ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Wednesday, May 8, 1996 TAG: 9605080002
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-14 EDITION: METRO
TYPE: LETTERS
AS A Roanoke Valley special educator for the past 16 years, the last 10 in the public schools, and the mother of three Roanoke city graduates presently attending the University of Virginia, I'd like to add some comments to your April 28 article, ``High-tech glitz vs. the basics.''
Technology is not a frill. Computer literacy is one of today's basics. Rudimentary computer skills are necessary for high-school graduation and employment.
Magnet schools are not schools for gifted children. They're a creative way of encouraging voluntary desegregation, in both directions. I taught four years in a magnet program and, believe me, our student population covered the gamut of abilities.
Please, pleas, spell-check doesn't eliminate the need to spell nor does it eliminate the need to proofread. It just eases the practice of orthography. (Witness the uncorrected error at the beginning of the paragraph. And I spell-check everything.)
I teach elementary-level learning-disabled students. I have three computers in my classroom and estimate they're used at least 75 percent of the time. They are a wonderful adjunct to teaching, and I'd hate to think of having to return to precomputer days. I believe the mastery of keyboarding and word processing are skills that will enable my students to succeed in middle school.
Class size is the answer to almost everything. I'm so old that I can remember teaching a class of 44. I don't believe everything was perfect in the good ol' days. Reducing class size further is probably the best use of education dollars. I believe that elementary classes of between 12 and 15 maximum would significantly increase every child's chance of literacy. And put me and most special-education teachers out of a job.
Why did Mike Rhodes let his son get to the seventh grade without telling him himself about the ``late unpleasantness between the states''?
ROSEMARY LAUREY
ROANOKE
Oratory skills do not a leader make
WHEN ONE describes his or her dissatisfaction with Bob Dole, one often includes: "He's so boring." I consider Dole to be interesting and articulate. However, the issue is largely irrelevant.
I consider the important presidential traits to be wisdom, character and the vision to head in the right direction. And Dole defeats President Clinton in all three areas.
While oratory talent is useful in rallying support and enhancing emotions, it isn't an essential skill.
BRIAN LUEDKE
ROANOKE
It's Henry Street's time to move on
BRUCE Brenner's commentary (March 25, ``Don't let the past destroy the future'') was informative and thought-provoking. It warrants the attention of all those concerned about the revival of Henry Street.
Opponents of Henry Street's progress have made proposals and poignant statements that are ill-thought-out, and they have expressed opinions that are conceptually flawed.
Henry Street can never be - nor would I ever hope for it to be - as it once was. It's now time to move on to something that's comparable to the surrounding areas, that's fiscally sound, grand and will stand the test of time.
It would be a disgrace to abandon the proposal as presented by the Henry Street Committee unless something more acceptable to all the citizens (taxpayers) is presented.
HELEN J. HALL
ROANOKE
Missing the point of Genesis 1
I AM grateful for recent responses to your April 1 article (``Scopes Monkey Trial revisited'') that spoke against teaching creationism in public schools.
I oppose the teaching of such, not just for educational reasons, but for theological reasons. To teach what isn't science as science is, I believe, unfaithful to the message and the intent of Genesis 1. The writer of Genesis 1 didn't intend his writing to be read as a message about the origins of creation. Rather, he wished to witness to the God who created all things; the God to whom all creation witnesses. The writer's message is ``God-centered,'' not ``science-centered.'' And sadly, one can read Genesis I as science and miss the point of the text entirely.
To read as science that which is a message about God does dishonor to the Bible and to God. A question for those who advocate the teaching of creationism: Which creation story is to be taught? The story found in Genesis 1 or the entirely different one found in Genesis 2?
KEITH RITCHIE
Pastor, White Memorial
United Methodist Church
SHAWSVILLE
LENGTH: Medium: 93 linesby CNB