Print
E-mail
Comment
Rate
School leaders talk transitions
 |
| Photo by Cpl. R. Logan Kyle
Combat Center educational representatives met with officials from the Morongo Unified School District for the Military Child Education Coalition Transition Counselors Institute seminar in the Mesa Room of the Officers’ Club Wednesday to discuss key education issues facing military families. |
Cpl. R. Logan Kyle
Combat Correspondent
Combat Center educational representatives met with officials from the Morongo Unified School District for the Military Child Education Coalition Transition Counselors Institute seminar in the Officers’ Club Mesa Room here Tuesday and Wednesday.
During the seminar, members from organizations like the Marine Corps Family Team Building Office, and the Lifestyle, Insights, Networking, Knowledge and Skills program, discussed the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunities for Military Children with local school officials.
MCEC focuses on making transitions easier for children who are forced to change schools when their parents are assigned to a new duty station, said Tina Paulson, the Combat Center school liaison.
“[The Interstate Compact] was signed into law by the state of California Jan. 15,” said Paulson, a Tucson, Ariz., native.
An Interstate Compact is an agreement, with the consent of Congress, between two or more states. These agreements often result in the creation of a governmental agency which is responsible for administering or improving some shared resource like the MCEC - the agency created as a result of the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunities for Military Children, according to its Web site, http://www.militarychild.org/whats-happening/inter state-compact/.
Dave Price, the director of student services with the Morongo Unified School District, said the Compact should help military children change schools more smoothly.
“Mostly, it makes sure everyone’s aware of the needs of military children and families around deployments, and the needs of the military,” said Price, a San Bernardino, Calif., native. “It also gives school districts a place to start to establish the accommodations available.”
Paulson said there are several problems transitioning military families run into when enrolling their children in a new school.
“A lot of the time, and especially at the high school level, tryouts for sports or deadlines to join school clubs have came and gone by the time the child is enrolled,” she said. “This agreement gives transitioning military students the same opportunities to participate.”
Zoe Trautman, the lead trainer during the seminar and Burke, Va., native, said another issue facing military families, is the length of time children spend out of school with parents scheduled to deploy overseas.
“We understand children need to see their parents before they deploy,” Trautman said. “When deployments come, some parents keep their children out of school for weeks at a time. Usually 10 days is the norm. We just can’t have children missing weeks and weeks of school.”
Paulson said the Compact also standardizes each participating state’s graduation requirements for high school students.
Currently, 26 states have signed the Compact.
“There are still a few states on the fence,” said Paulson. “But 26 is a lot of states. It’s a huge difference from last year because there were only 11 states under the agreement.”
For more information on MCEC or the Interstate Compact, visit http://www. militarychild.org/whats-happening.
Combat Correspondent
Combat Center educational representatives met with officials from the Morongo Unified School District for the Military Child Education Coalition Transition Counselors Institute seminar in the Officers’ Club Mesa Room here Tuesday and Wednesday.
During the seminar, members from organizations like the Marine Corps Family Team Building Office, and the Lifestyle, Insights, Networking, Knowledge and Skills program, discussed the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunities for Military Children with local school officials.
MCEC focuses on making transitions easier for children who are forced to change schools when their parents are assigned to a new duty station, said Tina Paulson, the Combat Center school liaison.
“[The Interstate Compact] was signed into law by the state of California Jan. 15,” said Paulson, a Tucson, Ariz., native.
An Interstate Compact is an agreement, with the consent of Congress, between two or more states. These agreements often result in the creation of a governmental agency which is responsible for administering or improving some shared resource like the MCEC - the agency created as a result of the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunities for Military Children, according to its Web site, http://www.militarychild.org/whats-happening/inter state-compact/.
Dave Price, the director of student services with the Morongo Unified School District, said the Compact should help military children change schools more smoothly.
“Mostly, it makes sure everyone’s aware of the needs of military children and families around deployments, and the needs of the military,” said Price, a San Bernardino, Calif., native. “It also gives school districts a place to start to establish the accommodations available.”
Paulson said there are several problems transitioning military families run into when enrolling their children in a new school.
“A lot of the time, and especially at the high school level, tryouts for sports or deadlines to join school clubs have came and gone by the time the child is enrolled,” she said. “This agreement gives transitioning military students the same opportunities to participate.”
Zoe Trautman, the lead trainer during the seminar and Burke, Va., native, said another issue facing military families, is the length of time children spend out of school with parents scheduled to deploy overseas.
“We understand children need to see their parents before they deploy,” Trautman said. “When deployments come, some parents keep their children out of school for weeks at a time. Usually 10 days is the norm. We just can’t have children missing weeks and weeks of school.”
Paulson said the Compact also standardizes each participating state’s graduation requirements for high school students.
Currently, 26 states have signed the Compact.
“There are still a few states on the fence,” said Paulson. “But 26 is a lot of states. It’s a huge difference from last year because there were only 11 states under the agreement.”
For more information on MCEC or the Interstate Compact, visit http://www. militarychild.org/whats-happening.
 |
 |
|
| 3rd Bn., 11th Marines, presents Purple Hearts | NCIS sets sights on fraud prevention |
Article Rating
Reader Comments
The following are comments from the readers. In no way do they represent the view of hidesertstar.com.
daskren wrote on Mar 31, 2009 4:11 PM:
" Way to go Sgt. Askren. We are proud of you. This is a well deserved honor. "
harleyrider1978 wrote on Oct 24, 2009 9:23 AM:
" This has to be a directive from dod courtesy of obamas prohibitionist people now in charge........
SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE. Ask the anti-tobacco folks to tell you what truly is in second hand smoke...when it burns from the coal its oxygenated and everything is burned and turned into water vapor..................thats right water..........you ever burned leaves in the fall...know how the heavy smoke bellows off.......thats the organic material releasing the moisture in the leaves the greener the leaves/organic material the more smoke thats made......thats why second hand smoke is classified as a class 3 irritant by osha and epa as of 2006........after that time EPA decided to change the listing of shs as a carcinogen for political reasons.......because it contained a trace amount of 6 chemicals so small even sophisticated scientific equipment can hardly detect it ........they didnt however use the normal dose makes the poison computation when they made this political decision. However osha still maintains shs/ets as an irritant only and maintains the dose makes the poison position.......as osha is in charge of indoor air quality its decisions are based on science not political agendas as epa's is. We can see this is true after a federal judge threw out the epa's study on shs as junk science......... Wednesday, March 12, 2008 British Medical Journal & WHO conclude secondhand smoke "health hazard" claims are greatly exaggerated The BMJ published report at:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057
concludes that "The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer are considerably weaker than generally believed." What makes this study so significant is that it took place over a 39 year period, and studied the results of non-smokers who lived with smokers.....
meaning these non-smokers were exposed to secondhand smoke up to 24 hours per day; 365 days per year for 39 years. And there was still no relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. In light of the damage to business, jobs, and the economy from smoking bans the BMJ report should be revisited by lawmakers as a reference tool and justification to repeal the now unnecessary and very damaging smoking ban laws. Also significant is the World Health Organization (WHO) study:
Passive smoking doesn't cause cancer-official By Victoria Macdonald, Health Correspondent " The results are consistent with their being no additional risk for a person living or working with a smoker and could be consistent with passive smoke having a protective effect against lung cancer. The summary, seen by The Telegraph, also states: 'There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood.' " And if lawmakers need additional real world data to further highlight the need to eliminate these onerous and arbitrary laws, air quality testing by Johns Hopkins University proves that secondhand smoke is up to 25,000 times SAFER than occupational (OSHA) workplace regulations.
The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke… but found, obviously, in very small quantities if at all.This is because most of the assumed chemicals have never actually been found in secondhand smoke. (1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80). Most of these chemicals can only be found in quantities measured in nanograms, picograms and femtograms. Many cannot even be detected in these amounts: their presence is simply theorized rather than measured. To bring those quantities into a real world perspective, take a saltshaker and shake out a few grains of salt. A single grain of that salt will weigh in the ballpark of 100 million picograms! (Allen Blackman. Chemistry Magazine 10/08/01). - (Excerpted from "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains" with permission of the author.)
The Myth of the Smoking Ban ‘Miracle’ Restrictions on smoking around the world are claimed to have had a dramatic effect on heart attack rates. It's not true. http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7451/
As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that: "Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997
-harleyrider1978
JOINT STATEMENT ON THE RE-ASSESSMENT OF THE TOXICOLOGICAL TESTING OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS"
7 October, the COT meeting on 26 October and the COC meeting on 18
November 2004.
http://cot.food.gov.uk/pdfs/cotstatementtobacco0409
"5. The Committees commented that tobacco smoke was a highly complex chemical mixture and that the causative agents for smoke induced diseases (such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, effects on reproduction and on offspring) was unknown. The mechanisms by which tobacco induced adverse effects were not established. The best information related to tobacco smoke - induced lung cancer, but even in this instance a detailed mechanism was not available. The Committees therefore agreed that on the basis of current knowledge it would be very difficult to identify a toxicological testing strategy or a biomonitoring approach for use in volunteer studies with smokers where the end-points determined or biomarkers measured were predictive of the overall burden of tobacco-induced adverse disease."
In other words ... our first hand smoke theory is so lame we can't even design a bogus lab experiment to prove it. In fact ... we don't even know how tobacco does all of the magical things we claim it does.
The greatest threat to the second hand theory is the weakness of the first hand theory.
Outdoor bans are even crazier than indoor bans. The chemical make-up of shs is nearly 94% water vapor and A SLIGHT AMOUNT OF CARBON DIOXIDE with about 3% being carbon monoxide AND 3% CONTAINING THOSE SUPPOSED KILLER CARCENOGENS.........
n-nitrosomines which you hear so much about is actually arsenic..what they dont tell you is that the measurements they took match the naturally occuring arsenic in the air outside everywhere.
they measured levels at 0-29 picograms....which is totally safe...the amount has to be 5 million times that to be harmful to humans........you see how they switched it. Trying to blame shs for what is actually a natural thing. The levels of other things in shs if they can be measured at all are millions if not billions of times smaller than the amounts needed to harm anyone......just remember this second hand smoke is a joke within nano seconds from the burn it turns into WATER VAPOR.....Even the exhaled smoke is loaded down with water vapor...osha has said nothing in shs/ets is going to harm you or anyone else.....what shs will do is irritate those with weak immune responces.......thats why shs is classified as a class 3 IRRITANT BY OSHA AND THE EPA.....Remember this a prohibition movement must rely on scare tactics and big money in order to succeed to the level of getting legislation....These outdoor regulations are even crazier than the first claims made for indoor bans.......
As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that: "Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997
-harleyrider1978 "
SECOND HAND SMOKE IS A JOKE. Ask the anti-tobacco folks to tell you what truly is in second hand smoke...when it burns from the coal its oxygenated and everything is burned and turned into water vapor..................thats right water..........you ever burned leaves in the fall...know how the heavy smoke bellows off.......thats the organic material releasing the moisture in the leaves the greener the leaves/organic material the more smoke thats made......thats why second hand smoke is classified as a class 3 irritant by osha and epa as of 2006........after that time EPA decided to change the listing of shs as a carcinogen for political reasons.......because it contained a trace amount of 6 chemicals so small even sophisticated scientific equipment can hardly detect it ........they didnt however use the normal dose makes the poison computation when they made this political decision. However osha still maintains shs/ets as an irritant only and maintains the dose makes the poison position.......as osha is in charge of indoor air quality its decisions are based on science not political agendas as epa's is. We can see this is true after a federal judge threw out the epa's study on shs as junk science......... Wednesday, March 12, 2008 British Medical Journal & WHO conclude secondhand smoke "health hazard" claims are greatly exaggerated The BMJ published report at:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/326/7398/1057
concludes that "The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. The association between exposure to environmental tobacco smoke and coronary heart disease and lung cancer are considerably weaker than generally believed." What makes this study so significant is that it took place over a 39 year period, and studied the results of non-smokers who lived with smokers.....
meaning these non-smokers were exposed to secondhand smoke up to 24 hours per day; 365 days per year for 39 years. And there was still no relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco related mortality. In light of the damage to business, jobs, and the economy from smoking bans the BMJ report should be revisited by lawmakers as a reference tool and justification to repeal the now unnecessary and very damaging smoking ban laws. Also significant is the World Health Organization (WHO) study:
Passive smoking doesn't cause cancer-official By Victoria Macdonald, Health Correspondent " The results are consistent with their being no additional risk for a person living or working with a smoker and could be consistent with passive smoke having a protective effect against lung cancer. The summary, seen by The Telegraph, also states: 'There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood.' " And if lawmakers need additional real world data to further highlight the need to eliminate these onerous and arbitrary laws, air quality testing by Johns Hopkins University proves that secondhand smoke is up to 25,000 times SAFER than occupational (OSHA) workplace regulations.
The Chemistry of Secondary Smoke About 94% of secondary smoke is composed of water vapor and ordinary air with a slight excess of carbon dioxide. Another 3 % is carbon monoxide. The last 3 % contains the rest of the 4,000 or so chemicals supposedly to be found in smoke… but found, obviously, in very small quantities if at all.This is because most of the assumed chemicals have never actually been found in secondhand smoke. (1989 Report of the Surgeon General p. 80). Most of these chemicals can only be found in quantities measured in nanograms, picograms and femtograms. Many cannot even be detected in these amounts: their presence is simply theorized rather than measured. To bring those quantities into a real world perspective, take a saltshaker and shake out a few grains of salt. A single grain of that salt will weigh in the ballpark of 100 million picograms! (Allen Blackman. Chemistry Magazine 10/08/01). - (Excerpted from "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains" with permission of the author.)
The Myth of the Smoking Ban ‘Miracle’ Restrictions on smoking around the world are claimed to have had a dramatic effect on heart attack rates. It's not true. http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/7451/
As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that: "Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997
-harleyrider1978
JOINT STATEMENT ON THE RE-ASSESSMENT OF THE TOXICOLOGICAL TESTING OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS"
7 October, the COT meeting on 26 October and the COC meeting on 18
November 2004.
http://cot.food.gov.uk/pdfs/cotstatementtobacco0409
"5. The Committees commented that tobacco smoke was a highly complex chemical mixture and that the causative agents for smoke induced diseases (such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, effects on reproduction and on offspring) was unknown. The mechanisms by which tobacco induced adverse effects were not established. The best information related to tobacco smoke - induced lung cancer, but even in this instance a detailed mechanism was not available. The Committees therefore agreed that on the basis of current knowledge it would be very difficult to identify a toxicological testing strategy or a biomonitoring approach for use in volunteer studies with smokers where the end-points determined or biomarkers measured were predictive of the overall burden of tobacco-induced adverse disease."
In other words ... our first hand smoke theory is so lame we can't even design a bogus lab experiment to prove it. In fact ... we don't even know how tobacco does all of the magical things we claim it does.
The greatest threat to the second hand theory is the weakness of the first hand theory.
Outdoor bans are even crazier than indoor bans. The chemical make-up of shs is nearly 94% water vapor and A SLIGHT AMOUNT OF CARBON DIOXIDE with about 3% being carbon monoxide AND 3% CONTAINING THOSE SUPPOSED KILLER CARCENOGENS.........
n-nitrosomines which you hear so much about is actually arsenic..what they dont tell you is that the measurements they took match the naturally occuring arsenic in the air outside everywhere.
they measured levels at 0-29 picograms....which is totally safe...the amount has to be 5 million times that to be harmful to humans........you see how they switched it. Trying to blame shs for what is actually a natural thing. The levels of other things in shs if they can be measured at all are millions if not billions of times smaller than the amounts needed to harm anyone......just remember this second hand smoke is a joke within nano seconds from the burn it turns into WATER VAPOR.....Even the exhaled smoke is loaded down with water vapor...osha has said nothing in shs/ets is going to harm you or anyone else.....what shs will do is irritate those with weak immune responces.......thats why shs is classified as a class 3 IRRITANT BY OSHA AND THE EPA.....Remember this a prohibition movement must rely on scare tactics and big money in order to succeed to the level of getting legislation....These outdoor regulations are even crazier than the first claims made for indoor bans.......
As for secondhand smoke in the air, OSHA has stated outright that: "Field studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual PEL would be exceeded." -Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Sec'y, OSHA, To Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, 1997
-harleyrider1978 "
harleyrider1978 wrote on Jan 21, 2010 7:09 AM:
" http://www.nycclash.com/CaseAgainstBans/OSHA.html
THE CASE AGAINST SMOKING BANS
(THE ABRIDGED-- BELIEVE IT OR NOT-- VERSION)
c. Stewart, NYC CLASH, 2003
I appoligise to the author of the air according to osha,I failed to include the authors name in posting this most important writing that shows just how ludicrous anti-smoking claims are.
As such, in the future I will only post with the authors permission if granted.
My sincere appolgies to the author.
harleyrider1978 "
THE CASE AGAINST SMOKING BANS
(THE ABRIDGED-- BELIEVE IT OR NOT-- VERSION)
c. Stewart, NYC CLASH, 2003
I appoligise to the author of the air according to osha,I failed to include the authors name in posting this most important writing that shows just how ludicrous anti-smoking claims are.
As such, in the future I will only post with the authors permission if granted.
My sincere appolgies to the author.
harleyrider1978 "
You must register with a valid email to gain access to this site feature.
Already a Member?Login Here:
|
Become a Registered MemberFill out the form below.
|
RSS
daskren wrote on Mar 31, 2009 4:06 PM: