I wanted to write in response to Kristin Moseley's article about the rising popularity of the alcoholic energy drinks.
I was originally going to do an editorial on this article and was therefore very interested in another's point of view about the subject. I have to say I am in full agreement with Kristin and, literally, couldn't have said it better; the FDA needs to have more control over the situation, they need to act immediately due to the fact that many more young lives are being taken by these ridiculous drinks. I hadn't heard of them until recently when some friends of friends had drank Joose(another alcoholic energy drink Kristin mentioned) and hadn't got one for each of them, but split one and were unable to function. I had also heard of Four Loko in a recent trip to College Station and the word was that many at the party were, "way past the point of drunken stupidity." There were many who became sick that night and suffered a very painful hangover throughout the next day and I was told to never try one, which I intend not to. I do agree with Kristin's idea on having the FDA stopping the sale of the drinks until further investigation but shouldn't the fact that people are losing their lives be enough reason. Sure, regular alcoholic beverages can bring harm but not by consuming one drink like the energy drinks can. Also, there is alcohol poisoning due to someone consuming too much alcohol but what about the cardiac arrest issue that the alcoholic energy drinks are now bringing to the table? Perhaps there should be more awareness about the danger of these beverages either on the news/media or maybe even on the drink itself. Quoting Kristin, I do believe "the FDA should have more power to remove products from the market that have such a reputation for hazard even if their investigations have not been completed." Though they are popular, perhaps if there were a pause in the distribution many would wonder and therefore become more aware of the danger.
http://millenialview.blogspot.com/2010/11/fda-and-four-loko.html
In Kristen Orr's article titled, Wake up and pick up your clickers...nap time is over kids, she explains a new concept of learning being implemented by schools as early as middle school and even into college; both community college and universities such as Harvard, University of Alabama and Vanderbilt. Ms. Orr is a fellow government student who has been assigned to investigate a national issue and provide her opinion of the subject. The concept presented by Ms. Orr is said to involve more student participation in class due to a small device, referenced to as a “clicker”. In the article she explains that the clicker can be used for a number of things such as, attendance, quizes, and 15 minute interactive learning sessions to keep the students stimulated. These devices are paid for by either the student or the school will provide them to the professors and teachers. Ms. Orr lists some feedback regarding student and teacher opinion, but the article lacks her opinion of the clicker. While the article is very informative, the author lacks to explain the pros and cons of the device and state whether she if for or against the distribution of the clicker in classes and why. She also lacks a tie between the information presented and the issue that it is presenting to our nation's government.
ReplyDeleteBased on the information in the article, I would say that the clickers sound like a great idea to get every student involved in class. My concern would be how schools are paying for the tools, especially in public schools. With budget cuts is it really wise to spend $30-$70 per clicker and cut some other program. It seems to me that if the teacher implements the right skills in the class room, the same type of work could be done. With that said, if the school can afford them it sounds as though they are great tools and a peek into the future of the classroom.