editorial #5-http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/18/opinion/18thu1.html

This article is called "Mr. Obama and No Child left Behind" by The New York Times. Its about how Obama wants to change the no child left behind education act. This includes monitering the failing schools and letting the better run ones room and flexibility to fix themselves. Obama wants his new reform to give credit to schools for improving student performance even if they fail to reach the progress targets. this new reform would also require a heavier evaluation on teachers and principles. However, this new provision is said to take up to a decade.

I think this new provision would be a good idea.there are so many teachers at schools with teaching capabilities that are questionable.there really shouldnt be any leeway for allowing people to teach because it effects the students, often in a permanent way.there should be higher standards set for who should be allowed to teach.even if they have a teaching degree, that shouldnt matter if they fail to perform and teach students effectively.with that being said, teachers have a huge effect on the No Child left Behind act because its their job to make sure theyre teaching effectively enough so no child gets left behind and if theyre not doing this, then its effecting alot more than their jobs.

editorial #4-http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/14/opinion/14sun1.html?ref=opinion

this editorial is called "national school standards, at last". its about how the national governors association wants the states to agree on a new set standard of learning for students in the US. their proposal indicates certain things the students will learn from year to year wwhich may lead to changes in curriculum, testing and teaching. it talks about how nationally, student performance is very low and the learning standards are different in each district. students in some countys arent learning the same things as students in other countys, even at the same grade level. students are performing badly in reading and math compared to other countries.

I think that this new proposal would be a good thing.its true that not all students are learning exactly the same things and because of this, it gives the ones that happen to be learning more then others in school in advantage in important tests such as the SAT.higher standards need to be set so that all students will be able to get the full education they deserve and wont have to struggle or be denied to a school because of poor tests scores becausse they werent taught a cartain thing that others may have been taught.let's face it, we dont always have the best of teachers on staff at highschools. they may not teach effectively or they fail to fully help students succeed, which effects the students more than they realize. students should not have to suffer and be denied the ability to achieve certain goals or be denied the opportunity to go to a university because they werent able to learn as much as they could from the teachers who are being paid to do it. this snag in the educational system just gives kids in other countys an advantage.why should that be allowed? all students who are willing to learn should have the right to learn everything they are supposed to. this also goes with some schools having certain classes and programs that other schools dont have.this is unfair because it makes it so kids who would have liked to take those classes unable to just because they happen to go to a school that doesnt offer it.what are they supposed to do then, transfer schools just so they can take that class?the system is highly flawed and unbalanced and it should be fixed because this makes such a huge impact on millions of lives. why should something as important as education be overlooked?

editorial #3-http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/14/pocket-money-for-politicians/

this article is called "pocket money for politicians" by the washington Times. its about how congressional member's don't fully understand what the average american has to go through daily to earn a living, especially considering the recession the US has been going through. the government is being irresponsible and spending taxpayer money frugally. lawmakers misuse public funds for private reasons. they rack up thousands of dollars on government credit cards but still they talk as if they can relate to the public.

I think that this editorial is right. not only about lawmakers though but many political figures, especially presidents. you hear in their speeches that they talk about relating to the public but alot of them came from wealth so they really cant relate to the average american. lawmakers dont have to struggle with paying off bills and saving money for things because they get alot of their expenses paid for. It amazes me what hard working citizen's tax dollars really go to sometimes.

editorial #2-http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/01/opini4.html

"Haiti's futile race against the rain"
By Lawrence Downes

This article is about how Haiti's government is struggling to find a solution to not being able to house over 1 million people effected by the harsh storm. Because they are unable to find a place to put them, Haiti's president decided to move all the haitians back to the shattered streets of Port-au-Prince. They are trying to house everyonee properly before the rain season officially starts.officials think that all they need to do is clear just enough of the mess so that people can continue to live there, yet its so much of disaster area.
I feel like they are not doing enough to try to fix the problem.they could send the haitians to other places besides port au prince. It doesnt make sense to take people out of disaster and send them to a still dumpy and shattered area.if they clear the rubble they wont find much left so it doesnt make sense to do that and then put people back there so they can live in the middle of a disaster area.