Don’t grade teachers by student progress
To the editor:
You asked in your Monday editorial for a better method of evaluating teachers than looking at how much students improve in a given teacher's class. I'll help you out.
There are factors affecting achievement over which teachers have absolutely no control. That's why individual student achievement is a terrible way to evaluate teachers. Some of these factors are the skills level with which the student enters the class (some are years below grade level; many are at least a couple of years below); student aptitude (which a colleague calls "the elephant in the room," because it's politically incorrect to suggest some kids have higher IQs than others); student transiency; student attendance; whether the kid does homework; whether the kid pays attention in class; whether the kid ever picks up a book and reads; whether the parent values education; whether the parent asks about school and helps the student to the best of his or her ability.
Now, look at the achievement of kids who come in at grade level, listen, do homework and try, and then factor in the kid's IQ, and I could buy that. And how about better pay when it's shown that those kids achieve what they need to?
Blaming teachers for low achievement will just drive more teachers out of Nevada, and out of teaching. It is degrading, counterproductive and maddeningly ridiculous to those of us who work very hard in classrooms.
Hope that enlightened you.
Betty Buehler
LAS VEGAS
Powerful voice
To the editor:
Sue Lowden is a fine person, a credit to Southern Nevada, and would make a great U.S. senator -- which is much more than can be said of the current Republican incumbent in the upper chamber.
But why would anyone in Nevada want to trade the most powerful voice this state has ever had in the Congress for someone who would begin with no voice at all (Oct. 1 Review-Journal)?
As for those who say Sen. Harry Reid doesn't do enough for Nevada, read the Constitution. House members are our direct representatives, with the job of "bringing home the goodies." Senators are supposed to act in the best interests of the entire United States.
George Appleton
LAS VEGAS
Ultra-left clique
To the editor:
Does the Review-Journal have the ACLU on speed dial? Members of the organization are quoted more often than Mayor Oscar Goodman.
On Friday, it was the constitutional rights of hookers plying their trade while hanging out among the slots on a casino floor ("Anti-prostitution codes eyed"). Before that, it was the free-speech rights of aggressive handbillers passing out porno fliers in the resort corridor. Invariably, the Review-Journal dutifully reports the ACLU's take on the matter.
Well, who cares what the so-called American Civil Liberties Union thinks?
There's nothing "American" about this group. They're certainly not "civil," and "liberties" is the furthest thing from their minds. That leaves "union." And they don't even fit that definition.
The ACLU has become nothing more than an ultra-left clique of fuzzy-headed lawyers whose ideological base is located somewhere east of the Hudson River. Please spare me their inane musing in my morning newspaper.
Joe Merica
LAS VEGAS
Biased poll
To the editor:
I was appalled at the results of the so-called health care poll in Saturday's Review-Journal ("Nevadans see tax hikes in plan"). The obvious conservative bias of the poll is shocking. All the Republican propaganda points and deceitful buzz words are well-represented.
I am one voter in this state who strongly supports a public health care plan and am ready to pay my fair share for such an advantage in return for casting off the yoke of ever-increasing, excessive private insurance costs. The current health care system is broken and must be fixed. Anyone who thinks this fix should be free has his head in the sand.
It never ceases to amaze me that people in this state think a good society should have no costs, then they whine and complain when the results are always less than satisfactory.
All Americans should have access to effective, comprehensive and affordable health care without equivocation or fear of cancellation or denial.
Steven Smith
LAS VEGAS
Historical place
To the editor:
In response to Mayor Oscar Goodman and Councilman Ricki Barlow saying they want to raze what's left of Moulin Rouge (Thursday Review-Journal):
The Moulin Rouge is a massive part of Las Vegas history, and there is no reason to demolish what is left of it. If a major downtown casino burned down, Mayor Goodman would never allow the hotel to be forgotten.
They are forgetting what the Moulin Rouge did for Las Vegas, and they are definitely forgetting about what Las Vegas is about. It's about glamour, music, art and the night life. That is exactly what the Moulin Rouge brought to Las Vegas.
The Moulin Rouge was also a breakthrough for the city: It was the first hotel that allowed blacks. Mr. Goodman and Mr. Barlow should think twice before destroying such a magnificent and historical part of Las Vegas.
Alexis Goergen
LAS VEGAS
