In other news, the modern day Nazis had a 20,000 person rally at Madison Square Garden, with thousands more watching TV screens outside.
Word is there were about maybe 150 protestors tops.
The fascist state of NY, and that bastion of fascism NYC, needs to up their game and start protecting Democracy.
4char
. These ones.
Maybe in a philosophical vacuum, but I generally agree govt oversteps pretty often, and not just in education. I donât have a problem with age restrictions, however, or more importantly parental control superseding govt in a childâs life. Cue govt overreach.
Again, we seem to actually agree and my posts in this thread have been saying as much.
Well, schools are about the children so itâs not a ploy. The real problem is most people canât see beyond themselves, and will push what they want on everybody so their kid can have whatever it is.
The solution, in the specific instance discussed, is for education to focus on academia and leave responsibility of shaping/coaching/experiencing world views on parents guiding and raising children in the world. Public schools are not parental units, nor should they be. The belief that they are is the core of the problem and it feeds both sides of the fence youâre mentioning.
Remove the ability for either to influence be it via anal raping surprises in literary assignments or the Ten Commandments and let kids just come home understanding X and Y formulas and foreshadowing instead, without intentionally provocative and unnecessary content. Problem solved.
I would say the literary elements have been focused on too much at the expense of communication. Clear communication with proper English grammar is lacking. We are producing college grads that are at the high-end well trained idiots and at the low-end just idiots. The top have better math skills, but canât communicate or provide any context or summarization skills. The lower end simply have no skills. It starts at the elementary level, wasting time and resources on these social or parental aspects are hurting our nation. China loomsâŠ
Then you canât teach history and have to avoid current events and the news.
Hereâs another little fun fact about my local public school and Democrat policy of unfettered immigration with comprehensive social welfare benefits. It is very, very pertinent to the subject of this thread due to the massive impacts immigration policy can have on a town like mine.
My kid graduated from Lewiston Public School in 2018. The school was on the decline with some concerning issues at the time, but NOTHING like what it is today after several years of local-to-federal complete Democrat control. I remember when I met with his freshman pre-algebra teacher to talk about some issues he was having in class. He was spending too much time on his cellphone, you see.
âWhy donât you take it away from him for the class or send him to the principal?â, I asked.
I wasnât shocked that a 14 year-old boy was having issues staying focused on math, but I was shocked to learn that students were allowed to use their cellphones in class. It seemed obvious to me that something like that was a major distraction and impediment to learning.
Lewiston Public Schools has recently revised this policy and no longer allows cellphone use on school property in most cases. Why this change of heart? The unstated reason for this has absolutely nothing to do with educating children more effectively.
The real reason many of us suspect is that too much dysfunction and violence is being filmed and our politicians and the administrators that work for them are unable to perpetuate their political narratives when so much evidence stands contrary to it. Videos of major problems are just creating too many major problems for the adults that wouldnât be major problems if the videoâs didnât exist.
Hence, no more cellphones.
Visceral evidence creates visceral reactions in people, like the severe beating of a 12 year old girl that took place on the bus the other week while the adults did nothing to intervene, as directed by school policy. The administrationâs solution, arrived at through âcultural responsivenessâ and âsocial and emotional learningâ principles, was to remove the beaten girl from the bus, place her in a special van and allow the assailants to remain on the bus.
âItâs their right to ride the busâ, we were told.
Democrats bring nothing but decay and dysfunction with their policies.
You teach it objectively and leave the thought shaping alone.
Similarly, you can objectively teach literacy without the unnecessary introduction of anal rape or religious principles.
I understand youâre trying to foster debate but weâre losing application of critical thought here, which we both agree is a problem.
Do you ever notice how the good guys keep winning every war?
Objective teaching of history is not REALLY possible in any comprehensive sense, but it is possible to stick to the major facts about history. The challenge lies in doing that without incorporating value judgements, but NOT incorporating value judgements also presents problems of its own. Can you really learn about the medieval world without understanding the force of nature that was the Mongols and feeling at least kind of bad for all of the people whose entire societies they completely annihilated, never to be known to history at all?
Or is that a case of good folks from the steppe living their own authentic truth in the 13th century?
CRT and related movements in education, for instance, have been successful insomuch as there is probably not a single American history subject that Americans are more broadly aware of than the institution of slavery.
How many Americans under 30 could name the major belligerents of World War II? How many could explain the functions of the legislative, judicial and executive branches of government? How many could name the decade in which the Korean War took place?
Not many, I suspect, but every single one of them will know that we had slavery at one point.
History is, in my opinion, the trickiest of subjects to teach if your goal is making your students aware of more facts without infecting them with your own value judgements.
I observed a class one time and a student had his cellphone out. After class, the teacher told me that his education plan which was created based on his âdisabilityâ (a 504), stated he could only be corrected or told to do something once. After that, the teacher canât ask or tell him to do it. Now, the average person can see how that is a formula for disaster. But these plans, which must be followed according to the law, are created by therapists and psychologists, not teachers. They were made into law by lobby groups and lawyers and ultimately politicians.
This is true. It happened in other schools as well. I believe I read somewhere that most teachers would be ok with cameras in the classroom. Like most cops were actually ok with bodycams. Yet, we wonât have cameras in the classroom because schools donât want the public to see just how terrible kids are which will lead to questions about why schools are doing so little to fix the behaviors. And to be honest, many parents donât want the public to see how shitty their kids are.
Tell me how to teach the Civil War, or even the Revolution, without mentioning the moral issues behind them. Objectivity means teaching without judgment but it doesnât mean you donât teach the arguments for and against.
I understand what youâre saying, and I have no idea why your school district actually made their decision, but I fully support schools no longer allowing cellphone use on school property. More schools in my state have announced theyâre going tech free (I donât know exactly what that always entails, but itâs at least almost always meant that kids do not have possession of their phones in class) and I believe theyâve only seen good come from it. (Weâre also largely, but certainly not entirely, not dealing with the issues you mention.)
You know who objects the most to these policies? Parents.
Not to get too off track, but something that doesnât get brought up much regarding kids, particularly girls, and smart phones, is how they are used by sex traffickers to reach their victims.
You teach the dates, locations, places, people, events and time period sentiments, objectively. As they occurred. As facts that existed. You donât teach the morality of slavery itself. Or white guilt and whatever else. Moral reckoning is up to the individual student to decipher and apply, and if guidance is sought it comes from the parent.
A little bit different than using a fictional novel with ass rape to teach literary elements when there are perfectly capable substitutes. And then defending ass rape in the curriculum because itâs a thing that happens. And TikTok.
I know youâve already agreed ass raping isnât really appropriate but I want to make sure we keep our eye on the ball.
The issue they usually bring up is not being able to contact their kids in the event that a shooting or something else terrible is going on.
I believe law enforcement has said it is pretty much always going to better for kids to listen to teachers and school officials and follow their drills, as well as stay quiet. Itâs hard to listen, follow drills, and stay silent when hundreds of kids are on their phones instead of doing what theyâre supposed to do.
I understand parents who feel this way. I would too. But I think the reward of minimizing the damaging effects of phones outweighs the risk of not being able to directly contact a child in the relatively rare chance of a shooting or something similar.
I genuinely believe most people have no idea what their kids have access to and are likely being exposed to. There is a very popular video game (if oneâs kid plays video games, they probably play it) that 1) has been known to make charges that werent clear to the user beforehand and they intentionally have practically no customer service/contact information or refund process; and (this is the actually important part) 2) has been shown to be a very popular place for pedophiles to make attempts at reaching out to kids. You can design worlds and people and make them do whatever they want. Itâs been shown that kids regularly see characters having sex or getting raped and the âfriendsâ they make in the game are often creepy adults. But parents see a brightly colored cartoon game and assume itâs fine.
You can easily find porn on YouTube, Instagram, Snapchat, Tiktok, etc. Bascially all platforms that most kids above the age of 5 are spending most of their time on will contain adult content. And pedophiles target these places because they know kids are on them and adults are largely ignorant of whatâs going on.
To me, this is the goal. Teach the facts, maybe the sentiments of the day as they objectively existed and test on that. Cut the fluff and engrained personal values. Not schools role. Same for the Mongols and whomever else.
Hiring qualified, capable teachers is a whole different can of worms. But a problem to address for sure.
How much did it cost to get Aristotle to teach your kids?
How much to buy a paidagogo?
Is education more expensive today?
Philip II of Macedon reportedly rebuilt Aristotleâs town in exchange for tutoring his son, Alexander (later known as âThe Greatâ). It is also suspected that Alexander had Aristotle killed. He was a well-educated and particularly deadly guy, that Alexander.
This is one of those increasingly murky situations for me. Normally I would completely agree with you, but there are also issues of acute personal safety that students today have to deal with that simply were not a problem when I attended public schools (before cellphones as we know them existed). The timing of the decision at my local school (2022) makes the motivations particularly suspicious to me when I consider it along with the march towards less transparency and less accountability for the adults.
Youâre going to get a pretty limited perspective on history if you really try to teach it that way.
Iâm fine with history being taught through the lens of Western and Judeo/Christian values in a broad sense. Itâs okay to say that the Imperial Japanese did some very bad things, and not just chalk it up to a different but equally valid set of political ideas and cultural traditions.
Yes, an objective one. Which is perfect.
Sure. But I wouldnât downplay dropping atomic bombs on citizens. I wouldnât weight either one. Just teach what happened.
This is the opposite side of the woke coin. Many people feel the way you do. Teach morality, but make it my morality. I doubt we will escape the scenario, but will just incorporate the most popular morality of the day, or region.
Objectivity is a lost art. So is maintaining selective influence.
Lol whatâs the most objective history book youâve read that you think should be assigned for reading in public high school?
Unless you want to examine history as a scientific pursuit to answer questions of âhow do we even know thisâ, youâre going to end up with some value judgements when teaching history as a humanities subject. If not, why bother highlighting what we consider atrocities?
What makes one death more significant than another, historically speaking?
All kinds of questions like this make it, in my opinion, a foolâs errand to attempt to be âobjectiveâ about learning history. It is and should be a mix of science and humanities.