Sport R Us | Info

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

Japanese consensus approach, top-down arm twisting and smile.

October 17, 2011 1:52 AM Anonymous said...

laprimavera, why are you assuming that the tsunami debris from Miyagi and Iwate would be radioactive? The coastal area of Miyagi seems to be OK. Fukushima is another matter, of course, but even Hosono admits that.

October 17, 2011 5:10 AM Anonymous said...

Anonymous, why should debris from tsumani be sent to other locations for burning/disposal...burn in place! No reason to spend for transporting! Unless there is a reason to spread and share any radioactive materials all over Japan. The children of Japan need to be protected, not become victims of TEPCO. Who will be their for them when thyroid cancer occurs in a few years, or when Japanese residents realize they have been chemically castrated by radiation????

October 17, 2011 10:19 AM arevamirpal::laprimavera said...

@anon at 5:10AM, I am not assuming. They actually are radioactive, as measured by the Ministry of the Environment (to the tune of over 4000 becquerels/kg of radioactive cesium in burned ashes in Miyako City, Iwate, that's where Tokyo metropolitan government will receive debris), no less. Tokyo metropolitan government did its mixing and matching measurement.

October 17, 2011 10:22 AM Anonymous said...

5:10,

Miyagi and Iwate have been subjected to weather.

October 17, 2011 12:10 PM ll said...

Long term plan :

1/ dispatch radioactive material throughout Japan
2/ Burn it
3/ increase radioactivity low level contamination nationwide
4/ expect global diseases
5/ 20 years later, lie : No the disease you are complaining about are NOT related to Fukushima, look all Japan as similar cases in every 47 prefectures.
6/ Keep Toshiba/Westinghouse making profits and kill people.

October 17, 2011 2:47 PM DD said...

Speaking cynically: spreading contamination nationally could be a policy designed to create "side effects" over the whole of the honourable nation of the formerly rising sun, so that in years to come the statistics could be abused to "prove" a nationwide increase in cancer, genetic defects, etc., and thereby "disprove" any effects due to contamination local to fuxu.

This cannot be the case!

October 17, 2011 2:51 PM Anonymous said...

@laprimavera: "I am not assuming. They actually are radioactive, as measured by the Ministry of the Environment (to the tune of over 4000 becquerels/kg of radioactive cesium in burned ashes in Miyako City"

But according to the Tokyo Shinbun article (http://ex-skf-jp.blogspot.com/2011/10/blog-post_04.html) 4895 Bq/Kg was the maximum found in Miyako and Rikuzentakata ashes. Since Rikuzentakata is much closer to the hotspot around Ichinoseki, I would assume that the maximum was found there, not in Miyako.

If we look at the results from the garbage processing plants (http://www.pref.iwate.jp/view.rbz?cd=34614), the areas that show higher levels, specially in fly ash, are Oshu and Ichinoseki. Miyako has only been measured once in July as far as I know. The results are: 40 for bulk ash, 240 for fly ash.

But this is around 10 or 20 times lower than what was being detected in garbage ash from Tokyo around the same time, specially in Adachi-ku, Katsushika-ku and Edogawa-ku: http://www.union.tokyo23-seisou.lg.jp/topics/data/shokyakubai-230711.pdf

So, what should be done is to differentiate between contaminated areas and less contaminated areas (maybe the 8000 Bq/Kg limit is too high, that I don't know.) But it seems that, at least in the case of Miyako debris, it would actually be an improvement for Tokyo, if only because that would mean burning stuff that apparently is less contaminated than the garbage that has been being burned daily in the city for months already.

October 17, 2011 5:15 PM arevamirpal::laprimavera said...

@anon at 5:15PM You could assume, but the article doesn't say it is Rikuzentakata either.

As to "improvement" you say for Tokyo, I fail to see why adding radioactive debris, however low (or high) in radiation, to the existing radioactive sludge and garbage that Tokyo has been burning. It's not like Tokyo stops burning these and burying when they burn Iwate's (and soon Miyagi's) debris.

October 17, 2011 6:25 PM Anonymous said...

It is certainly NOT an improvement because Tokyo never stops burning their own radioactive crap. Iwate's crap is on top of that.

October 17, 2011 8:29 PM Anonymous said...

Improvement since it would mean burning less radioactive stuff for a change. And it hasn't been proved that there are releases from the incineration plants. There are at least a dozen incineration plants around Tokyo-to alone and no one has detected increased radiation levels around them. We have Yamauchi-sensei's report for Koto-ku, but Koto-ku is in the east, closer to Edogawa and probably more contaminated to being with, so maybe the higher radiation levels he detected back in May were already there because of the fallout, not because of the sludge plant.

So, before protesting against the distribution of tsunami debris, what has to be done is to study the possible releases from the garbage and sewage sludge plants. If those are a source of radioactive contamination they must be stopped, whatever the government decides to do with the rubble from Miyako (which seems to be less contaminated than anything being burnt in Tokyo, not to talk about Matsudo or Kashiwa in Chiba.)

October 17, 2011 10:01 PM Anonymous said...

You must be really, really dense or you work for the Tokyo government. Burning less radioactive stuff ON TOP OF more radioactive stuff is an improvement? Give me a break.

October 17, 2011 10:11 PM Anonymous said...

OK, let the people from Iwate die among the ruins of their lives just cause I don't feel like checking if the incineration plants actually represent a problem or not.

October 18, 2011 12:55 AM Anonymous said...

10:01,

why refer to "possible releases" from burning radioactive materials?

How to scrub for that stuff?
Doesn't exist, or prove their method?
Surely not assuming they do??

October 18, 2011 3:38 AM nelson311 said...

"OK, let the people from Iwate die among the ruins of their lives just cause I don't feel like checking if the incineration plants actually represent a problem or not."

oh yes ... I am sure they will check every cm of 500 000 tons of debris ... NOT! 7 months later, they barely came up with a map showing Plutonium (45km) and Strontium (89km)... Strontium in Yokohama ... they dont even have the enough proper gear to measure such particles. So what on earth makes you think that they will not spew this atrocity back into our atmosphere? On top of that this incompetent government believes eating p<lutonium is ok ...LOL. I mean come on people ... take a very very very deep breath and hold it for a very very very long time. This is nothing short than a "a collective effort serving a mass delusion" as I always refer it to.

October 18, 2011 3:52 AM Anonymous said...

But is it going to be impossible to measure radioactive releases from incineration plants? You go to one, you get air samples, you measure it.

They have been burning radioactive stuff for months, why do people start loosing their minds when ruble from an area way less contaminated than Tokyo is going to arrive?

October 18, 2011 4:10 AM Anonymous said...

Freakishly revealing, we aware people know about it, but put black on white like this gives the same effect as that last little cup of sake you should have refused... When I see trucks carrying soil, I can't help looking at the driver in the eye at the traffic light as I cross the street. Social distrust：not only government and big business, but anyone who has to make a living, fishermen, rice cultivators, restaurant owners... Like in Nazi Germany, we’ll look back on these days when almost everybody was a coward and part of the issue.

October 18, 2011 5:35 AM Anonymous said...

On the same topic with links to our dear Hosono-san （will he be revered in Yasukuni jinja when he dies）：

http://survivaljapan.wordpress.com/2011/09/29/tokyo-imports-500000000-kg-of-nuclear-waste/

October 18, 2011 5:44 AM Anonymous said...

October 17, 2011 2:51 PM Anonymous said.......But according to the Tokyo Shinbun article ... I would assume that the maximum was found there, not in Miyako."

On what planet yall living?

...25 yrs ago Chrenobyl - the still bubbling metdown - blanketed the globe (Hello, is japan on this globe? Yes? No?)

...with Strontium Sr-90. And you 'keep assuming.' Cant you see how deep-programmed you are? Yes? No?

October 18, 2011 7:31 AM Anonymous said...

"October 18, 2011 3:38 AM
nelson311 said... This is nothing short than a "a collective effort serving a mass delusion" as I always refer it to."

Papal Mass. According their own published goals, evenly published for the deluded. Its funny how human brain always refuses the Truth, loves the mass...

October 18, 2011 7:37 AM

Of school, exams, bags that weigh a ton and education
Like any kiasu (read: scared to lose out) parent, I've been itching to know how Josh fared for his mid-term school exams. Well, he got his papers back today. Though initially he lied when I wondered aloud why he'd only received his English, Maths and Science results. Finally, he admitted that he also received his Chinese exam results. It's becoming pretty apparent to me when he's lying as I detect a slight downcast look in his gaze. It's barely noticeable and others may be convinced, but I'm glad I can tell.

He didn't do fantastic, but he didn't do that badly either. I told him I'm relatively pleased with his results and so there won't be a total withdrawal of his holiday privileges like time on the computer. And he'll also received his belated birthday outing to Downtown East. Anyway, Josh told me that his form teacher has always stressed to the class not to compare marks. Thank goodness this is being reinforced to them at a young age. I recall when I was in primary school how I'd always noticed groups of mothers standing around and comparing their kids' exam results and I was relieved that my mum never ever mingled around with parents like those.

Just for the record anyways, here are his results:
English listening comprehension: 13.5/15
English main paper: 29.5/45

Chinese listening comprehension: 5/10
Chinese main paper: 19/50

Maths: 87/100

Science: 79/100

It's a little frustrating that even though he converses in English at home, he's still guilty of making simple grammatical errors, like mixing the past tense up with the present tense. Ever since last year, he's averaged about 65-75 marks for English and I really feel he could do a whole lot better if he put his mind to it. His maths grade has slipped just a little, but it's more due to careless calculation mistakes rather than not knowing how to solve the problems. What's more, I was surprised how tricky some of the questions were, particularly one of them. I went through the corrections with him earlier this afternoon, and I admit I'm really rusty, so it took me some time to actually solve this problem:

Mr Chong paid $392 for 6 shirts and 4 pairs of shorts. A shirt costs $32 more than a pair of shorts. How much did Mr Chong pay for the shirt? (Hint: You may use a model to solve the problem.)

Some hint! It's been eons since I used units or models to solve any maths problems and initially I couldn't figure it out. It was a little embarassing to sit with Josh and go "umm" and "ahh" while I did my working on a separate sheet of paper. I eventually came to the answer using algebra, then I used that concept to go about getting the answer by drawing units. Gee... but honestly, don't you think that such a question is too tricky for a primary three kid? I believe I was doing this sort of questions only in primary six or secondary one. I wasn't that surprised when he told me that the entire class had failed to get it right. (anyway, the answer is $52) ;)

As for his science, I was a little relieved with his 79 marks... it's his first time sitting for a science paper and he'd hardly studied for it (if you count studying on the eve of the exam as any type of revision at all). A little tricky too, some of the questions were... I'd thought the teacher would have at least given him half a mark for idenitifying a stem as a stalk. Even answers.com doesn't shed much light on this: stalk, stem: a slender or elongated structure that supports a plant or fungus or a plant part or plant organ. a slender or elongated structure that supports a plant or fungus or a plant part or plant organ. The free dictionary's definition doesn't help much either as does the word reference forum, so if anyone could enlighten me, I would pretty much appreciate that! Eventually after much thinking I told him that I supposed the stem is the main part of the plant, while the stalks could refer to the parts growing out of the stem (pretty much like how the branches of a tree grow out of its trunk).

Regarding his Chinese, I just couldn't resist asking him if anyone else fared worse than he did.

"Well, Liam got 12 marks, and Beckham had a higher score, but he got 21/50 so that means he still failed. Oh! And even though teacher told us not to compare, did you know that Shawn Loh failed each and every one of his exam papers? Shawn Loh is always at the bottom of the class, I wonder if he's sad! I saw that he only got 3 marks for his English!"

So honestly, it doesn't mean that just because these boys attend a more well-known school, they're intellectually smarter. Rather, I find that students from neighbourhood schools in the heartlands could fare just as well if not better. I mean, Josh's grades are really just average. Just because he's in this school doesn't qualify him as a smarter kid.

Knowing that he tried his best, for that I've nothing to be angry or disappointed over. It's a relief too, as I don't have to play the bad guy all out and he'll be able to enjoy part of his school holidays after all - I'll still be bringing him to catch Monsters vs Aliens (he's been asking me about it since the beginning of this year when the trailers started!), bring him to my mum's place to swim and also... the visit to Downtown East along with his belated birthday gift of a microscope. Anyone thinks if I'm spoiling him just a little...? Would just like to impress upon him that hard work brings rewards... and it is true that kids are spurred on by incentives. Also I do intend to balance those moments of leisure with extra revision during the hols, which means completing at least one assessment book in every subject during the holidays.

Overall, he couldn've done better but he also could've been capable of faring a lot worse. Anyway, MY expectations would have been for him to pass his Chinese with at least 50-something marks, at least 75-80 for his English, 90 and above for Maths, and about 80 marks for his Science. Then again, those are my expectations and I won't hold it against him for failing to meet them.

So the next thing is to wait for the assigned date for the once-a-year meet-the-parents session where I'll be collecting his report card. Last year, I went with Michele as she was free, and the year before that, I went with Rick (when Josh was in primary one). It would definitely matter to me if Rick went, but he's perfectly content leaving it to me (he doesn't say anything during the meeting with the teacher anyway). One of the things I do want to know is why the children's schoolbags are so awfully heavy. I don't understand why, in addition to their school textbooks and workbooks, they have to lug all of their subject files to school everyday when the teacher can simply give out the papers for them to go back and file them. Because these files hold assignments from the start of the year, and I honestly don't expect the teacher to be going through them again right? In fact, last week, to ease his burden, I removed all the files from his bag, but the next week, he told me that it "wasn't allowed" and that he had to bring his files to school every.single.day. Poor things. No wonder I notice some kids even pulling their schoolbooks in luggage trolleys! Shocking! But what else is there to do? Josh's schoolbag weighs a ton and on the days that I have fetched him from school after his remedial classes, even I struggle with its weight (just 15 minutes of carrying the bag gives me a proper backache).

What good is there helping him pack his schoolbag? In the past, some kids wouldn't even pack their schoolbags, but insist on bringing the same books to school each day, even though there weren't lessons for the day (like for social studies, music or health education). Well, Josh diligently packs his bag every day according to the next day's lessons, and already his bag is woefully heavy. No wonder some concerned parents have written in to the Ministry of Education requesting for the school to install lockers. I think it's a pretty common thing in the US where every student has his/her own locker and keys, so why hasn't this simple practice taken off here? Every so often the national newspaper carries stories about just how heavy kids' schoolbags are. Initially I read with disbelief and skepticism, but now I really am 100% convinced that it's true. And schoolbag manufacturers are gleefully marketing bags that supposedly help improve posture and reduce strain, but I've come across some of these bags, and without anything in them, they already weigh quite a fair bit.

This is the typical life of a kid in a mainstream Singapore school. Not surprising that more parents are getting more interested in home-schooling. The heavy schoolbags are already so off-putting. And no matter that the Government says about encouraging kids to adopt more creative, out-of-the-box thinking, teachers are more or less pressurised for their class to deliver good grades. When the exams are approaching, for example, lessons like Physical Education, Music and Social Studies are placed on the backburner and more attention is devoted to the teaching of the core subjects. And you still get parents writing in to the national newspaper about the most mind-boggling things (the most recent was a parent lamenting why he couldn't find the latest 10-year exam series for his son, and he urged the education ministry to do something about it). I don't notice Josh commenting on much group work either and field trips are few and far in-between (like his most recent visit to the Marina Barrage to learn more about water). If anything, the kids pretty much do stuff on their own for their homework assignments during after-school hours. I wonder why class time can't be devoted to learning outdoors instead. There was an assignment in collecting any plant and labelling its parts, and definitely the teacher could have taken time out to engage in such a lesson outdoors. But it was left to the the kid... in the end, I took Josh to the nearby field where I was delighted in finding stalks of lallang (in fact, we had a great time that afternoon, and we collected bougainvillea, ixora, mimosa and even a toadstool (or was it a mushroom?) before deciding on the lallang (later I got worried when he told me that most of its feathery parts had come off after he'd stuck it on the sheet and put it in his bag... but luckily there were enough "hairs" left for the teacher to know what plant it was exactly).

Also I find it a popular practice for schools to engage external vendors in teaching "extracurricular" stuff for certain subjects. Like there was a drama/debate workshop for English, and there's an Art camp lined up for the June holidays. Fortunately, the fees for extra classes like these can be paid out of the child's Edusave account (some - not all), but I wonder why the teachers aren't "qualified" to conduct such lessons independently? After all, these enrichment programmes can cost quite a fair bit (for example, I'm still pondering about the Art camp because it costs $40 for just 4 hours). Or are the teachers too caught up in the dry, theoretical stuff during class to devote more time to thinking and interactive sessions? Despite this, the MOE insists that it still is moving towards a Teach Less, Learn More initiative, but old [teaching] habits die hard, mainly because, I suspect, of over-anxious parents.

Hopefully in future, the education ministry might consider beginning classes later (I think a few years back a couple of schools had a trial where classes were held between 830am-4pm or something like that, but this was withdrawn in the end for reasons I'm not too sure of). Ever since Rick's schooling days (and he began primary one in 1974), the morning session has begun at 730am. In those days (my time included), kids would alternate between morning and afternoon sessions annually (morning classes were held from 730am-1255pm, afternoon classes were between 1pm-625pm). In some secondary schools, the lower secondary classes were held between 1230-630pm, and upper secondary, 730am-1pm). More or less, I can't quite recall the exact times. But the bugbear is the 730am starting time. Can you imagine if a kid lives a considerable distance from his school? He'd have to wake at around 5am if the journey is 45 minutes to an hour. Even though Josh lives a stone's throw from his school, he gets up at 6am every morning because I don't want him to rush. This gives him 45 minutes to have a leisurely breakfast, bathe and get dressed before heading downstairs to wait for the school bus which arrives at about 650pm. Because even though school officially begins at 730am, the kids have to be in by 720am to get ready for assembly and to sing the national anthem.

I could always have him walk to school (it takes 15 minutes, tops) and that's what Rick and I are considering for next year. It'll cost less too (a standard ride costs 50 cents, so public transport would work out to around $20-$25, compared to the current $70 for the school's private transport). Not to mention it wouldn't cost a thing if he'd to make the stroll himself. Anyhow, even half an hour makes a difference, and I'd much prefer for school to begin at 8am (Josh's school is one of the last remaining schools where primary one and two pupils attend the afternoon session before it's morning classes all the way to primary six. Reason why - the school's premises are too small to accommodate all the levels for one entire session, but the government had pledged to convert all schools to single session by the year 2016, so I suppose for schools such as his, the yearly intake will have to be reduced, because I don't foresee extra wings to be built. The only new structure his school constructed last year was a small chapel, which already cost in the few tens of thousands of dollars.)

The single session conversion will definitely affect Jolie, who's due to register in primary one in the year 2013. Hopefully, there will be enough parental feedback for the ministry to settle on a later beginning time of either 8am or 830am so that schoolkids and their parents needn't undergo the mad daily rush to make it to school on time and that pupils won't spend the first few lessons still in a sleepy stupor.

With all this talk of a holistic primary school education where there'll be a projected shift away from textbook learning, hopefully the MOE isn't just holding one giant PR campaign filled with lofty lip-service ideas, but where it actually means what it says. Because I shudder when I think of past generations of schoolchildren who have been sadly penalised because of their grades alone, and what about those who had to undergo the cruel exercise of streaming in P3? (isn't that way too early and a blow to a child's self-esteem when he gets placed in a class meant for "academically weaker" students?). I mean, it's sad thinking about where those kids are now and how they are faring. How can the MOE undo the damage done during those years? If not for the mass outcry, I doubt they'd have changed this stance at all. Imagine being placed in a stream meant for "not-so-bright" students (if such a thing exists at all, at such a tender age), just because of their grades. For years, a child was considered condemned if he landed in the EM3 stream (and can you imagine being placed under such a stigma at the mere age of 10 when you've barely started your education?) It was EM1: bright, intelligent. EM2: average, mediocre. EM3: slow-learners, "lazy". Which kid would want to be classified like that? But yet they were branded in this way.

For example, a kid who fared badly in languages but was exceptionally bright in Maths would have been assigned to such a class where he would have languished, instead of flourished, because his strengths weren't noticed or given the chance to be improved upon. Even if kids didn't have academic leanings but were talented in Arts or sports, they would be penalised too, just because they weren't capable of scoring As and Bs in the theoretical subjects. Where are all these legions of such children now? How many gave up on themselves or weren't given the chance to realise their full potential just because of the early education system here?

That's why I'm thankful the EM1-3 system has since been abolished, or goodness knows where that would have left Joshua. Now the education ministry has learnt from some of its mistakes and has since been a bit more understanding, compassionate and forgiving. Because every kid learns at a different pace, and some of them may be late-bloomers, or have strengths in just one particular subject instead of the whole lot of them. What has certainly helped is placing kids in different classes for Mandarin. In primary one, they undergo a basic test, and the ones more proficient in the language are sent to a Higher Chinese class. The average ones continue studying the normal school syllabus, whereas much weaker ones like Josh attend classes where the emphasis is on building their foundation (and it's not unusual for the kids there to converse to their teachers in English and vice versa). I believe kids are thus more motivated to learn the language instead of throwing in the towel altogether (dumping everyone in the same proficiency level wouldn't do the stronger or weaker ones any good). Still, Josh doesn't realise how much easier he's having it and how much more fortunate he is in that regard. During my schooling days, I always felt like one big hopeless case because the ones who were strong in Mandarin always consistently scored 90 and above, while there I was struggling at the bottom of the class with grades hovering around the 50 pass mark. At least now he's in the same boat together with the weaker students and isn't made to feel like he's particularly slow or stupid.

Take this story in the Straits Times for example, where educators are finally understanding that education is not always about nailing good grades. After all, the learning environment should be an interactive, non-judgemental one where questioning and curiosity are encouraged. For far too long now, the emphasis (here anyway) has been on rote learning and learning things off by heart before regurgitating the facts. But slowly, parents are also understanding that the Science stream isn't academically superior and there's nothing to be ashamed of when their child ends up in the Arts stream (with literature, geography, history, visual arts). I recall a good friend of mine being so terribly crushed when she wasn't able to enter the Science stream; she thought was condemned as she'd placed it as her first choice at her parents' urging (she confided in me just how upset they were). For me, I was lucky enough that my mum was open-minded enough when it came to making my own decisions. I never did opt for the Science stream; I was ecstatic when I got my first choice of attending a class with a combination of history, literature, combined science (physics/chemistry), elementary maths, english and chinese. And I also have her to thank for persuading my dad to let me study at the local polytechnic instead of going for the conventional route of junior college and thereafter, university. If not for her, I suspect I'd just be armed with 'A' levels now. (My dad was mortified that his younger daughter was so "stupid" that she couldn't enter JC, and he took quite a long time coming to terms with it. Sadly, I also suspect he was a bit ashamed telling his side of the family where I was furthering my studies too, since most of my cousins are uni graduates).

So that's what I'm going to do with Josh too - I'm going to have the faith and confidence in him when he makes his own independent decisions. Apart from choosing his primary school, I hope he'll be able to make his own mind up regarding the secondary school he wishes to attend after his Primary School Leaving Examinations. After my PSLE, I chose all six of my secondary schools without my parents' feedback or guidance, and when I got into my third choice, they gave me all the support I needed with no critique or judgement, and I think this is what each and every kid deserves. Even though my high school was no academic shining example (far from it), I refused to be ashamed. In fact, my delight in having my best friend in primary school get posted to the same high school quickly turned to dismay when she cried buckets! She tried to get her mum to register in another school but their efforts came to naught in the end when all the places in the other "better" schools were filled. Thereafter, she seemed ashamed of herself that she could have done so "badly" and I just couldn't be around someone who kept lamenting how hopeless the situation was (she and I naturally drifted apart after that).

Still, when it comes to home-schooling, I have never considered that option truthfully (the latest I heard, local celeb Evelyn Tan and her hubby Darren Lim have decided to homeschool their kids, while drama queen Zoe Tay is reportedly volunteering to teach acting at Nanyang Primary School so that her son may be ensured of a place there - he's only 4, by the way). In fact, some homeschooled kids may fare better because they don't have to participate in this crazy paper chase from young and they are more confident to learn at their own pace and know it's ok to make mistakes and not be "perfect") - but the biggest question is, do I have the confidence in myself to home-school Josh and Jolie? Sadly, I don't. Oh, but homeschooling doesn't mean the parent teaches the child - they can always engage a private tutor. Still, I know Rick would balk at the idea and he would never come up with the additional fees to homeschool either of them. I could rattle off a complete list justifying home-schooling, and he wouldn't listen. But it's not all his fault. Deep inside, I still don't have the solutions as to how to make their learning "fun". I'm apprehensive about not being able to discipline them (already it's a nightmare getting Josh to knuckle down and hit the books when it's time to). I also doubt my level of involvement... right now, I still admit getting a bit intense when I explain to Josh his corrections. Like, I sigh aloud in impatience because he's still getting his past participle and past tenses mixed up (for example: the kids had swam earlier in the day, instead of the kids had swum earlier in the day). Maybe homeschooling will just reveal my perfectionist faults to me when my current mantra is to relax and let him learn from his mistakes no matter how long it takes. Hopefully he doesn't drive me further up the wall in the process...

• Canoe Slam Sports Hockey

  Canada, Sports news, scores, stats, features and more in Canada and abroad from SLAM! Sports

• Sportfreunde

  German Rockband Sportfreunde Stiller and the german Soccer Team singing 54, 74, 90, 2010 at the Berlin Brandenburg Gate.

• Sports Digital Backgrounds

  Digital Photography Backgrounds, Digital Backdrops, Photography Backdrops, Photo Backgrounds, Photographic Backdrops, Canvas and Muslin Digital Backdrops, Digital ...

• Affiliate Programs Sports

  Learn How to Succeed with Affiliate Marketing. Affiliate marketing has been around for a long time and there are quite a few cases where people make a lot of money through ...

• Sporttrainer

  Sonex Sport Trainer. What is the Sonex Sport Trainer? In Early 2005, Sonex Aircraft released the Sonex Sport Trainer (ST). The Sport Trainer is not a new aircraft, but is ...

---