Who should Nelly Furtado give the money to?

I believe that with the one million dollars that Nelly Furtado received from performing for 45 minutes in Italy for Muammar el-Quaddafi should be given back to the Libyans. First of all, most likely Quaddafi stole that money from Libya which means he was stealing from the Libyans. That money he gave away was rightfully theirs and they should have a right to have that money and use it for purposes that help support themselves or use it to benefit all the Libyans.

For the past 42 years the Libyans have suffered enough under their dictator, Muammar el-Quddafi. Despite their abundance of oil which is their main attraction, he had many children suffer from malnutrition and anaemia.  Also, in Benghazi the HIV infection broke out causing over 500 children to be effected because the sterilization equipment was not working properly.  Another reason is that salaries in Libya are governed by law number 15 that sets the average salary of Libyans at 200 dollars per month. To make things even worst it is normal to have this low wage pay. With this statement being said, the Libyans will not have enough money to support themselves. So, this why Nelly Furtado should give back the Libyans what was rightfully theirs. 

Summary: How is this a public school system?

Based on Chris Selley article he talks about the difference between wealthy and poor public schools. Public schools full of rich kids tend to raise more money than public schools full of poor kids. The Social Planning Toronto’s report states the massive fundraising imbalances among the cities public schools, talking about the differences of up $500 and even $1000 per student during the school year of 2008-09. Banning parent donations and having the government pay for all the funds will not do the schools any improvement, says Tasha Kheiriddin, who wrote a related article to Chris Selleys. They would rather go with Plan B - taking in all the donations from parents and distribute them evenly.

Among the TDSB schools ranked by the Fraser Institute based on standard test scores, the top 10 fundraisers brought $515 per student and got an average of 8.75 out of 10. The bottom 10 fundraisers brought $17 per student and had an average of 5.3. Or another way to look at this is that the top 10 TDSB schools in Fraser institute that ranked a 10 or 9.9 raised an average of $164.45 and the bottom 10 which had an average of 2.3 only raised an average of $58.64. But there is no connection between the fundraising and academic achievement because one of the top 10 schools that did well academically, was the ranked at the bottom 10 TDSB for fundraising.

This article tells that rich kids in a wealthy public school tend to do better if they have a lot of money than poor kids that tend to do worst with not a lot of money. In the article, it states that each student in the wealthier school raised about $500 per student as where the poorer school would raised $17. This relates to the wealthier doing better in school because the wealthier school standardized test scores have an average of 8.75 out 10 and the poor school has an average of 2.3 This comes to show that more money helps you get more out of an education. As in the less money you have, you do the best with what you got.

In the article where it says, “Officially, the provincial curriculum should be available to all students without a single extra dime being paid.” Honestly, this is true because not everyone can afford to pay all the expenses of school, which means students can’t participate in some activities as in the wealthier school can. Also in the article its says, “People have always discussed the importance of social inequalities, but nobody denies the importance of education,” which means that even though we’ve discussed the unfairness in the system, everyone thinks that the kids deserves a proper education no matter if you’re in a wealthy or poor school.

Would E-learning work in an elementary school?

Having e-learning in elementary school is that it’s not the ideal style to teach students at our age. First of all, there are some disadvantages of e-learning. If students had e-learning as a choice to use, they would obviously pick the one that gives you more time to think and more time to do; and it wouldn’t be mandatory to attend classes. As well, more technology in the class, the less the students retain information this is because sometimes looking at the computer screen for too long a can make your brain a little delusional and unfocused. I relate to that because I would be on the computer all day on weekends and when I’m on for too long, I start to misread words. In addition to that, e-learning can make you feel isolated and lose social interaction.

On the other hand, there are perks about having e-learning in school. One scenario is that if you are sick one day and you have an important lesson the day after, you can watch a live stream and you can learn from home. As well, it gives the students the opportunity to learn at a self-paced mode and they can access their classes if they are located near a computer with internet. Also, more students are organized when it comes to e-learning. It as well, reduces the travel cost and time to and from school. Another reason is that e-learning gives time to think about answers and lets you ask questions either on forums or discussion boards, and get answers from teachers or fellow classmates. In the end, having a teacher in the front of the class teaching  the work is the best solution to teach students at our age instead of using e-learning which is somewhat teaching yourself at home.