I think size is crucial to school improvement. I am basing my feelings on my own personal experience. I went to a small school from kindergarten to halfway through my 8th grade year. The other half of my 8th grade year was spent in a large school (Fremont Junior High) . It was a big change that I had to adjust to. I hardly knew anybody, I had different people in each class, and my teachers did not really know me. I can't even remember any of their names today, so to me that showed they really didn't care or they did not have the time to get to know everyone in their classes. I can see how students fall through the cracks. When I compare the larger school to the smaller school setting, I appreciated the smaller school much more. I knew everyone in my class and I knew all of my teachers. This provided me with a safe and caring environment. The environment I felt in the larger school was like "outer space or a foreign country" both. I didn't feel safe and my self-esteem plummeted. When I had questions in my studies I was afraid to ask for help, but in the smaller school setting I felt confident and asked my questions. I think it is easier to speak up in class when you know your peers compared to when you don't know them. By providing the smaller class size, students will be able to learn more and get the extra help they need.

I don't agree with the whole civics class issue. One class will not teach a person proper citizenship skills. A person is going to learn citizenship as soon as they are old enough to talk. Most parents teach their children proper values everyday as the issue arises and citizenship is a mixture of those values. As a teacher and a parent, I can pick out the students or children that have had good citizenship skills taught to them outside of a school setting (home life). It is wonderful to see these students apply their skills, but yet I also see the students who do not possess these skills. I feel sorry for these students, as it really isn't their fault they haven't learned proper values and citizenship skills accepted in society. I blame their parents. These students did not grow up around loved ones (parents, siblings, etc.) to see good citizenship at work, it was the total opposite. These parents are not going to change their way of life so I believe the school system can try to help. I don't think teachers should be held responsible to teach the students good citizenship, but I do think they should try their hardest to help those students that need taught good citizenship skills. When a student enters school and each teacher that student has from year to year, shows examples of citizenship (ex. being respectful, picking up trash, helping others, saying kind words) it might make a huge impact on that student by the time they are ready to graduate. I know we don't have time to squeeze in class time to teach citizenship, but if we show it before school, during school, after school, during lunch, and during recess, the students will "GET IT". I firmly believe that every teacher impacts at least one or two students a year, and wouldn't be great if it was the students who needed help with societies values, since they didn't get it from home. That students life could change for the better as they get older, and they would always remember who helped them. A negative cycle would be broken and they would instill good citizenship values into their own children.

I think merit pay should only be given if a teacher is working toward self improvement in teaching/education. A teacher who attends educational workshops or classes to improve their teaching deserves a pay increase. That teacher is improving personally and professionally, which benefits the students that teacher instructs. The teachers who have been with a school system for years and have not attended a workshop or class should not be given a merit raise. By only providing a merit raise to the teachers that want to expand their knowledge, it might motivate the other teachers that become "comfortable" in their job. Years of experience, sponsorship, coaching, etc., shouldn't be qualified under the merit pay. Sponsorships and coaching usually has its own separate pay scale that is combined with the teachers salary. And these positions only last a few months. But the years of experience combined with educational workshops and classes would benefit the teacher, students, and school system.
As for the other debate tonight: Have Public Schools Adequately Accommodated Religion? I would have to say no. I know there has always been violence in the world, but I have to stop and think, if we brought religion into our school systems (prayer, commandments, "God", etc.) at appropriate times maybe we could instill some values into the students who need this direction. The American society was built on Christianity, our founding fathers used it when they signed the Declaration of Independence by referring to God. Just because the minority of society has different religious meanings doesn't mean that the majority of society has to change to accommodate them. Don't we go by majority rules when it comes to elections? Why can't we leave it up to the majority of society to decide on whether religion should or shouldn't be in public schools.