I have been running in Saucony for over a decade. I was fitted years ago at a great running store in the pro grid omni, and have been running in that ever since. I like the wide toe box and the stability and the cushioning. I am 50 years old and have been running since I was 12, so no minimalist shoes here. My older joints appreciate a little cushioning. I also buy a size larger than my street shoe size. I am a 7 1/2 to 8 in street shoes and I buy an 8 1/2 wide in running and hiking shoes.

Yes, train an alternate behavior. I have done this. We used a special mat that just came out at dinner time. Dog got a marrow bone when we sat down to eat. After dinner bone and mat went away, and any scraps we wanted to give went into a food bowl which he got later. It didn't take long. and you can just pop the marrow bone in a ziploc and put it in the fridge till the next meal. I like marrow bones for their teeth, but any yummy long lasting treat will work, like a filled kong or another bone. I always trade treat for treat when taking away a bone with a drop command. Soon they will drop the bone for the command and you can just treat occasionally. Patience and not feeding from the table are key.

Debt is not the only thing that matters, as twolittleboys points out above. Pretty significant differences between CT and Venezuela, the primary one being functioning governing institutions. Nobody in CT wants the disaster in Hartford to play out. Serious legislators have worked doggedly to find an actual governing compromise and as of last night it looks like the new bipartisan budget agreement might actually hold. The point is, strong, functioning governments are crucial to dealing with these sorts of crises. One might look back at this CT budget impasse and see it as an good example of governing compromise. I doubt many would say the same of the governing institutions in Venezuela.

I have not met any homeschoolers here in CT that are not meeting minimum standards, but my sample is extremely limited and includes only college educated / graduate degree parents in a pretty affluent area. I have no doubt that there are very different circumstances in other areas. We are a no requirement state, but I would not be averse to some regulation, and I know of (though do not personally know) some cases of educational neglect in this state. The math thing does not bother me quite as much. I think it is in large part a function of the quality of elementary math education. Kids don't really have arithmetic down by the end of 6th grade. But, I do not think there is a huge need to get to algebra before 8th grade. My DH has been teaching high school math for almost 30 years, so we talk about this a lot. He would much rather see kids strong in algebra, geometry and algebra 2, than to see these topics pushed in middle school. There is certain amount of maturity needed to keep work organized enough to do well in high school math, and many students do not have that maturity until they are 14, 15 or 16 years old (maybe that's a problem in itself, but that would be another topic). The push to improve math education has focused too much on getting more students to higher level math, than on providing quality education for those building blocks.

This brings me back to the early 80s and my sophomore English teacher (yes, I was in high school in the early 80s) who had a total love affair with William Safire. I remember taking up an entire class period talking about "the whole nine yards." And, I still don't remember where it came from. I think Safire wrote multiple columns on it. I recall something military sticking in my mind.... now I will have to go look it up.

The thing that is so crazy about the current debate is that this idea that the individual right to own a gun is enshrined in the constitution is such a recent idea. That right was only established by the Heller decision in 2008. The NRA had been pushing to redefine the popular understanding of the 2nd amendment for about 25 years and that Supreme Ct. decision was the culmination of that effort. It is, IMO, and in the opinion of former Chief Justice Burger, one of the greatest frauds perpetrated on the American public. We have had over 200 years of jurisprudence that never understood the constitution as enshrining an individual right to gun ownership. And, it is so ironic that the conservative, so called "originalist"justices completely ignored the available historical debates surrounding the 2nd amendment, as well as 200 years of precedent to create this new "right." So, I think we can change this and it doesn't require a constitutional amendment to do so. 75% of Americans own no guns at all. A mere 3% of the population owns about half of the firearms in the US, and those people own an average of something like 17 weapons. This is not really a debate about whether an individual should be able to own a gun. I think the current debate should be about whether we are ok with people owning an arsenal of military style weapons. Do we really think that is a right? Healthcare is not, but that is? Seriously? Why does three percent of the population get to determine what kind of society we live in?

Temperature really matters, so my advice varies. If it's warm and raining, running shorts or water shorts, a synthetic t-shirt, a light rain jacket, and a baseball style cap (the brim keeps the rain off your face). If it's cooler, then running or hiking shorts or running tights/capris, rain pants, a synthetic t-shirt or long sleeved shirt, rain jacket and cap. I have columbia hiking pants that I love and I wear them in light or intermittent rain, but in all day rain the rain pants will keep you warmer. I wear trail runners on all my hikes - 2 hours, 2 days, 2 weeks, 2 months. They get wet, but they dry out quickly once the terrain dries out. I make sure I have extra dry socks. Also, remember if you are planning stops along the way (lunch etc) and you are wet, you will probably want something warm to put on while you are stopped. I agree, no cotton.

In the US, Horace Mann is typically credited with popularizing the idea of universal, non sectarian public education. He is considered the "father" of American public education. Mann's idea of public schools was based on the Prussian ideal of common schools, and he specifically wanted schools to educate citizens in civic virtue (again, the ancient Roman ideal) and to help equalize social disadvantages. Interestingly, his ideas were opposed by religious groups because he insisted that public education be non-sectarian.

I don't understand this. The concept of the common or public good has a long trajectory in political philosophy. In the western tradition alone, it runs from Aristotle to Cicero and ancient Roman republicanism, to Machiavelli and the Enlightenment thinkers of Hobbes and Locke and Rousseau who were a pivotal influence on the American founders. The whole idea of a 'republic' as discussed by James Madison and Thomas Paine is a direct derivation from the ancient Roman idea of res-publica (the public good). This tradition continues up through contemporary social and democratic theorists like Rawls and Arendt and Habermas. In economic theory, the idea of public goods has a long history as well, including Hobbes and Adam Smith. The concept of public good is not dependent on religious doctrine.

Yes! Do this!

I would agree with OhElizabeth on this one. Get Barton. I have been through all of those - AAR, AAS, LOE, ETC, and many more. None of them worked with my dyslexic children ( I have three ). My middle DD did learn to read in first grade using AAR and OPGTTR, so I did not think she was dyslexic. She is now almost 14 and her reading difficulties are apparent, especially in more complex, non fiction texts. I wish I had started on Barton with her from the beginning. My DS 9 was in the same boat as your ds. I tried AAR preK and AAR1, as well as ETC, and he just wasn't making progress. He was stuck just where your DS is stuck. Mid way through second grade we switched to Barton and it made all the difference. If I had it to do over again, I would use Barton with all my children (regrets....). IMO, there is no point in waiting any longer. Your DS is 8 and is not reading for no apparent reason (as least as far as I can see from your post). That is dyslexia. Barton seems expensive, but it is well worth it.

I think there is a significant difference between having an interest in dyslexic kids and having a legal commitment to trying to provide an equitable education. IDEA requires that schools provide an education to kids with disabilities and learning differences. If you are really wondering if the altruistic impulses of the corporate sector would step in and provide an appropriate education for these kids, all you need to do is look at history. I don't remember lots of corporations or corporate foundations advocating for the passage of IDEA or stepping in to fill the void when these students were excluded from public education. Some states even had laws that allowed schools to specifically exclude these students. Is accepting government funding of any sort the only thing that defines a "government school." If so, that does not seem to me to be a term of precision. I suspect that the term "government schools" actually has a much meatier subtext. In other words, for the people who use the term, it is a pejorative.

Where are all these free or low cost options for dyslexic students?? Do you have a dyslexic student? 1 in 5 students are dyslexic. Many if not most require intensive tutoring. Bill Gates hasn't made much of a difference for us. And, frankly, I'm always a bit confused when I hear the phrase "government schools." I think the government schools here in CT and MA would not consider themselves the same as the government schools in Texas or Alabama or Idaho. What does that phrase really mean?

This was a mistake by the FDA. New research shows that these meds do not increase suicide risk and the warnings should be removed (as mental health expects advocate). In fact, the warnings reduced the prescribing of anti-depressents and anti-anxiety drugs, which in turned increased suicide attempts. The initial correlation was a result of the fact that the kids who were getting these prescriptions were the ones already experiencing suicidal ideations. Anxiety is real, depression is real, and these drugs are lifesavers.

That post still shows up. I only deleted the overly sarcastic post I made yesterday. I think it was just a mistake or misquote, since I was essentially agreeing with creekland.

nevermind...

Interestingly, this article was just published in The Atlantic. The WTM forum members are always so timely :001_smile:

But again, these are not really per student expenses. Buildings and salaries and insurance etc are more costly in NY than in Utah or Idaho. NY has unions. Charter teachers in NY love the unions, because their salaries are often based on what public school teachers are getting paid. NY has a way more diverse student body than Idaho. The sheer number of languages spoken by NYC school children is phenomenal.

I don't disagree that there may be a place for strictly regulated, transparent, not for profit, innovative charter schools. And, I guess it's not fair to say that the situation is the same everywhere. But, it does seem that many public schools have experienced the money spent on charter students as a drain on resources. While per student funding is an accounting measure, it is sort of meaningless. Schools don't spend x amount per student. That's just an average. If a student leaves for a charter, a school can't just automatically cut it's expenses by that amount. Maybe the school will eventually be half the size it is now, for example, but it still has to maintain the same building, run the same bus routes, etc. And, this doesn't account for the fact that a good percentage of charter students were not originally even attending the public school. This certainly happened in Pennsylvania. I think something like 30% of charter students in Philadelphia were never in the schools to begin with. They were homeschooled or attended other private schools. So it is my understanding that Philadelphia lost that per student money without a commensurate decrease in students. And in NYC, even though charters are receiving less money per student. many of those charters are operating in district buildings, so when you deduct the building costs they basically have the same amount of money to spend per student. These may be shorter term budget problems for the schools, but I think it is fair to say that many school districts have experienced the increase in charters as a financial hit. Maybe they are wrong. I'm not sure?

Charter schools are not government run, only government funded (if they were run by the public school system they would be magnet schools). To quote Diane Ravitch, "charter schools are part of a separate system, which has its own interests, its own lobbyists, its own separate advocacy organizations." I'm not saying public schools should get a pass (did I say this?), I'm just saying lets not strip resources from them. They don't have enough to begin with.

Charter schools are "public" schools until they end up in court, where they then claim to be non state actors???? If there is a study that shows that charter schools are educating better than traditional public schools, I'd like to see it. As far as I have seen, some are doing as well and many are not. Rather than shutting down public schools, I favor addressing the community problems that are plaguing poorly performing public schools. Sometimes, even a poorly performing school is the only safe place kids see all day, and the only place they get fed.

I think the bigger question is why has "privatization" become a hot topic today. Public education has been rousing success in the US. The founders believed an educated populace was essential to a functioning democracy and throughout most of the 20th century it was assumed that the public would provide for the education of the citizens. This has been a central tenet of our developing democracy. Most of the debates surrounding public education in the past century were focused on expanding that education to more and more people. And, it has largely worked. We managed to transform a nation of immigrants into a superpower. All of our parents and grandparents, who did not speak English, were able to send their children to public schools where they learned English and had access to an education that their parents could not provide at home. There have always been critics of public education. I cannot think of a time when we have not had discussions about what is wrong with the public education system. But, today, public schools are educating more students than ever before. A greater percentage of students are graduating from high school than ever before. A greater percentage of students are attending college than ever before. "No stakes" testing results are better than ever before. Our public schools are not failing. There are clearly problems in rural schools and "failing" schools in high poverty, high minority population and high immigrant population areas. But these schools are struggling because they are dealing with the outsized problems created by poverty and unemployment. We would do better to actually address those problems, rather than blaming the public schools. What exactly do we expect teachers and schools to be? Miracle workers? These problems are bound only to get worse as gaps in wealth and income continue to grow. There is no good evidence to suggest that charter schools are doing a better job than public schools, and in many cases there is ample evidence to suggest that they are a disaster. And, vouchers simply do nothing to address the real problems schools face. If vouchers are going to work, there have to be schools for kids to go to - schools that don't discriminate, schools that will address the issues of learning disabled and special needs students, schools that are geographically available, schools that are actually teaching what kids need to learn, schools that can provide after school care and free food, schools that are not churches in diguise, etc.... So why the big discussion about privatization? Well, if you look under the carefully crafted rhetoric, the "school reform" movement of the 21st century has been funded largely by a small number of corporations/corporate foundations. Why is that?? Perhaps because they have made this education thing a $500 billion dollar a year industry? We all want more options, better options and better access. But, if we look at the facts, if we look at our actual history and not the carefully crafted message of a burgeoning profit-making industry, the place where we have always found that is in the public schools.

This is pretty much the model for elite private schools. They hire history majors, math majors, english majors and science majors to teach history, math, english and science. Now, new teachers do need some mentoring since they have not thought at all about the art of teaching. But, most elite private schools have some sort of system for bringing in novice teachers and breaking them in gently (of course they are not dealing with the same sort of classroom management issues that many public school teachers face). They also sometimes drop the ball on dealing with learning differences, but they are getting better at that. Countries with really successful teachers do both. Teachers are skilled in their field and then attend teacher college type programs to learn to teach. This is not rocket science. I often feel this debate in the US is similar to the heath care debate. We act like doing these things is not possible, or that no one has any idea how to do it, when all we have to do is look around and be willing to learn from the countries who are already doing it well.

It is so much easier to control the populace when the populace is ignorant and uneducated.

What do you get when you privatize a public good? ..... Mercenary armies, toll roads, private prisons, youth club sports, the US health care system .... I have no reason to believe that education would be any different. Privatization of a public good requires rigorous, competent and extensive regulation to make sure that decisions are still being made in the public interest. It can be done well, but only in concert with democratic governance and oversight, not as an alternative to government.