What you are describing is a timed-test technique that has been used off and on for a number of years, usually in the upper grades. The goal is to develop fluency. The theory is that when children can quickly answer basic facts, they will have greater success when encountering more complicated problems like long division.

I do not agree with this practice, especially for young children. Here are some of my concerns:

Learning math requires more than memorizing a set of facts. A math curriculum should help children acquire and apply an understanding of math concepts in real life situations. Early primary children need to explore math concepts such as addition and subtraction with interesting materials and play fun math games with other children before they are tested for fluency.

The purpose of a test is to uncover what a child has learned and what skills are yet to develop. Tests should provide feedback to the teacher. When we test only for speed — not even evaluating all of the problems — we have lost an opportunity to use the information to plan new lessons and experriences for the child.

I am concerned about any teaching practice that causes anxiety in children. I fail to see how stress creates a positive learning environment for anyone. Older children may find some benefit in comparing their scores on timed tests, but for young children, whose concept of time is uncertain, the only place they will attribute the failure is to themselves.

I suggest you speak with your son’s teacher. Focus the conversation on the behaviors you see in your son and your concerns about his level of anxiety. The teacher may have designed this math program without considering how it makes the children feel about themselves and their abilities. Some children don’t show their feelings to their teacher. The teacher might not recognize the distress this practice is causing.

In 2007, the cost of treating arthritis was more than 15 billion dollars; the overall cost in lost productivity was 150 billion. It is estimated that in an average family, a diagnosis of arthritis in the primary wage-earner will lead to a 50% drop in income over the first 10 years.

Source:Arthritis Insight

The Level of Inflammation in RA Remains Stable

A study conducted by the National Data Bank for Rheumatic Disease-Arthritis Research Center Foundation, has determined that the level of inflammation in rheumatoid arthritis is determined early and remains stable over the longterm course of the illness.

Over ten years, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) was analyzed to measure inflammatory activity in 1,897 patients with RA. Scientists found that the ESR decreased by 4 mm/h over the first 10 years of disease, remained stable over the next 25 years, and increased slightly thereafter.

This is disappointing since earlier theories suggested that RA tended to “burn out” or lessen in severity over the years. However, the good new is that the very recently diagnosed who were receiving combination therapies did show marked improvement in symptoms, rather than remaining stable.

RA is a “New” Disease

Contrary to earlier reports, rheumatoid arthritis is a “new” disease, not described until the mid-1700′s. There have been many reports that RA existed in ancient times, but there is no scientific evidence that the disease existed in ancient Europe, Asia or Africa.

However, in Alabama, six skeletons of Native Americans–3,000 to 5,000 years old–show changes typical of RA. Scientists believe that some infectious agent was introduced and confined to a small geographic area before 1700′s.

Why is this important? If RA did appear recently, that suggests some environmental change could have triggered RA because the human gene structure has not changed in the last 250 years.