I feel curriculum should be standardized for all. I believe children need a direction in life. They need schools to provide them with the "three callings" that the Paideia Group believes. I also think about how our society looks at educating our children. In Nebraska, a child can quit school at the age of 16. There's been times I've heard other children say, "when I turn 16 that's it, I'm done". Shouldn't our government change this law to support our children to at least get a high school diploma? Most of these children grow up in homes that don't support education or their own child. As a member of society shouldn't we help motivate and direct these children to a better life. We leave it up to the children on whether or not they want to continue education through college, but in today's world children need a high school diploma to even survive. Giving a child the option to quit school at 16 is saying after their freshman or sophomore year, they've learned it all! They are still developing physically, mentally, and emotionally. By standardizing the curriculum, we should also be able to standardize the age limit one can quit school to at least 18.

I liked reading and listening to all the pro's and con's debate with technology in school. I agree with issues on both sides. As I listened to Mrs. Morrow's comment about how it is hard to teach technology to the little kindergartener's and 1st graders since they don't know how to read, I had to agree. That wasn't something I would have thought about either. Are we teaching our children too young or not? I have mixed emotions with that. On one hand, it is great that they learn what a computer is and learn the different keys. But yet, are we confusing them with the different ways the alphabet looks with the correct way. Then on the other side, by learning young, they won't have to learn the basic stuff when they get older. The students would be able to apply the basic stuff into their own creations with all the different tools available to them. Then I think about how children's brains are like sponges during the younger years and they absorb so much. So that would be the ideal age to start because when they get older, they like to choose what they learn (absorb).

I believe constructivism would be great for a classroom setting, but not every student will be able to comprehend this approach. Maybe, if teachers would start using this type of learning in the younger grades (slowly) by the time the students reached the higher grades, they would be more open to this type of learning. We, as teachers, want our students to think "outside the box", a constructivist view. In this day and age, we have already changed our classroom settings into the 21st century compared to the "old school" proper ways of schooling (Early 1900's). I believe we need to keep growing with our society and encourage students to think on their own (by guiding them) because our intellectual and technology society is also growing. I think back to the early 1970's when I was in elementary school and am amazed at what is being taught to our younger students compared to when I was in school. Children are learning things earlier than they did back in my days. I also look at the technology offered today to our students. These students definitely have a higher level of education then I did at the elementary grade level. I wish I could have had some constructivism learning during those years, because now as a teacher I have to really concentrate and think "outside the box" about what approach I could use in my room. Maybe if I would have used this learning process in elementary school, I wouldn't be so "stumped" at times.