Why Standardized Testing in Schools Should be Abolished

Standardized testing has been a staple in American schools for quite some time now. School districts say that this is so we can get a better understanding of the overall knowledge each grade should possess to pass, but I think that it is causing our school systems to adopt a "pass this test and you're done" mentality. Even when I was in high school, only about six years ago, all the teachers cared about was making sure you could pass the "TAKS" test. Nowadays, in Texas, schools are doing the same thing to students with the "STAAR" tests. I also feel like this really takes away from more creative projects student could be doing that would actually help them learn. Instead, teachers prepare their students for end-of-year testing by TAKING MORE TESTS. How can we expect our youth to actually want to learn things when all they are taught is "memorize, repeat"? This type of testing doesn't help out the teachers either. A few years ago, President Obama started a "Race to the Top" initiative, which pretty much meant that states would evaluate the scores students were receiving on these tests and use them to evaluate teachers as well. How can this possibly be correct? I know from experience, as I myself am one, that there are many students in America that can learn material effectively and complete assignments and projects, but don't test very well. Schools will take the results of these standardized tests and reprimand specific teachers for not "fulfilling their duties" just because a few students couldn't pass. I believe that this is absolutely outrageous and we should be grading our students on things like critical thinking ability, as these skills will actually help them later in life as adults. I wholeheartedly believe that standardized testing is ruining our schools, students, and teachers, and should be put to an end. What do you think?

Should the Death Penalty Continue to be Legal?

I came across an interesting article in the New York Times written by their Editorial Board. It is an older article, published on January 1, 2013, but I think it is still valid today. The article mainly talks about how the death penalty is being used less and less in the United States today. "While 33 states retain the death penalty on their books, 13 of them have not executed anyone for at least five years." This quote specifically got me thinking, if only a few states are even using the death penalty these days, why not get rid of it altogether? To me, life in prison is a much harsher sentence, and even a study found that "there is no useful evidence to determine if the death penalty deters serious crimes." This just confirms that there is no reason to keep the death penalty legal. It can also be a huge mistake when it comes to sentencing criminals the death penalty when not all of the facts were there. "Since 1973, a total of 142 people have been freed from death row after being exonerated with DNA or other kinds of evidence." That number is way too high for my comfort. How many innocent people have been executed by the government without all of the facts? Another thing to mention as well is that the death penalty is actually very expensive and we, the taxpayers, are paying for the government to have these killing tools. This could also potentially cause a racial issue in death penalty states as well, considering it has been proven that African American males typically receive harsher punishments than other races as well. I believe the death penalty should be made federally illegal, because what would deter a criminal from committing a crime more than knowing they will have to spend every last minute of their life in prison?

Classmate Comment 2: Trump Protesters

I chose to make my second classmate comment on Adrian Dominguez's blog again. This blog is about the actions of Donald Trump's protesters at his campaign rallies. He speaks on the fact that people who are anti-Trump can't act like vigilantes and hooligans while protesting his campaign. First, I believe that with how Trump's personality is, these violent protests are adding more and more fuel to his "anti-liberal" fire. However, on the other side of things, if we don't act out like this in protest, how will we get the media, who feeds off of terror and violence, to pay attention to us? As much as I would love to say that Trump's protesters would still get coverage without having to resort to violence or "mocking the authority", but I don't think that that is the case. I wholeheartedly agree with Adrian as I also believe that Donald Trump as president would set this country back at least 200 years. His beliefs are crazy, and potentially toxic to the American people and their belief systems. If he were elected president, the whole country would start to adopt his views and we'd be no better off than in the late 1700's where the only people who had rights were white, land-owning males. I'm not sure why Trump's supporters think this is a good thing. We have all seen on the news by now how his supporters verbally abuse people at his campaigns that don't adhere to his views. As much as I would love to get more attention to his protesters and how they are they are the sane ones, but how can we do that when all the media cares about is violence?

Classmate Comment: Hillary Clinton for Prez?

As I was reading through fellow classmates' blog posts, I came across this one written by Adrian Dominguez. His article is his personal opinion as to why he believes Hillary Clinton should be elected President of the United States. He states in this article that he doesn't know much about politics, but I feel the points he made helped me better understand why Hillary Clinton would be a good fit for the White House. "...she has seen firsthand what it’s like to be a successful president (in her husband) and what it takes to get to get the job done". This quote actually spoke volumes with me, as honestly during this presidential race I had forgotten all about Bill Clinton and that fact that he and Hillary were married. I do agree with that statement considering she has also been the Secretary of State for quite some time and definitely has more insider knowledge on how things in the White House work. Adrian also mentions Hillary's age in this article, mainly saying that Bernie Sanders is just a bit too old to be in office for the next 4-8 years. "...not too be nit picky but he is a bit old to be running." This quote actually did make me think. We've all seen presidents heavily wrinkle and grey throughout their presidencies just because of stress. This definitely concerns me when it comes to Sanders' health, just like it did when McCain was running. Overall, I definitely found Adrian Dominguez's blog post very interesting and it will keep me evaluating who I decide to vote for in the upcoming election.