Convention Against Torture
Discuss how the “Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment” might be applied to a contemporary conflict. Use references to support your answer. Respond to at least two of your fellow students’ postings.
Our nation is currently involved in a conflict in Iraq. There have been numerous accusations of torture, along with the support of pictures particularly at Guantanamo Bay. (Knight, 2003). Our agreement to the convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment and punishment was seemingly abandoned. But, the invocation of this and other agreements (the Geneva Conventions) has put the spotlight on the American Army and the prisons run by it. (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/torture/etc/faqs.html)
Our government must abide by the agreements it has signed, but it must also do what is necessary to keep other terrorism attacks from happening. In the often quoted ticking bomb scenario, torture has proven to be ineffective (http://www.amnestyusa.org/ask amnesty/torture200112.htm). And even it if were effective, having the wrong person in custody could lead all resources in the totally wrong direction.
We have a stated policy in the United Sates of America not to deal with kidnappers, to do so would only create more kidnappers and make people more vulnerable. We have a signed agreement to not become torturers, and our reasoning is just as sound. To do so would make us as potentially evil as the person who placed the bomb, it is essential that we not become what we fear.
Knight, B (October 2003), Claims of torture in Guantanamo bay , AM on ABC Local Radio, http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2003/s962052.htm
Mayer, J, (October 2005), what international treaties govern torture?, PBS http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/torture/etc/faq.html
Thank you,
Janet Johnson
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Universal Human Rights
Universal Human Rights
Should the United States take a more active role in support of universal human rights?
My answer is, “No, we must speak up for what is right, and for the inalienable rights of all, but we are under no implied obligation to support universal human rights, with actions.”
I agree with our Declaration of Independence (http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm) that :
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
But, as a nation, as a people, we have an obligation to see to it that our rights are protected, that we must guard our own rights. We are people, not children who need protection. We must stand up for our own rights, and for those who might have their rights removed.
And again referencing the Declaration of Independence:
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.
We, in the United States, must continue to be vocal about what we see as right and as wrong. We have an obligation to speak up for the principles on which our country is built, but each nation must decide what she considers a right worth fighting for.
If we fought for the universal human rights of others, we would be obligating our armed forces indefinitely to fight, not in defense of our borders, or protection of our land. We have an army for a specific defined role, and this is not it. If we were to fight for the universal human rights of others, we would have to prioritize and protect the rights of perhaps our enemies.
So, in conclusion, we must always speak up for the right, and careful use of diplomacy can be used to assure the rights of others, but I believe that we are under no obligation to defend the rights of those who aren’t willing to do this for themselves.
Should the United States take a more active role in support of universal human rights?
My answer is, “No, we must speak up for what is right, and for the inalienable rights of all, but we are under no implied obligation to support universal human rights, with actions.”
I agree with our Declaration of Independence (http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm) that :
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
But, as a nation, as a people, we have an obligation to see to it that our rights are protected, that we must guard our own rights. We are people, not children who need protection. We must stand up for our own rights, and for those who might have their rights removed.
And again referencing the Declaration of Independence:
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.
We, in the United States, must continue to be vocal about what we see as right and as wrong. We have an obligation to speak up for the principles on which our country is built, but each nation must decide what she considers a right worth fighting for.
If we fought for the universal human rights of others, we would be obligating our armed forces indefinitely to fight, not in defense of our borders, or protection of our land. We have an army for a specific defined role, and this is not it. If we were to fight for the universal human rights of others, we would have to prioritize and protect the rights of perhaps our enemies.
So, in conclusion, we must always speak up for the right, and careful use of diplomacy can be used to assure the rights of others, but I believe that we are under no obligation to defend the rights of those who aren’t willing to do this for themselves.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Tabatha, my problem
I am going through something odd right now. I've been in the position of owing money to someone before, and I've been owed money before, but I've never had a situation like this. I'll start from the beginning... I'll let you read the letter that I wrote to the Police Department after I filed a formal complaint. Background, I am a landlord to two historic buildings which were converted to apartments about fifty years ago. They are beautiful old buildings, always in need of something to be repaired, but mostly I enjoy being a landlord. Every once in a while there is a problem of a tenant, but I've never experienced anything like this before.
Dear Mr. Thompson,
I am sorry that it has taken me the extra day to get back to you. I'm often swamped with life. I'll try to get all the details to you.
My apartment at Address Here, Number 2 became available in the middle of January. I ran an ad in the Valley News and received many responses. I have a tenant in Apartment 5 of a different address. She has been a wonderful tenant. She told me of her cousin, who just started a job at Dartmouth's Optical department, who was a single mother that needed to move closer to her new job. She described a young woman who had worked at Walmart's Optical in Claremont for two years. She often babysat her cousin's daughter, and I knew her somewhat (the baby girl).
I felt comfortable with the situation of renting to Tenant One's cousin Tabby. Tabby and I scheduled a look at the apartment for January 23 which was a Wednesday. She was late and Tenant One stayed at the apartment and cleaned for a while because I had to leave. I asked Tenant One to show the apartment to Tabby and collect the deposit and first month's rent. I told her that when she had that in hand, she could give the key to Tabby so that Tabby could move in at her convience (I understand that a working mother has limited time to devote to these types of things). I was going to return to New Hampshire on February 9 and collect signatures on leases and such when I returned, feeling comfortable that the rent and deposit in hand would give us both a leg to stand on.
When I returned on February 12 (weather kept planes from landing, we flew all over trying to get home), I called Tabby. She told me that her boyfriend was out of jail (she had warned me that he was incarcerated, but would get out shortly. She told me that the charges were domestic related and that he was completely incapacated as he was in total kidney failure, that he was unable to work, but would stay home and take care of their little girl while she worked.) She told me that Zach was living there and that there was a problem with the check she had written and given to Tenant One. I collected the check from Tenant One before calling at Tabby's apartment.
Tabby said that the deposit and the first month's rent were a gift from her best friend, and that they put her as a signator on their account so that she could get into the apartment. But, she had discovered in the time that I was gone that the check was from the wrong account, maybe. She asked that I bring the check and that she would give me the cash that evening. She wasn't home, but Zachary told me that she was going to meet me the next day. What I told him was that I needed to get the check covered, and he seemed to think that there was no check. I asked Tabby and she hinted that Zach was a responsible guy, but he tended to spend money if he had it on him, so she felt most comfortable if she gave the money personally. I still had no signed lease at this point. I left the lease with Zach.
I stopped by on Wednesday February13 and Tabby wasn't there again. I left her a handwritten note that said that I needed to be paid by 10 AM on the 14th or I was going to have to have her evicted. At that point, I had a check that she asked me not to cash, but I had nothing to cover the deposit. They had lived in the apartment for two and a half weeks and I had no signed lease.
I left Tabby many messages on February 14 and she failed to call me back. At ten PM she called from the car in Claremont. She told me that she would pay me tomorrow, I was supposed to call her at work 555-5555 in the morning. Zach was in the car with her and he was drunk. He was yelling at me, calling me threatening names, really mad at me. He told me that they were going to move because a registered sex offender lived in the building (I told them that before they moved in, Tenant Three who then lived in apartment 3 and currently lives in apartment 1) Tabby assured me that he was fine, but he was starting dialysis tomorrow and that he was going to be unable to drink again and so he wanted to have one last drunk. She also told me that it was her birthday.
This is what I wrote in my journal about Friday February 15th.
Went to meet Tabby at pro-optical to pick up money. She said she didn't have it, her wallet was at home. Zach was at ER all night. Could I come to get the money in the evening?
Waited at apartment from 7:05 until 8:30. Spoke w/ Tabby at 7:15. She was locked out at work and the alarm was off. At 8:00, she had alarm off was waiting for Ben. 8:30 Tabby shows up. Wallet still not in car or apartment. We went ot Friend's house on Church Street. Friend just left to bring boyfriend to job in Claremont. I went home at 10:00 with no money.
She asked me to come the next day at work to get the money. Februry 16. She called me in the morning to tell me that she had the money in her car. Her lunch was at 12:30, could I go get it. Waited from 12:30 until 3:05. Tabby called me at 8:59am, 9:30am, 11:31am, 12:44am, 1:05am, 1:10am, 1:39pm, 1:49pm, and 4:20pm. For the 4:20 call she asked me to meet her at the Irving off Interstate (near where I live). I drove there and waited until 5. She never showed up. I had to go to the apartments at Address at 7 for a reason unrelated, no one was home.
February 17
10:30 went to the apartments, Tabby was not home, no car.
Sunday evening. I went to apartment and Zach invited me in. Tabby was there and they told me that she had lied to me every time she had spoken to me since I returned from Louisiana. Her friends had allowed her to write the check, but then they told her that they closed the account. She was really sorry, she honestly thought that they were going to help her with moving in. I could have evicted them at that moment, but Zach was starting dialysis on Tuesday (he looked very, very ill). I know that Tabby gets paid on Thursday and I asked if they would pay me from last weeks' check. They explained that their money had gone to car repair, that there was none left.
They agreed to give me 200 per week toward the current rent and that they would pay off the check (deposit and February's rent) when Zach's disability check came on Friday. I agreed.
I left town that evening immediately after leaving thier apartment to go to Ithaca, NY to help a friend out. I came home on February 21... On February 22 I stopped by their apartment, Zach gave me 200$ in cash. I called on February 28, Zach assured me that they had the money, but were out of the apartment when I stopped by. I wrote a letter and an eviction notice and stopped by on March 3. The first attachment is the letter. Zach was home. We discussed what happened so far. He showed me a signed lease, but he wanted a copy of it so I told him to give it to me when he got a copy of it made or that I would bring one with me next time so that we could both have a signed copy. He gave me 120$ cash.
March 6 was the next Friday. I have not written anything down in my journal for that day. I have written Zach a list of what he paid me toward March's rent, but I didn't put it in my journal.
March 13 was the next Thursday. On Friday Zach gave me 220$. We discussed the fees that I had listed in the letter that I sent. I told him that while most of March was covered, April was fast approching and how were they going to get caught up when they were now more behind than before. Zach was very agitated and annoyed about this. He continued to tell me that there was a disability check which was routed the wrong way. He told me that they were going to apply for fuel assistance. (when people apply for fuel assistance, I generally receive a voucher from the city and I sign it and then a check is drawn. I have not received a voucher for them, so I know that they have either not applied or not been approved.) He assured me that the money on the bad check would be covered.
I have not heard from them again except in the form of Instant Message. Those were brief and I will forward them to you later. I am not on the computer where I received them... they are only retrievable there. On April 1, 2008 with two weeks of not receiving any more money, I deposited the check that I had received in February. It was returned on April 4. Also, on April 4 Tabby IMed me that their hot water wasn't working in the bathroom and that they were going to pay me nothing until I fixed it. I told her thank you and that I would let them know.
I posted a notice to vacate on Saturday April 5th. I also attached another letter. I heard nothing and on Monday I went to the Court to file papers to civil court for the bad check. They told me to go to the Police where I received the check and I could file criminal charges. I did so.
Thank you,
Please let me know if there is anything else you need.
Janet Johnson
As you can see, I am the most guilty party here. I let her lead me around like it was her building.
I have requested the report from the Police Department, and will post that here when I receive it. The charges were dropped, even though the check was pulled off of a bad account because I allowed her to start paying me back. Had I refused a partial payment, she would have been charged with felony check fraud, or the police department would have made her pay me in full. So, again, my fault.
I went back to the original court and posted a formal eviction and civil suit for the amount owed in back rent. We have a court date on May 28, Tomorrow. In the meantime, I received an instant message from Tabby regarding my showing the apartment.
I have posted another ad on the local paper, Valley News. I had appointments to show the apartment and she refused to allow me to show it. Here is the Instant Message exchange.
This particular chain of correspondence began on May 25,2008 in response to a notice that I left on three apartment doors that I would be showing the apartments which will soon be vacated..
Tabby (5/26/2008 5:06:09 AM): i contacted a lawyer and they said that until we go to court and have our hearing that we have the right to say that no one can come in to look at the apartment... and we dont want anyone in here... also the lawyer said that if u just let urself in then we can call the police... and we will have the alarm set up... maybe if we can have set times and days that would work for us as well we can talk but to say that from 11-6 u can be here netime is very disturbing to our day and cuts into our rights
me (5/26/2008 5:21:18 AM): Tabby, I have appointments to show the apartment at 11 tomorrow. I will only show it between 11 and 12 if that is OK with you.
me (5/26/2008 5:49:57 AM): I have read through all of my landlord tenant law and I only find that I must give you twenty four hours notice to enter the apartment.
me (5/26/2008 5:50:51 AM): Tabby, if you think that by refusing to allow me to show the apartment, I will somehow allow you to stay, you are mistaken
me (5/26/2008 5:51:01 AM): We are so at odds. You and I
me (5/26/2008 5:51:22 AM): You have not told me any truth since we met
me (5/26/2008 5:51:41 AM): I don't for one second believe you that you contacted an attorney
me (5/26/2008 5:52:11 AM): I will have you evicted this week in court
me (5/26/2008 5:52:21 AM): and I am suing you for the unpaid rent
me (5/26/2008 5:53:22 AM): You have been nothing but a pain in my ass since I met you. You lie and you steal from me every day. Every time you turn on a light,you are stealling from me. Every time you take a shower, you are stealing from me.
me (5/26/2008 5:54:37 AM): You have caused me so much stress that I have trouble sleeping. When you, as a topic, come up in my house... it makes my stomach hurt. There is no circumstance in which I will allow you to continue to stay in the apartment.
me (5/26/2008 5:55:16 AM): It is mearly a formality, going to court
me (5/26/2008 5:55:58 AM): You have put it off as long as possible, but time is up. The court will force you to move. It is only because I am honorable that you even have this opportunity
me (5/26/2008 5:56:33 AM): I should have evicted you when I found that your check was bad.
me (5/26/2008 6:01:31 AM): I had sympathy for you and your situation, Also, you have an odd charisma. I wanted to help you. But, you punished me for wanting to help. You gave me just enough money to stay in the apartment. I've no doubt that you and Zach will find another landlord to take advantage of. I have no doubt that you will continue to lie and cheat and steal until you end up in jail. You use Zach's medical condition and your daughter to justify lying and stealing, but it doesn't change that what you are doing is lying and stealing. I don't know how you justify this in your head, I guess you have some way of thinking that all of this is OK. I assume that you somehow feel like it is your right to continue to screw me over and over again. At some point you have decided that your responsiblities to your family
me (5/26/2008 6:03:28 AM): make it ok to use others, without thought to what your actions do to them. You use the law to continue to abuse others. I would be insane to continue our tenious relationship as landlord and tenant.
me (5/26/2008 6:06:47 AM): continue to lie to people about attempting to get in touch with me if you like. I know that you have not called me . I know that you have not attempted to call me. I know that you have not tried to pay rent. I know that you have no intention of paying me. No intention of leaving unless the police force you. I am allowing you to bully me because the law is on your side in this.But, I have the right to show the apartment. I gave you notice.
Tabby (5/26/2008 10:03:05 AM): i have no intentions to try and work things out. i dont want to live here in this apartment. u r a slumlord that does not care how the apartments are taken care of. i should have trusted my instinct and never moved in here in the first place. the minute i saw the place was trashed i should have known that u were a slum lord and things would never be done. you can say all u want about me. as far as the bad check goes i was paying that off and i have all my proof and cant wait to see u in court. and u did not give me a 24 hour notice u left a note that never specified the date and time and even these ims are not 24 hours notice so i will call the police. i have a right. and dont believe that i called a lawyer is called free legal advice... would u like their number u can check for urself...
Tabby (5/26/2008 10:03:18 AM): and dont ever bring my daughter into something...
Tabby (5/26/2008 10:13:37 AM): i will also being show these ims to the court i dont think that its approiate u talk about me the way u do and u even admit it about my name being brought up in ur house. and i am suing as well for the 5 hour clean up that i had to give the apartment when it was suppossed to be all clean to move into
me (5/26/2008 2:43:43 PM): I have an appointment to show the house at 5 PM tomorrow. Please , bring these IMs to court. Of course, your name is brought up in my house. I went 4000 dollars in arrears over the bad check, the unpaid rent, and the court costs. My husband and I discuss money and the apartments on a daily basis. Your name comes up because you are unfinished business.
me (5/26/2008 2:45:39 PM): I have not brought your daughter into anything. You use your responsibilities to justify stealing from me. I think your daughter is a joy, totally cute and smart to boot.
me (5/26/2008 2:48:03 PM): I am not a slumlord. I rent apartments for lower rent. I take care of them the best I can on what money they make. When you complained about the tub water temperature not working properly. I sent Joe over to take a look at it. That was the next day. When he couldn't fix it, I called a plumber the day after that, and he came on Monday (you told me of the complaint via IM on a Friday evening or a Saturday morning). Zach refused to let me into the apartment
me (5/26/2008 2:48:42 PM): Because of your nonpayment of rent, I've had trouble getting Irving to come and fill the heating oil, but I've stayed on top of it as best I can.
me (5/26/2008 2:50:15 PM): The apartment building is up to code in every way. My insurance company and the city both keep a close eye on the building as it is over 150 years old. I told you the age of the building when you moved in. I've not hidden things from you, nor have I broken any law.
me (5/26/2008 2:50:53 PM): I am not a perfect landlord, but in order to be that I'd need to tear down and rebuild the apartment building. It is a historic building and I am not allowed to do that.
me (5/26/2008 2:51:48 PM): Besides, I like the building the way that it is. It is in serious need of a paint job, but other than that. I really do like the building. I wouldn't have bought it otherwise. You should not have moved into it if you didn't like it.
me (5/26/2008 2:55:02 PM): And as to whether I believe you about calling an attorney, I don't. You've told me nothing that was true so far. You can get as defensive as you like, but you DID write me a bad check on a closed account. You did ask me to go to your work three different times when you KNEW that you did not have the money to pay me in hand. You implied that Zach couldn't be trusted with money so that I wouldn't just get you to leave the money with him. You had me drive you to a friends house when you knew that they weren't going to give you the money. You got me to wait for you for over three hours and you knew that you didn't have the money. You told me that you would pay me as soon as " " came in (fill in Zach's back money from when he was in jail, the next paycheck, the money from your relative, your
me (5/26/2008 2:55:17 PM): your bonus check, the money from the IRS, the money from the state)
me (5/26/2008 2:55:46 PM): You lied to the police when you told them that you applied for assistance from the city. They check with me first thing when a tenant does, and they never did that.
me (5/26/2008 2:56:12 PM): You say that you were paying me off on the bad check. You gave me only 800 so far.
me (5/26/2008 2:56:35 PM): The check was for over 1000 and it has been over four months since the check was written
me (5/26/2008 2:56:43 PM): and NO RENT has been paid in that time
me (5/26/2008 2:57:13 PM): So, tell me, Tabby, why I shouldn't have the right to rent my apartment to someone else.
me (5/26/2008 2:57:53 PM): and If you feel like calling names, like slumlord, go ahead. Sticks and stones.
me (5/26/2008 2:58:01 PM): But, I've tried.
me (5/26/2008 2:58:24 PM): I even only filed suit against you rather than you and Zach in order to keep his name out of it given his legal problems and health problems
me (5/26/2008 3:03:37 PM): I've not called the police nor DSS about your pot use in the apartment, and I could have. I saw weed in there, and you told me about your pot use but honestly, I don't care about pot use, I think it should be as legal as alcohol.
me (5/26/2008 3:04:23 PM): So, Tabby, you can be as mad about me as you like. But, I've stolen nothing from you. I've taken nothing from you. I've broken none of our agreements with you.
me (5/26/2008 3:04:36 PM): I've tried over and over and over again to work with you
me (5/26/2008 3:04:47 PM): I've done everything by the book/.
me (5/26/2008 3:05:14 PM): And you lie to me and to your cousin about me.
me (5/26/2008 3:06:27 PM): IF I want to discuss you and my apartment with my husband, it is fine, it is legal, and it is just.
me (5/26/2008 3:06:53 PM): If I want to write a short story about my interactions with you and publish it on my blog, that is also my own business.
me (5/26/2008 3:07:37 PM): Please sue me about the state of the apartment when you moved in.
me (5/26/2008 3:08:10 PM): Please bring everything we have signed together to the court date.
me (5/26/2008 3:08:28 PM): Please move the heck out of my building. and pay me what you owe me.
me (5/26/2008 3:09:53 PM): And if you don't allow me to show the apartment, I will attempt to collect any rent I would have received from a new tenant had the apartment been rented.
me (5/26/2008 3:10:08 PM): This is more than 24 hours notice.
As you can see, still, I am allowing myself to take this personally. Hopefully, it will be over soon.
Janet Johnson
Dear Mr. Thompson,
I am sorry that it has taken me the extra day to get back to you. I'm often swamped with life. I'll try to get all the details to you.
My apartment at Address Here, Number 2 became available in the middle of January. I ran an ad in the Valley News and received many responses. I have a tenant in Apartment 5 of a different address. She has been a wonderful tenant. She told me of her cousin, who just started a job at Dartmouth's Optical department, who was a single mother that needed to move closer to her new job. She described a young woman who had worked at Walmart's Optical in Claremont for two years. She often babysat her cousin's daughter, and I knew her somewhat (the baby girl).
I felt comfortable with the situation of renting to Tenant One's cousin Tabby. Tabby and I scheduled a look at the apartment for January 23 which was a Wednesday. She was late and Tenant One stayed at the apartment and cleaned for a while because I had to leave. I asked Tenant One to show the apartment to Tabby and collect the deposit and first month's rent. I told her that when she had that in hand, she could give the key to Tabby so that Tabby could move in at her convience (I understand that a working mother has limited time to devote to these types of things). I was going to return to New Hampshire on February 9 and collect signatures on leases and such when I returned, feeling comfortable that the rent and deposit in hand would give us both a leg to stand on.
When I returned on February 12 (weather kept planes from landing, we flew all over trying to get home), I called Tabby. She told me that her boyfriend was out of jail (she had warned me that he was incarcerated, but would get out shortly. She told me that the charges were domestic related and that he was completely incapacated as he was in total kidney failure, that he was unable to work, but would stay home and take care of their little girl while she worked.) She told me that Zach was living there and that there was a problem with the check she had written and given to Tenant One. I collected the check from Tenant One before calling at Tabby's apartment.
Tabby said that the deposit and the first month's rent were a gift from her best friend, and that they put her as a signator on their account so that she could get into the apartment. But, she had discovered in the time that I was gone that the check was from the wrong account, maybe. She asked that I bring the check and that she would give me the cash that evening. She wasn't home, but Zachary told me that she was going to meet me the next day. What I told him was that I needed to get the check covered, and he seemed to think that there was no check. I asked Tabby and she hinted that Zach was a responsible guy, but he tended to spend money if he had it on him, so she felt most comfortable if she gave the money personally. I still had no signed lease at this point. I left the lease with Zach.
I stopped by on Wednesday February13 and Tabby wasn't there again. I left her a handwritten note that said that I needed to be paid by 10 AM on the 14th or I was going to have to have her evicted. At that point, I had a check that she asked me not to cash, but I had nothing to cover the deposit. They had lived in the apartment for two and a half weeks and I had no signed lease.
I left Tabby many messages on February 14 and she failed to call me back. At ten PM she called from the car in Claremont. She told me that she would pay me tomorrow, I was supposed to call her at work 555-5555 in the morning. Zach was in the car with her and he was drunk. He was yelling at me, calling me threatening names, really mad at me. He told me that they were going to move because a registered sex offender lived in the building (I told them that before they moved in, Tenant Three who then lived in apartment 3 and currently lives in apartment 1) Tabby assured me that he was fine, but he was starting dialysis tomorrow and that he was going to be unable to drink again and so he wanted to have one last drunk. She also told me that it was her birthday.
This is what I wrote in my journal about Friday February 15th.
Went to meet Tabby at pro-optical to pick up money. She said she didn't have it, her wallet was at home. Zach was at ER all night. Could I come to get the money in the evening?
Waited at apartment from 7:05 until 8:30. Spoke w/ Tabby at 7:15. She was locked out at work and the alarm was off. At 8:00, she had alarm off was waiting for Ben. 8:30 Tabby shows up. Wallet still not in car or apartment. We went ot Friend's house on Church Street. Friend just left to bring boyfriend to job in Claremont. I went home at 10:00 with no money.
She asked me to come the next day at work to get the money. Februry 16. She called me in the morning to tell me that she had the money in her car. Her lunch was at 12:30, could I go get it. Waited from 12:30 until 3:05. Tabby called me at 8:59am, 9:30am, 11:31am, 12:44am, 1:05am, 1:10am, 1:39pm, 1:49pm, and 4:20pm. For the 4:20 call she asked me to meet her at the Irving off Interstate (near where I live). I drove there and waited until 5. She never showed up. I had to go to the apartments at Address at 7 for a reason unrelated, no one was home.
February 17
10:30 went to the apartments, Tabby was not home, no car.
Sunday evening. I went to apartment and Zach invited me in. Tabby was there and they told me that she had lied to me every time she had spoken to me since I returned from Louisiana. Her friends had allowed her to write the check, but then they told her that they closed the account. She was really sorry, she honestly thought that they were going to help her with moving in. I could have evicted them at that moment, but Zach was starting dialysis on Tuesday (he looked very, very ill). I know that Tabby gets paid on Thursday and I asked if they would pay me from last weeks' check. They explained that their money had gone to car repair, that there was none left.
They agreed to give me 200 per week toward the current rent and that they would pay off the check (deposit and February's rent) when Zach's disability check came on Friday. I agreed.
I left town that evening immediately after leaving thier apartment to go to Ithaca, NY to help a friend out. I came home on February 21... On February 22 I stopped by their apartment, Zach gave me 200$ in cash. I called on February 28, Zach assured me that they had the money, but were out of the apartment when I stopped by. I wrote a letter and an eviction notice and stopped by on March 3. The first attachment is the letter. Zach was home. We discussed what happened so far. He showed me a signed lease, but he wanted a copy of it so I told him to give it to me when he got a copy of it made or that I would bring one with me next time so that we could both have a signed copy. He gave me 120$ cash.
March 6 was the next Friday. I have not written anything down in my journal for that day. I have written Zach a list of what he paid me toward March's rent, but I didn't put it in my journal.
March 13 was the next Thursday. On Friday Zach gave me 220$. We discussed the fees that I had listed in the letter that I sent. I told him that while most of March was covered, April was fast approching and how were they going to get caught up when they were now more behind than before. Zach was very agitated and annoyed about this. He continued to tell me that there was a disability check which was routed the wrong way. He told me that they were going to apply for fuel assistance. (when people apply for fuel assistance, I generally receive a voucher from the city and I sign it and then a check is drawn. I have not received a voucher for them, so I know that they have either not applied or not been approved.) He assured me that the money on the bad check would be covered.
I have not heard from them again except in the form of Instant Message. Those were brief and I will forward them to you later. I am not on the computer where I received them... they are only retrievable there. On April 1, 2008 with two weeks of not receiving any more money, I deposited the check that I had received in February. It was returned on April 4. Also, on April 4 Tabby IMed me that their hot water wasn't working in the bathroom and that they were going to pay me nothing until I fixed it. I told her thank you and that I would let them know.
I posted a notice to vacate on Saturday April 5th. I also attached another letter. I heard nothing and on Monday I went to the Court to file papers to civil court for the bad check. They told me to go to the Police where I received the check and I could file criminal charges. I did so.
Thank you,
Please let me know if there is anything else you need.
Janet Johnson
As you can see, I am the most guilty party here. I let her lead me around like it was her building.
I have requested the report from the Police Department, and will post that here when I receive it. The charges were dropped, even though the check was pulled off of a bad account because I allowed her to start paying me back. Had I refused a partial payment, she would have been charged with felony check fraud, or the police department would have made her pay me in full. So, again, my fault.
I went back to the original court and posted a formal eviction and civil suit for the amount owed in back rent. We have a court date on May 28, Tomorrow. In the meantime, I received an instant message from Tabby regarding my showing the apartment.
I have posted another ad on the local paper, Valley News. I had appointments to show the apartment and she refused to allow me to show it. Here is the Instant Message exchange.
This particular chain of correspondence began on May 25,2008 in response to a notice that I left on three apartment doors that I would be showing the apartments which will soon be vacated..
Tabby (5/26/2008 5:06:09 AM): i contacted a lawyer and they said that until we go to court and have our hearing that we have the right to say that no one can come in to look at the apartment... and we dont want anyone in here... also the lawyer said that if u just let urself in then we can call the police... and we will have the alarm set up... maybe if we can have set times and days that would work for us as well we can talk but to say that from 11-6 u can be here netime is very disturbing to our day and cuts into our rights
me (5/26/2008 5:21:18 AM): Tabby, I have appointments to show the apartment at 11 tomorrow. I will only show it between 11 and 12 if that is OK with you.
me (5/26/2008 5:49:57 AM): I have read through all of my landlord tenant law and I only find that I must give you twenty four hours notice to enter the apartment.
me (5/26/2008 5:50:51 AM): Tabby, if you think that by refusing to allow me to show the apartment, I will somehow allow you to stay, you are mistaken
me (5/26/2008 5:51:01 AM): We are so at odds. You and I
me (5/26/2008 5:51:22 AM): You have not told me any truth since we met
me (5/26/2008 5:51:41 AM): I don't for one second believe you that you contacted an attorney
me (5/26/2008 5:52:11 AM): I will have you evicted this week in court
me (5/26/2008 5:52:21 AM): and I am suing you for the unpaid rent
me (5/26/2008 5:53:22 AM): You have been nothing but a pain in my ass since I met you. You lie and you steal from me every day. Every time you turn on a light,you are stealling from me. Every time you take a shower, you are stealing from me.
me (5/26/2008 5:54:37 AM): You have caused me so much stress that I have trouble sleeping. When you, as a topic, come up in my house... it makes my stomach hurt. There is no circumstance in which I will allow you to continue to stay in the apartment.
me (5/26/2008 5:55:16 AM): It is mearly a formality, going to court
me (5/26/2008 5:55:58 AM): You have put it off as long as possible, but time is up. The court will force you to move. It is only because I am honorable that you even have this opportunity
me (5/26/2008 5:56:33 AM): I should have evicted you when I found that your check was bad.
me (5/26/2008 6:01:31 AM): I had sympathy for you and your situation, Also, you have an odd charisma. I wanted to help you. But, you punished me for wanting to help. You gave me just enough money to stay in the apartment. I've no doubt that you and Zach will find another landlord to take advantage of. I have no doubt that you will continue to lie and cheat and steal until you end up in jail. You use Zach's medical condition and your daughter to justify lying and stealing, but it doesn't change that what you are doing is lying and stealing. I don't know how you justify this in your head, I guess you have some way of thinking that all of this is OK. I assume that you somehow feel like it is your right to continue to screw me over and over again. At some point you have decided that your responsiblities to your family
me (5/26/2008 6:03:28 AM): make it ok to use others, without thought to what your actions do to them. You use the law to continue to abuse others. I would be insane to continue our tenious relationship as landlord and tenant.
me (5/26/2008 6:06:47 AM): continue to lie to people about attempting to get in touch with me if you like. I know that you have not called me . I know that you have not attempted to call me. I know that you have not tried to pay rent. I know that you have no intention of paying me. No intention of leaving unless the police force you. I am allowing you to bully me because the law is on your side in this.But, I have the right to show the apartment. I gave you notice.
Tabby (5/26/2008 10:03:05 AM): i have no intentions to try and work things out. i dont want to live here in this apartment. u r a slumlord that does not care how the apartments are taken care of. i should have trusted my instinct and never moved in here in the first place. the minute i saw the place was trashed i should have known that u were a slum lord and things would never be done. you can say all u want about me. as far as the bad check goes i was paying that off and i have all my proof and cant wait to see u in court. and u did not give me a 24 hour notice u left a note that never specified the date and time and even these ims are not 24 hours notice so i will call the police. i have a right. and dont believe that i called a lawyer is called free legal advice... would u like their number u can check for urself...
Tabby (5/26/2008 10:03:18 AM): and dont ever bring my daughter into something...
Tabby (5/26/2008 10:13:37 AM): i will also being show these ims to the court i dont think that its approiate u talk about me the way u do and u even admit it about my name being brought up in ur house. and i am suing as well for the 5 hour clean up that i had to give the apartment when it was suppossed to be all clean to move into
me (5/26/2008 2:43:43 PM): I have an appointment to show the house at 5 PM tomorrow. Please , bring these IMs to court. Of course, your name is brought up in my house. I went 4000 dollars in arrears over the bad check, the unpaid rent, and the court costs. My husband and I discuss money and the apartments on a daily basis. Your name comes up because you are unfinished business.
me (5/26/2008 2:45:39 PM): I have not brought your daughter into anything. You use your responsibilities to justify stealing from me. I think your daughter is a joy, totally cute and smart to boot.
me (5/26/2008 2:48:03 PM): I am not a slumlord. I rent apartments for lower rent. I take care of them the best I can on what money they make. When you complained about the tub water temperature not working properly. I sent Joe over to take a look at it. That was the next day. When he couldn't fix it, I called a plumber the day after that, and he came on Monday (you told me of the complaint via IM on a Friday evening or a Saturday morning). Zach refused to let me into the apartment
me (5/26/2008 2:48:42 PM): Because of your nonpayment of rent, I've had trouble getting Irving to come and fill the heating oil, but I've stayed on top of it as best I can.
me (5/26/2008 2:50:15 PM): The apartment building is up to code in every way. My insurance company and the city both keep a close eye on the building as it is over 150 years old. I told you the age of the building when you moved in. I've not hidden things from you, nor have I broken any law.
me (5/26/2008 2:50:53 PM): I am not a perfect landlord, but in order to be that I'd need to tear down and rebuild the apartment building. It is a historic building and I am not allowed to do that.
me (5/26/2008 2:51:48 PM): Besides, I like the building the way that it is. It is in serious need of a paint job, but other than that. I really do like the building. I wouldn't have bought it otherwise. You should not have moved into it if you didn't like it.
me (5/26/2008 2:55:02 PM): And as to whether I believe you about calling an attorney, I don't. You've told me nothing that was true so far. You can get as defensive as you like, but you DID write me a bad check on a closed account. You did ask me to go to your work three different times when you KNEW that you did not have the money to pay me in hand. You implied that Zach couldn't be trusted with money so that I wouldn't just get you to leave the money with him. You had me drive you to a friends house when you knew that they weren't going to give you the money. You got me to wait for you for over three hours and you knew that you didn't have the money. You told me that you would pay me as soon as " " came in (fill in Zach's back money from when he was in jail, the next paycheck, the money from your relative, your
me (5/26/2008 2:55:17 PM): your bonus check, the money from the IRS, the money from the state)
me (5/26/2008 2:55:46 PM): You lied to the police when you told them that you applied for assistance from the city. They check with me first thing when a tenant does, and they never did that.
me (5/26/2008 2:56:12 PM): You say that you were paying me off on the bad check. You gave me only 800 so far.
me (5/26/2008 2:56:35 PM): The check was for over 1000 and it has been over four months since the check was written
me (5/26/2008 2:56:43 PM): and NO RENT has been paid in that time
me (5/26/2008 2:57:13 PM): So, tell me, Tabby, why I shouldn't have the right to rent my apartment to someone else.
me (5/26/2008 2:57:53 PM): and If you feel like calling names, like slumlord, go ahead. Sticks and stones.
me (5/26/2008 2:58:01 PM): But, I've tried.
me (5/26/2008 2:58:24 PM): I even only filed suit against you rather than you and Zach in order to keep his name out of it given his legal problems and health problems
me (5/26/2008 3:03:37 PM): I've not called the police nor DSS about your pot use in the apartment, and I could have. I saw weed in there, and you told me about your pot use but honestly, I don't care about pot use, I think it should be as legal as alcohol.
me (5/26/2008 3:04:23 PM): So, Tabby, you can be as mad about me as you like. But, I've stolen nothing from you. I've taken nothing from you. I've broken none of our agreements with you.
me (5/26/2008 3:04:36 PM): I've tried over and over and over again to work with you
me (5/26/2008 3:04:47 PM): I've done everything by the book/.
me (5/26/2008 3:05:14 PM): And you lie to me and to your cousin about me.
me (5/26/2008 3:06:27 PM): IF I want to discuss you and my apartment with my husband, it is fine, it is legal, and it is just.
me (5/26/2008 3:06:53 PM): If I want to write a short story about my interactions with you and publish it on my blog, that is also my own business.
me (5/26/2008 3:07:37 PM): Please sue me about the state of the apartment when you moved in.
me (5/26/2008 3:08:10 PM): Please bring everything we have signed together to the court date.
me (5/26/2008 3:08:28 PM): Please move the heck out of my building. and pay me what you owe me.
me (5/26/2008 3:09:53 PM): And if you don't allow me to show the apartment, I will attempt to collect any rent I would have received from a new tenant had the apartment been rented.
me (5/26/2008 3:10:08 PM): This is more than 24 hours notice.
As you can see, still, I am allowing myself to take this personally. Hopefully, it will be over soon.
Janet Johnson
Environmental Scarcities
Do environmental scarcities undermine international security? If so, how? Please provide at least one example. If you were in charge of developing U.S. policies how would you reconcile the two problems?
Environmental scarcities, such as oil (a debatable point, but not the topic of this post, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4542853/, March 16, 2008, & http://www.govspot.com/issues/anwr.htm , May 2008), have certainly had a large impact on our dependency on the Middle East. Most of our (outside) security problems originate from this area. Were we able to depend solely on U.S. drilled oil, we would be able to stop associations with countries in the Middle East.
Were I in charge, I would strongly encourage with money and attitude a science revolution akin to one when electricity was first invented. I would encourage the smaller automobile, the more efficient appliance, the 'offgrid' families would receive the highest tax breaks. I would work to get small towns to build their own 'wind' farms and 'solar power' collection sites, and to sell this power to the consumers. I would reward electric and hybrid cars usership annually. And most of all, I would release all noncompetition agreements between power companies.
(I want to strongly say that this next paragraph should not indicate that I think a nontrade situation is desirable overall. I do, however, think think that our economic dependence on foreign oil will prohibit us from evaluating our problems with the Middle East objectively.)
I do not think that developing U.S. drilling sites is the answer. I'm in the market for a new car. I want one that seats at least seven (the number of children plus adults that are in my immediate family) and that gets at least 30 MPH in town and 40 on the highway. I know it is possible because with our Hybrid Toyota, we get between 45 and 55 MPH out of every tank, and we easily seat five in that vehicle. That car does not yet exist, but it should all the technology is there. I view the U.S. dependence on foreign oil much like this situation. The technology is all there, no body has put it together in a package and given it a name yet. If I were in charge, I would merely put it all together and give it a name.
Thank you,
Janet Johnson
Environmental scarcities, such as oil (a debatable point, but not the topic of this post, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4542853/, March 16, 2008, & http://www.govspot.com/issues/anwr.htm , May 2008), have certainly had a large impact on our dependency on the Middle East. Most of our (outside) security problems originate from this area. Were we able to depend solely on U.S. drilled oil, we would be able to stop associations with countries in the Middle East.
Were I in charge, I would strongly encourage with money and attitude a science revolution akin to one when electricity was first invented. I would encourage the smaller automobile, the more efficient appliance, the 'offgrid' families would receive the highest tax breaks. I would work to get small towns to build their own 'wind' farms and 'solar power' collection sites, and to sell this power to the consumers. I would reward electric and hybrid cars usership annually. And most of all, I would release all noncompetition agreements between power companies.
(I want to strongly say that this next paragraph should not indicate that I think a nontrade situation is desirable overall. I do, however, think think that our economic dependence on foreign oil will prohibit us from evaluating our problems with the Middle East objectively.)
I do not think that developing U.S. drilling sites is the answer. I'm in the market for a new car. I want one that seats at least seven (the number of children plus adults that are in my immediate family) and that gets at least 30 MPH in town and 40 on the highway. I know it is possible because with our Hybrid Toyota, we get between 45 and 55 MPH out of every tank, and we easily seat five in that vehicle. That car does not yet exist, but it should all the technology is there. I view the U.S. dependence on foreign oil much like this situation. The technology is all there, no body has put it together in a package and given it a name yet. If I were in charge, I would merely put it all together and give it a name.
Thank you,
Janet Johnson
Thursday, May 22, 2008
The Pollution in India and China
This post is in response to an assignment in my class. The assignment was:
Debate the following proposition: “The countries of India and China have a “right” to pollute the environment until they catch up with more industrialized countries.” Construct a one-two paragraph posting in which you explore the supposition that follows, supporting your answer with references.
My post:
India’s pollution problem is comparable to the pollution problem in the West in the 1960s. The factors that prompted the cleanup over the last 50 years are: 1. Public outrage 2. Strong laws 3. Strict monitoring and enforcement.
As of yet, India has not been self motivated to clean itself up. If we suppose that India has NO right to pollute the globe as the West did, if we suppose that we have the obligation to force it to clean it’s own pollution., we must also suppose that we had a means of monitoring and enforcing rules. As we respect the sovereignty of each country, we have no methods to force compliance.
If we assume that India and China have the right to pollute, then we must trust that the same influences that changed the direction here in the West will assert themselves in the East. The brunt of the destruction will fall upon the poor. Cancer rates will rise, drinking water will be polluted, bodies of water will become barren of life. After quality of life has declined to pre industrial times, people will force the government to monitor and enforce laws.
References:
Agarwal, A, (January 2000), When will India be able to control pollution?, The Hindu, found on http://www.cseindia.org/hindu.htm on May 22, 2008
Brahic, C, (November 2007), Pollution is dimming India’s sunshine, New Scientist Environment, Found on May 22, 2008 on the NewScientist.com news service, http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12919
Leslie, J, (December 2007), The last empire: China’s pollution problem goes global, found on May 22, 2008 on Mother Jones at http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2008/01/the-last-empire.html
Debate the following proposition: “The countries of India and China have a “right” to pollute the environment until they catch up with more industrialized countries.” Construct a one-two paragraph posting in which you explore the supposition that follows, supporting your answer with references.
My post:
India’s pollution problem is comparable to the pollution problem in the West in the 1960s. The factors that prompted the cleanup over the last 50 years are: 1. Public outrage 2. Strong laws 3. Strict monitoring and enforcement.
As of yet, India has not been self motivated to clean itself up. If we suppose that India has NO right to pollute the globe as the West did, if we suppose that we have the obligation to force it to clean it’s own pollution., we must also suppose that we had a means of monitoring and enforcing rules. As we respect the sovereignty of each country, we have no methods to force compliance.
If we assume that India and China have the right to pollute, then we must trust that the same influences that changed the direction here in the West will assert themselves in the East. The brunt of the destruction will fall upon the poor. Cancer rates will rise, drinking water will be polluted, bodies of water will become barren of life. After quality of life has declined to pre industrial times, people will force the government to monitor and enforce laws.
References:
Agarwal, A, (January 2000), When will India be able to control pollution?, The Hindu, found on http://www.cseindia.org/hindu.htm on May 22, 2008
Brahic, C, (November 2007), Pollution is dimming India’s sunshine, New Scientist Environment, Found on May 22, 2008 on the NewScientist.com news service, http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn12919
Leslie, J, (December 2007), The last empire: China’s pollution problem goes global, found on May 22, 2008 on Mother Jones at http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2008/01/the-last-empire.html
Thursday, May 15, 2008
GNP and living on ten cents a day
This post is in response to an assignment by my professor.
What are the components of Gross National Product (GNP)? How does it understate aggregate production in Third World countries where substantial economic production may be consumed directly and thus not reach markets where it can be measured? Finally, is per capita income (PCI) a good measure of the level of living people enjoy or are the data skewed, given substantial differences in the distribution of income especially in Third World countries? Construct a one-two paragraph posting in which you respond thoroughly, supporting your answer with references.
Gross National Product and living on 10 cents per day.
The GNP is comprised of the value of all the goods and services produced in a given year. Valentino Piana describes three components of the GNP, demand, income and production.. (Piana, 2001) No matter the sellable products in a country, there is a certain minimum level of demand. There is a calorie minimum to ensure continuity of a country. Gardens and bartering are two things that are not calculated in the GNP of third world countries.
When Per Capita Income of Turkey is $6,700 (http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu/indicator_detail.cfm?IndicatorID=140&Country=TR) it seems that people would be dying from malnutrition. Standard of living is dependent on a few things that aren’t in the formula.. Purchasing power is much higher in smaller countries. In 2005 only 1/3 of the average family’s income was spent on food and clothing. The rest of the need for food and clothing is taken care of in immeasurable things, trade and home production (gardens and sewing).
PCI is a good measure of success families in developed countries. In comparing two developed countries, GNP is a good indicator. But, in third world countries, and even in some pockets within a developed country, these measures would only show no real comparison.
Thank you,
Janet Johnson
Piana, Valentino, (2001), Gross Domestic Product, from the Economics Web Institute at http://www.economics/sebinstitute.org/glossary/
What are the components of Gross National Product (GNP)? How does it understate aggregate production in Third World countries where substantial economic production may be consumed directly and thus not reach markets where it can be measured? Finally, is per capita income (PCI) a good measure of the level of living people enjoy or are the data skewed, given substantial differences in the distribution of income especially in Third World countries? Construct a one-two paragraph posting in which you respond thoroughly, supporting your answer with references.
Gross National Product and living on 10 cents per day.
The GNP is comprised of the value of all the goods and services produced in a given year. Valentino Piana describes three components of the GNP, demand, income and production.. (Piana, 2001) No matter the sellable products in a country, there is a certain minimum level of demand. There is a calorie minimum to ensure continuity of a country. Gardens and bartering are two things that are not calculated in the GNP of third world countries.
When Per Capita Income of Turkey is $6,700 (http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu/indicator_detail.cfm?IndicatorID=140&Country=TR) it seems that people would be dying from malnutrition. Standard of living is dependent on a few things that aren’t in the formula.. Purchasing power is much higher in smaller countries. In 2005 only 1/3 of the average family’s income was spent on food and clothing. The rest of the need for food and clothing is taken care of in immeasurable things, trade and home production (gardens and sewing).
PCI is a good measure of success families in developed countries. In comparing two developed countries, GNP is a good indicator. But, in third world countries, and even in some pockets within a developed country, these measures would only show no real comparison.
Thank you,
Janet Johnson
Piana, Valentino, (2001), Gross Domestic Product, from the Economics Web Institute at http://www.economics/sebinstitute.org/glossary/
Global Civil Society
This post is in response to an assignment by my professor.
Describe and assess how international law has addressed matters of trade, human rights, and the environment. How have these efforts contributed to developing or retarding the construction of global civil society? Why? Construct a one-two paragraph posting in which you respond thoroughly, supporting your answer with references.
Global Civil Society
Our international society has become one defined by the agreements and treaties that each country enters. Economically, the World Trade Organization (WTO), formerly General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), U.S. and Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), and others are the treaties and the organizations based on the treaties we have signed. These regulate the tariffs, practices, and regulations that we share with our international trading partners. They have been evolving and developing since the largest threat to free trade was pirates.
In the areas of Human Rights, agreements are relatively new, and this type of diplomacy is in its infancy. Before the Holocaust in Germany, countries tended to respect sovereignty and custom and most had policies of non-interference. Since that time, we have been exposed to governments which participate in slavery, starvation, genocide, and other human rights atrocities. We have graduated to a place where we will interfere when the situation reaches a point of offending our now shared norms and when doing something is possible given the set of circumstances. The United Nations is our main peacekeeping (rules and agreement based) organization, they are the world's watchdog on human rights' issues. (The U.N. Web page, http:/un.org)
Internationally, our agreements with other countries in order to protect the environment are few. The ones that are signed, like the Kyoto Protocols, are virtually unenforceable. (World Public Opinion.org, http://www.americans-world.org/digest/global_issues/globalization/envAgreemnts.cfm) While public opinion is strong on wanting the United States to be a leader in environmental issues, allowing policing of our businesses by foreign countries has little support.
A global civil society is well defined in a paper supporting such a situation written in 2002 by David Korten, Nicanor Perlas, and Vandana Shiva as, "Humanity has entered into the final stage of an epic struggle between the forces of imperial rule (empire) - presently represented by the institutions of elite globalization - and the forces of democratic rule (community) - presently represented by the Global Civil Society. It does seem plausible, yet unlikely that we will ever form the type of empire or the type of community envisioned by the writers of this document (and book, published later). Regardless of how many treaties we enter into, without the bite of enforceable law, they remain about as strong as a gentleman's handshake.
Thank you,
Janet Johnson
Describe and assess how international law has addressed matters of trade, human rights, and the environment. How have these efforts contributed to developing or retarding the construction of global civil society? Why? Construct a one-two paragraph posting in which you respond thoroughly, supporting your answer with references.
Global Civil Society
Our international society has become one defined by the agreements and treaties that each country enters. Economically, the World Trade Organization (WTO), formerly General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), U.S. and Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), and others are the treaties and the organizations based on the treaties we have signed. These regulate the tariffs, practices, and regulations that we share with our international trading partners. They have been evolving and developing since the largest threat to free trade was pirates.
In the areas of Human Rights, agreements are relatively new, and this type of diplomacy is in its infancy. Before the Holocaust in Germany, countries tended to respect sovereignty and custom and most had policies of non-interference. Since that time, we have been exposed to governments which participate in slavery, starvation, genocide, and other human rights atrocities. We have graduated to a place where we will interfere when the situation reaches a point of offending our now shared norms and when doing something is possible given the set of circumstances. The United Nations is our main peacekeeping (rules and agreement based) organization, they are the world's watchdog on human rights' issues. (The U.N. Web page, http:/un.org)
Internationally, our agreements with other countries in order to protect the environment are few. The ones that are signed, like the Kyoto Protocols, are virtually unenforceable. (World Public Opinion.org, http://www.americans-world.org/digest/global_issues/globalization/envAgreemnts.cfm) While public opinion is strong on wanting the United States to be a leader in environmental issues, allowing policing of our businesses by foreign countries has little support.
A global civil society is well defined in a paper supporting such a situation written in 2002 by David Korten, Nicanor Perlas, and Vandana Shiva as, "Humanity has entered into the final stage of an epic struggle between the forces of imperial rule (empire) - presently represented by the institutions of elite globalization - and the forces of democratic rule (community) - presently represented by the Global Civil Society. It does seem plausible, yet unlikely that we will ever form the type of empire or the type of community envisioned by the writers of this document (and book, published later). Regardless of how many treaties we enter into, without the bite of enforceable law, they remain about as strong as a gentleman's handshake.
Thank you,
Janet Johnson
Check out my ebay listings...
This is for a watch that Dagny got as a gift.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&sspagename=STRK%3AMESELX%3AIT&viewitem=&item=260239553967
This is for a toy that we are done with.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&sspagename=STRK%3AMESELX%3AIT&viewitem=&item=260239571153
And this is for a batch of birds sitting on houses that I bought to give someone as a gift, but they didn't like them. Drat!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&sspagename=STRK%3AMESELX%3AIT&viewitem=&item=260240073088
Just some other stuff I am working on.
Janet
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&sspagename=STRK%3AMESELX%3AIT&viewitem=&item=260239553967
This is for a toy that we are done with.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&sspagename=STRK%3AMESELX%3AIT&viewitem=&item=260239571153
And this is for a batch of birds sitting on houses that I bought to give someone as a gift, but they didn't like them. Drat!
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&sspagename=STRK%3AMESELX%3AIT&viewitem=&item=260240073088
Just some other stuff I am working on.
Janet
Which Criteria Should the President Use to Decide on Armed Intervention?
Which Criteria Should the President Use to Decide on Armed Intervention?
Janet L. Johnson
LIB: 320
Global Socioeconomic Perspectives
Errol G. Palmer, Ph.D.
May 12, 2008
Abstract
After economic and military capabilities are assessed, our president must look at the more abstract and fickle criteria of domestic political support. There are at least five criteria which tend to influence the availability of domestic political support and support by the American public. These are separately classified as sovereignty, national interest, human rights, expected net effect on the human condition, and the degree of multilateralism. (Viotti & Kauppi, 2009) I will look at these criteria and how they conflict with each other. I will look at what criteria I think are most important if I had to make these decisions.
Which Criteria Should the President Use to Decide on Armed Intervention?
When all diplomacy has been exhausted, when the threat is real, when American lives are in real danger, armed intervention might occur. Our position as a military force, armed to the teeth, generally prevents other states from taking action which might mean war with the United States of America or with her allies. We are a rich country with financial resources, and a generally stable economy. Our military has been built up to over 600,000 troops on active duty (Casey, 2008)and has the capacity to enlarge itself using the military draft. Domestic political support and support of the American public are the real determining factors as to whether a president should consider armed intervention. The separately classified criteria are sovereignty, national interest, human rights, expected net effects on the human condition, and the degree of multilateralism. Looking at them together as separate influences and as conflicting issues, a president must either move with the support of the country or risk not getting the moral, financial, and actual support for his war.
Sovereignty has in times past been a shield used to protect a state from possible armed conflict. Under international law and normal customs, states are prohibited from intervening in domestic affairs unless the legitimate government requests aid. The only exception would be if self defense to an aggressive act by that state. The population of the United States holds its sovereignty as infinite and unquestionable. This attitude might imply a stronger respect for foreign sovereignty than is even guaranteed by the United Nations.
National interest is another criteria. It is often stated that the wars we engage in are because of “oil” rather than some other stated reason. These issues of National Interest are not as simple as this. It is difficult to clearly define when and what might be declared of national interest, but in each particular case there is this ambiguous factor.
Human Rights are largely becoming the stated underlying reason for military use. When our country was formed it was to protect our inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. After 220 years of these guaranteed rights, the population of the United States has moved toward recognizing that all humans have these rights. The United Nations has openly declared, in September 1999 that states bent on criminal behavior should " know that frontiers are not an absolute defense, that massive and systematic violations of human rights, wherever they may take place, should not be allowed to stand." (Haass, 2003)
Expected Net Effect on the Human Condition must be considered. Even if the numbers can’t be known, that there will be a devastating effect on human life, private property, and long term effects on the surviving solders and civilians after an armed conflict is well established. This must be respected and taken into account when deciding on whether or not to use armed intervention.
The last consideration which would influence popular opinion and political support is multilateralism. Getting support from our allies is of greater importance than ever. While our military strength may be so mighty that we would be unchallenged if we moved without the support of the world, we are vulnerable in the economic sense. The “sticks” which could be applied by our trading partners might upend our economy.
Discussion
Assuming that the financial and military arguments are sound that all diplomacy has been exhausted, and that the threat is real, the criteria we are debating must be considered, but how they are viewed by the American public can be manipulated. While Americans respect the sovereignty of a foreign government, placing doubt as to the legitimacy is a commonly used practice. Human rights violations can be manufactured, or old already addressed instances can be dragged out as if new. The expected net effect can be mineralized and whatever issue is in our national interest can be built up. What cannot be manufactured is our degree of multilateralism.
How much support other countries are offering would be the criteria that I would use to decide. The American values that we bring to every discussion are simply basic human values. They are shared by most of our allies. If we are fully prepared to invade a foreign state, the ‘rightness’ of it should be obvious to any who share our value and have access to our information.
This multilateralism is also a good gage as to how much manipulation of facts has occurred in the issues mentioned above. The degree of abuses of human rights might be played about on our news channels. We can generally assume that the news organizations have done their function as the invisible fourth branch of government, checking and balancing the power of the sitting president. In this internet age, we have access to the other press of the world.
Multilateralism is also important when looking at the cost of the war in “human condition”. If our allies are fighting alongside us, the financial cost will be shared. The experience of their militaries are available to the troops. The new technologies can be shared. Channels open for movement of supplies and of troops. Overall, the war will be shortened and the burden shared.
Conclusion
In deciding on whether or not to use armed intervention, the criteria described above are all useful. The one that I would use to make final decisions are the criteria of Multilateralism or support from the world at large. If we enjoy the support of our allies, we can form clear goals and exit in a way that is agreed upon by all players.
References
Haass, R., (February 7, 2003), Armed intervention: When nations forfeit their sovereign privileges, International Herald Tribune online, retrieved at http://www.iht.com/articles/2003/02/07/edhaass.php
On May 12, 2008
Podur, J, (2006), Kofi Annan’s Haiti, New Left Review 37, January - February 2006, retrieved on May 12, 2008 http://www.newleftreview.org/?view=2604
Viotti, P.R. & Kauppi, M.V. (2009), International relations and world politics, fourth edition, Pearson prentice hall, New Jersey
Wheeler, N. (2001), Melbourne Journal of International Law, 2001, retrieved at www.mjil.law.unimelb.edu.au/issues/archive/2001(2)/10Wheeler.pdf
Janet L. Johnson
LIB: 320
Global Socioeconomic Perspectives
Errol G. Palmer, Ph.D.
May 12, 2008
Abstract
After economic and military capabilities are assessed, our president must look at the more abstract and fickle criteria of domestic political support. There are at least five criteria which tend to influence the availability of domestic political support and support by the American public. These are separately classified as sovereignty, national interest, human rights, expected net effect on the human condition, and the degree of multilateralism. (Viotti & Kauppi, 2009) I will look at these criteria and how they conflict with each other. I will look at what criteria I think are most important if I had to make these decisions.
Which Criteria Should the President Use to Decide on Armed Intervention?
When all diplomacy has been exhausted, when the threat is real, when American lives are in real danger, armed intervention might occur. Our position as a military force, armed to the teeth, generally prevents other states from taking action which might mean war with the United States of America or with her allies. We are a rich country with financial resources, and a generally stable economy. Our military has been built up to over 600,000 troops on active duty (Casey, 2008)and has the capacity to enlarge itself using the military draft. Domestic political support and support of the American public are the real determining factors as to whether a president should consider armed intervention. The separately classified criteria are sovereignty, national interest, human rights, expected net effects on the human condition, and the degree of multilateralism. Looking at them together as separate influences and as conflicting issues, a president must either move with the support of the country or risk not getting the moral, financial, and actual support for his war.
Sovereignty has in times past been a shield used to protect a state from possible armed conflict. Under international law and normal customs, states are prohibited from intervening in domestic affairs unless the legitimate government requests aid. The only exception would be if self defense to an aggressive act by that state. The population of the United States holds its sovereignty as infinite and unquestionable. This attitude might imply a stronger respect for foreign sovereignty than is even guaranteed by the United Nations.
National interest is another criteria. It is often stated that the wars we engage in are because of “oil” rather than some other stated reason. These issues of National Interest are not as simple as this. It is difficult to clearly define when and what might be declared of national interest, but in each particular case there is this ambiguous factor.
Human Rights are largely becoming the stated underlying reason for military use. When our country was formed it was to protect our inalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. After 220 years of these guaranteed rights, the population of the United States has moved toward recognizing that all humans have these rights. The United Nations has openly declared, in September 1999 that states bent on criminal behavior should " know that frontiers are not an absolute defense, that massive and systematic violations of human rights, wherever they may take place, should not be allowed to stand." (Haass, 2003)
Expected Net Effect on the Human Condition must be considered. Even if the numbers can’t be known, that there will be a devastating effect on human life, private property, and long term effects on the surviving solders and civilians after an armed conflict is well established. This must be respected and taken into account when deciding on whether or not to use armed intervention.
The last consideration which would influence popular opinion and political support is multilateralism. Getting support from our allies is of greater importance than ever. While our military strength may be so mighty that we would be unchallenged if we moved without the support of the world, we are vulnerable in the economic sense. The “sticks” which could be applied by our trading partners might upend our economy.
Discussion
Assuming that the financial and military arguments are sound that all diplomacy has been exhausted, and that the threat is real, the criteria we are debating must be considered, but how they are viewed by the American public can be manipulated. While Americans respect the sovereignty of a foreign government, placing doubt as to the legitimacy is a commonly used practice. Human rights violations can be manufactured, or old already addressed instances can be dragged out as if new. The expected net effect can be mineralized and whatever issue is in our national interest can be built up. What cannot be manufactured is our degree of multilateralism.
How much support other countries are offering would be the criteria that I would use to decide. The American values that we bring to every discussion are simply basic human values. They are shared by most of our allies. If we are fully prepared to invade a foreign state, the ‘rightness’ of it should be obvious to any who share our value and have access to our information.
This multilateralism is also a good gage as to how much manipulation of facts has occurred in the issues mentioned above. The degree of abuses of human rights might be played about on our news channels. We can generally assume that the news organizations have done their function as the invisible fourth branch of government, checking and balancing the power of the sitting president. In this internet age, we have access to the other press of the world.
Multilateralism is also important when looking at the cost of the war in “human condition”. If our allies are fighting alongside us, the financial cost will be shared. The experience of their militaries are available to the troops. The new technologies can be shared. Channels open for movement of supplies and of troops. Overall, the war will be shortened and the burden shared.
Conclusion
In deciding on whether or not to use armed intervention, the criteria described above are all useful. The one that I would use to make final decisions are the criteria of Multilateralism or support from the world at large. If we enjoy the support of our allies, we can form clear goals and exit in a way that is agreed upon by all players.
References
Haass, R., (February 7, 2003), Armed intervention: When nations forfeit their sovereign privileges, International Herald Tribune online, retrieved at http://www.iht.com/articles/2003/02/07/edhaass.php
On May 12, 2008
Podur, J, (2006), Kofi Annan’s Haiti, New Left Review 37, January - February 2006, retrieved on May 12, 2008 http://www.newleftreview.org/?view=2604
Viotti, P.R. & Kauppi, M.V. (2009), International relations and world politics, fourth edition, Pearson prentice hall, New Jersey
Wheeler, N. (2001), Melbourne Journal of International Law, 2001, retrieved at www.mjil.law.unimelb.edu.au/issues/archive/2001(2)/10Wheeler.pdf
A National Model Needed for No Child Left Behind
A National Model for States to Meet Teacher Requirements Set Out by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
Janet Johnson
History 324
Judith Richardson
April 28, 2008
A National Model for States to Meet Teacher Requirements Set Out by No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
Janet Johnson
History 324
Judith Richardson
April 28, 2008
A National Model for States to Meet Teacher Requirements Set Out by No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
Introduction
President George W. Bush first ran for President of the United States in 2000 as an education candidate. He used the improved Texas education system as a model to show the public what could be accomplished with oversight. In January 2002, he signed the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 into law with overwhelming support. The Act tried to increase accountability and flexibility and increase federal support for education. (US Department of Education, 2004)
One of the increasingly debated portions of this legislation is the Teacher Quality Objectives. Under No Child Left Behind, all teachers must be highly qualified by the end of the 2005-06 school year. The wording “highly qualified” has become accepted as meaning: 1) hold a bachelor's degree, (2) hold a certification or licensure to teach in the state of his or her employment, and (3) have proven knowledge of the subjects he or she teaches. In 2005 the president requested that teachers receive financial support through training, recruitment, and loan forgiveness. He requested 5.1 billion in 2005 and 4.4 billion in 2004.
Issue to be Investigated
Individual states have historically had the responsibility to educate and license teachers. This new legislation provides oversight, but the responsibility still is a state and local function. (Pullman & Van Patten, 2007) A national model is necessary in order to meet the teacher quality objectives for the No Child Left Behind Act.
I will outline what the No Child Left Behind Act is requiring of states in regards to teacher quality. I will look at what the majority of states currently have in place now. I will outline what is necessary for a national model and look at where we are in reaching those goals set out in No Child Left Behind Act.
Literature Review
The issue that I am looking at is teacher quality. When looking for articles and information on this subject, I have discovered that there are many articles that verify the position that a skilled teacher is essential for student performance to excel. The problem that I had was that I discovered few articles that gave objective means of defining “skilled”. The wording in NCLB is not vague but it still leaves question.
I found my topic for this paper in the article, State Policies Hinder Teacher Quality, which was anonymously written for American Teacher in September 2007. It looks at the “patchwork of state policies designed to promote teacher quality”. This article is where I discovered the “2007 State Teacher Policy Yearbook”, which I found on the National Council on Teacher Quality website.
The best source for data and concrete numbers that I was able to find was the website for the National Council on Teacher Quality. In the section “About Us” (http://www.nctq.org/p/about/index.jsp) they did a good job of summing up the problems that I had with my research. “We recognize the absence of much of the evidence necessary to make a compelling case for change and seek to fill that void with a research agenda that has direct and practical implications for policy. … increasing public awareness about three sets of institutions that have the greatest impact on teacher quality: states, teacher preparation programs, and teacher unions.”
While looking for information about the scope of the problem. I found on ProQuest, an article by Suzanne Perez Tobias, from April 18, 2008, discussing a school district which completely restructured it’s middle schools’ teachers. They failed to meet the test score targets for six years. The article, Restructuring Shuffles half of schools’ teachers, appeared in The Tribune Business News, Washington.
The U.S. Department of Education website was also a great wealth of information with concrete numbers defining both portions of the problem and ways of identifying progress. It uses the NCLB as a backdrop on all of its research and reports. On their “Stronger Accountability” page, there is a searchable database that gives numbers that correlate to each state. I was able to compare the states of New Hampshire and Louisiana within seconds. 98 % of New Hampshire‘s elementary school students that live in high poverty areas have highly qualified teachers, compared to the 85.3% of high poverty students in Louisiana. (http://www.ed.gov/nclb/accountability/results/progress/index.html)
John Wright, President of the Arizona Education Association testified before the Senate Subcommittee on Labor, Health & Human Services, Education and Related Agencies on April 16, 2008, only 12 days before this report was due. I was able to get he content of his speech from the National Education Association. He gave good working definitions for Quality Teacher, he also discusses teaching as a profession, and details a career path whereas quality teachers will emerge. He quoted a document, What Matters Most: Teaching and America’s Future.
What Matters Most: Teaching and America’s Future, a 162 page document published by the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future in 1996, which was rich with information about teacher quality, how to define it, how to find it in all teachers, and how important this is. Because the information is over 10 years old, it helps us define what the problems are and how to address them. It also gives some data which can be compared to the current data. (in 1990 about 70 % of teachers were certified, but only about 50% had a bachelor’s degree in the subject that they taught. In math the numbers were much lower at around 35%) I found this document downloadable in PDF form at www.nctaf.org/documents/WhatMattersMost. The article, Interfacing Culture Specific Pedagogy with Counseling: A Proposed Diversity Training Model for Preparing Preservice Teachers for Diverse Learners, published in Multicultural Education in the Spring of 2007 issue, was a through article about how new teachers can be trained to teach in schools that are racially and culturally diverse. This problem arises when the goal of “highly qualified” teachers arises. Working in schools with students from low socio-class and minority backgrounds causes more turnover of teachers and addressing this issue before they begin working might help stem the flow of teachers to wealthier school districts.
I found the article More with Less: Urban Teacher Experiences in a New Small School published in Negro Educational Review in Fall 2007 to be useful in defining the quality of schools and of teachers. This article is about a public school within a larger school. The attempt is to increase graduation rates, daily attendance, and daily student experience with a smaller school and effective teachers. It defines how, with a large school district, revenue is not necessarily dependant on quality of outcome. This article explores how competition can act as a mechanism of recuperation, even if that competition comes from within the school itself.
In Jerry Odland’s article, NCLB-Year for Change, explores the reasons behind the separate issues in NCLB legislation. This article, published in Olney in the Fall of 2007 was useful in verifying the underlying principles and objectives of the NCLB Act.
Findings
In high poverty schools nationwide, in 2006-2007 school year, 90.42 % of elementary and secondary students have “highly qualified” teachers. (Department of education website, Stronger Accountability page) State policies determine the career path of teachers, who gets a license, who gets to work where. Being called into question is the existence the distinct systems overall. There are separate plans being instituted by each state from the Department of Education website on the “Highly Qualified Teachers Revised State Plans” page.
Discussion
There was bipartisan support for the No Child Left Behind Act from its’ inception. With charter schools, private schools, alternative districts, and home schooling, there are some options to parents who want their child to get the best education possible. Now, with testing requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act, the performance numbers are available to assist parents in making the best possible choice for their child.
Public school will not be a perfect fit for all students, with respect to religious practices and medical conditions, but it must be a good choice for all of the children who need it. The NCLB Act can help to achieve this by assuring that teachers are highly qualified, well trained and have degrees in their subjects. According to the wording in NCLB, a teacher is highly qualified with full certification, a bachelor’s degree and demonstrated competence in subject knowledge and teaching.
The NEA goes further to suggest that a quality teacher will know their subject matter, know how to teach that subject matter, and understand how students learn and what it takes to reach them (emphasis mine). (Wright, 2008) Teacher preparedness to deal with any type of classroom, as would be self reported by new teachers entering a classroom has improved over the last ten years (Marbley, 2007).
New teachers must be highly educated on how information is learned, (Pullman, 2007) not just what information is tested. To make matters more complicated, new teachers are often white and come from a non-diverse background. New teachers often feel particularly unprepared to teach children of diverse backgrounds and socio-economic backgrounds.
Conclusion
This paper covers the requirements set out for testing of teachers in the No Child Left Behind Act, it looks at the different state models for improvement, and it tries to show that a model for training teachers and allowing them to enter the classroom as highly qualified has yet to be discovered. No state has reached the goals set out by NCLB to date. In fact, some districts are having to fire all their teachers and rehire only those who meet the standards set by NCLB, and they are striving to make the job attractive enough to ensure that there are enough teachers to fill the vacancies that exist.
Before the 2001 Act was passed, only about 70% were certified and between 35% and 50% had degrees in the subjects that they taught. (What matters most, teaching America’s future, 1996). Things have improved since the inception of the act, but only two states, Tennessee and South Carolina have even come close to reaching the goals
Performance (National Council on Teacher Quality Yearbook, 2007). In the area of special education, only small parts of the goals have been achieved.
With no state meeting all the parts of the highly qualified teacher wording from the No Child Left Behind Act, there are currently no states that would serve as a national model. We, as a country, are getting closer to meeting the lofty goals.
References
Anonymous, (2007), State policies hinder teacher quality, American teacher. Washington: September 2007, vol. 92, iss. 1, pg 5, 1 pg, Retrieved April 14 from ProQuest Direct database
Abstract (Summary)
The study finds that no state comes close to being a national model for change in the six areas; meeting NCLB teacher quality objectives, teacher licensure, teacher evaluation and compensation, state approval of teacher preparation programs, alternate routes to certification and preparation of special education teachers. Forty-one states require teacher preparation programs to administer a basic skills test, but 24 of those states delay testing until the candidates complete the preparation program.
Garth-McCullough, Ruanda, (2007), Negro educational review. Greensboro: Gall 2007, vol. 58, iss. ¾; pg. 253, 20 pgs, Retrieved April 14 from ProQuest Direct database
Abstract (summary)
While reform options such as creating new schools seem tempting, they challenge the ills of public schools with new school creation under the same system. Of interest are the lessons that can be gleaned from teachers at a small school that serves a Black American population. A theory on declining institutions was used to explore teachers’ experiences and the feasibility of exit, voice, and loyalty as mechanisms of recuperation. Interview data concerning the benefits and challenges of working at a small school in a larger system illuminate the realities of changing a system from within. With an investigation of the lessons learned, the educational community was able to explore the viability of a Small School option as an effective way to provide an equitable, free education for non-White students in large urban school districts.
Kupermintz, H. (Fall 2003). Teacher effects and teacher effectiveness: A validity investigation of the Tennessee value added assessment system, Education evaluation and policy analysis, no. 3, pp 287-298, article retrieved on April 27, 2008 from National Education Association Website http://www.nea.org/teacherquality/validity.html
Abstract
Student test score gains have recently been proposed as a measure of educational “value-added” contribution by teachers and schools to student learning. Recent educational reform efforts such as NCLB seek to employ standardized test score gains as a key policy instrument for holding educators and school systems accountable. Currently the most influential value-added model is the Tennessee Value Added Assessment System, which analyzes student test score data and estimates the effects of individual teachers on score gains. These effects are used to construct teacher value-added measures of teaching effectiveness.
Marbley, A.F., Bonner II, F.A., McKisick, S., Henfield, M.S, Watts, L.M., (2007), Interfacing culture specific pedagogy with counseling: a proposed diversity training model for preparing preservice teachers for diverse learners, Multicultural education. San Francisco: Spring 2007, vol. 14, iss. 3, pg. 8, 9 pgs, Retrieved April 20 from ProQuest Direct database
National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America’s future. New York: Teachers College Press; Little, J. W. (1990)
Summary
A plan that outlines a lofty goal of improving the education system in America. It is a large document, 162 pages, and it lists the drawbacks and the roadblocks that might happen as the system improves for all of the states.
Odland, J., (2007), NCLB- year for change, Childhood Education. Olney: Fall 2007, Vol 84, Iss 1, pg 30B, 2 pgs, Retrieved April 14, 2008 from the ProQuest Direct database
Abstract (Summary)
Drafted in 2001 and signed into law in January 2002, NCLB provided the framework for President George W. Bush's bipartisan education reform plan intended to ensure that every child in U.S. public schools has equal access to high-quality education and, in the process, raise the achievement level of elementary and secondary school students.
This article looks at the implementation of mandates in NCLB in practical terms, what it is designed for, how does it handle accountability, how it rates students, teachers, schools, and districts?
Pullman, J.D., and Van Patten, J.J. (2007), History of Education in America, New Jersey, Pearson Education
Tobias, S.P., (2008), Restructuring shuffles half of schools’ teachers, McClatchy - Tribune business news. Washington: April 18, 2008, Retrieved April 27, 2008 from the ProQuest Direct database
Abstract
Representatives with America’s Choice, a for-profit school turnaround company, were in Wichita this week to visit seven schools they will help redesign. Last month, employees at Marshall and Mead middle schools had to reapply to district administrators for their jobs as a part of a start from scratch restructuring required under the federal No Child Left Behind Act.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of the Secretary, Office of Public Affairs, A Guide to Education and No Child Left Behind, Washington, D.C., 2004.
http://www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/guide/guide_pg12.html#history
Summary
This document gives a fourteen page summary of what was expected in the NCLB legislation and updates on its successes and failures.
U. S. Department of Education, No Child Left Behind Overview, Proven methods, teacher quality frequently asked questions, http://www.ed.gov/nclb/methods/teachers/teachers-faq.html, Retrieved on April 25, 2008
Summary
This document is designed to answer the questions: 1. How does this law improve teacher quality? 2. How are states and districts held accountable for improving teacher quality? 3. What about paraprofessionals or teachers’ aids? Does NCLB call for increased academic requirements for them? 4. Why is teacher quality such an important issue?
Walsh, Kate, National Council on teacher quality website, (2007) http://www.nctq.org/stpy/about.jsp
Summary
The State Teacher Policy Yearbook examines what is arguably the single most powerful authority over the teaching profession: states. States' influence over the profession-whether through regulation approved by state boards of education or profession standards boards or laws passed by state legislatures-is far reaching. These policies have an impact on who decides to enter teaching and who stays and everything in between. The Yearbook provides an unprecedented analysis of each state's full range of teacher policies, measured against a realistic blueprint for reform.
Wright, John (April 16, 2008), The federal role: quality teachers in every classroom Statement submitted before the Senate Subcommittee on labor, health& human services, education and related agencies, retrieved from the NEA website on April 27, 2008, http://www.nea.org/lac/funding/041608testi.html
Summary
Improving the quality of teaching in America's schools continues to be a central focus of school improvement and educational reform efforts. This is because teacher quality matters. Teachers do not enter the classroom as accomplished professionals — they increase their knowledge and skills with increased experience, and, as a result, effect greater student learning. Simply put, good teachers produce good students.1 In fact, research continues to show that having a good teacher is a key to students' success. The National Education Association understands and values this and is a leading voice that supports and promotes quality teaching. Throughout its long history, the NEA has advanced the profession of teaching and works toward a goal of a qualified teacher in every classroom.
In my statement I first review NEA's policies on teacher quality, next highlight some of our initiatives to improve teacher quality, and finally focus on the federal role.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)