment on Evolution in the Classroom…Beating the Battered Horse by Lorraine

Lorraine — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 13:52:51 +0000

Eric,
I am not a science person nor can I claim to be a religious person. However, from a completely unbias point of view, I agree with you 100%. Religion is fine for those who believe, but that is just it, they “believe”. They do not have facts, and studies, and proof, they simply believe because they feel in their heart or soul that it is right. Science, however, is a core subject and it is based on facts, statistics, and PROOF. As a parent I do not want my child’s science teacher to teach them something that has no facts backed by proof simply because their own heart tells them it is right. It seems almost like brainwashing to me. I think that students should be given facts when it comes to science and allow them to come up with their own “beliefs” and feelings based on those facts.

Comment on Dr. Noguera’s Riall Lecture by rdroyer

rdroyer — Tue, 24 Mar 2009 22:58:44 +0000

Great discussion here. I agree that great teachers use a variety of tools to help students learn and that technology is not always the most appropriate tool. The purpose of the teacher it to determine what is the best tool for learning given the task at hand. Sometimes, given a variety of tools that can accomplish the same goal, the technology tools will provide the motivation that will engage the learner.

Comment on Dr. Noguera’s Riall Lecture by psportier

psportier — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:01:54 +0000

Your analysis here is reassuring. I struggle with what role technology should play in a classroom. I think of my own experiences, first with learning technologies that just don’t exist anymore or are obsolete, I can make smiley faces go on forever in DOS. This begs the question of relevance of the latest toys and gadgets to a successful education system. However, here you cite, most importantly, and equal opportunity for access to information via the internet. I use the internet in the same way that you do in eduation, for research, confirmation of facts, and deaper explanations. Technology and education spending itself are often seen as cure alls for what ails the system. While technology is important, it can never replace or replicate the success of the human element in how we, both as teachers and fellow citizens, treat students, their families and the conditions underwhich they learn and live.

Comment on Dr. Noguera’s Riall Lecture by jhesen

jhesen — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 15:12:45 +0000

I think that you’re right that the lack of adequate technology is not the only reason that publis school systems are failing. The Bayer lab and music lab are excellent examples of programs that motivate students to “get out and work.” Dr. Noguera’s work in Oakland goes beyond students just using the Internet and puts the students in real world situations with real world problems, an invaluable substitute for students who aren’t interested in mainstream school curriculum.