Texting While Driving

             Vanessa Tamayo’s blog post “Distracted driving is blind driving ” is relevant and accurate. Texting while driving is incredibly dangerous!  My favorite line Vanessa wrote was that texting is “something that can wait.” Incorporating a no texting while driving law is just putting restrictions on when it is allowed; no text is ever as important as a life but unfortunately, according to Vanessa’s blog, 6,000 deaths from texting while driving happen annually.

              In addition, I believe if someone is riding a bicycle, they should follow the same rules as a vehicle; including not texting while on the road.  Changing songs on an iPod or media on any electric device is just as dangerous as texting because the driver does not have total focus on the road. Their attention is being divided between at least two different things. I think banning the use of electronics would help eliminate accidents having to do with distractions whether you’re riding a bike or driving a vehicle.

 Unfortunately, people will still continue to text while driving regardless of the law.  I have seen a public service commercial showing the dangerous and tragic results of texting while driving.  Public service announcements on the dangers of texting while driving could be shown at the TX Dept of Public Safety for people waiting in lines. The effects are serious and people should know why texting should never be done by the driver of a moving vehicle.

Standardized Testing Today

             The STAAR (State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness) exam is the latest standardized exam in the Texas public schools today.  This new exam started in the spring of 2012 when it replaced the TAKS test. Its purpose is to make sure adequate learning skills are taught in an educated and safe classroom by well prepared teachers.

               I think that the Texas Education Agency (TEA) should remove the STAAR exam as well as other high stakes testing. In 2012, the STAAR exam alone cost Texas $89 million dollars.  In addition, the annual cost of testing has risen every year.  I believe there are many other places in the education system where this money could increase learning.  In 2011, the Legislature took $4 billion from the education system’s budget and instead of removing these unnecessary high dollar tests, 900 of the needed faculty and staff were laid off. The benefits to this exam are nowhere near the cost and cuts it has required. 

Not only are we wasting money on this exam but the results show it is not even helping students grow in their knowledge.  The exam is a standardized test that focuses on whether or not Texas students are at the same education level as others both nationally and internationally.  I do not think standardized tests are a good measurement of one’s amount of knowledge. In no way is the STAAR exam preparing students for a higher level of education. Furthermore, it seems to be causing stress and anxiety for the students, parents and teachers.

At the end of the 2011-12 school year, more than 150,000 high school freshmen failed STAAR exam.  In order to graduate high school, one must pass all 15 of the EOC (end-of-course) exams.  If the student happens to fail an exam, there are re-takes during the summer.  If they still cannot make up the course, they are not allowed to graduate.  This puts a lot of pressure on these students!

I would like to encourage the Texas Legislature to allow teachers to focus on teaching and students progressing in their learning rather than just learning how to take standardized tests.  By eliminating the STAAR exam, I believe Texas could get back to a quality education for public school students.

Elderly Drivers

After reading Huy Le’s blog post dated July 27, 2012, titled "Stage 5: Why Old People Should Not Drive," I find myself in favor of the idea that “elderly people who are incapable of operating an automobile safely, should not be on public roads.” When I think of car accidents, I usually think of texting or drinking while driving.  The thought of elderly people causing accidents as well is a very logical thought, it had just never occurred to me.

I think Huy did a great job providing evidence that some senses diminish as one ages. This suggests that a simple exam should be conducted to find out if one is still capable of being a good driver.  I like that Huy stated that not all elderly should lose their privileges to drive but only those who cannot pass the exam.  Currently, Katie’s Law forces those over 79 years of age to take this exam every 6 years.  I agree with Huy that this age should be lowered. I think 60 years of age might be a better baseline age requirement with follow up exams every 4 years. Once the driver reaches the age of 72, an annual exam would be beneficial. According to the American Optometric Association, the most common vision problems in adults occur between the ages of 40-60 years, thus the reason I suggest the age be lowered to 60. Yes, it may seem like a hassle to get a license renewed more frequently once you turn 60, but by requiring this it may keep unsafe drivers off of the roads, hopefully reducing accidents caused by elderly drivers.

At the end of Huy’s blog post he states that “the prevention of unnecessary accidents caused by this group is completely possible with more frequent exams.” I believe a lot of the accidents due to age related impairments will be reduced, however; there are still cases of reckless driving that happen regardless of age.