Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:The natural progression is something people often forget about.  The rise of liberal principals and progressive ideals, whether you agree with them or not, are certainly embedded in social and economic transitions.  Unfortunately, the mere mention of Granger Laws, Populism as a political movement, the establishment of its principals through Progressivism in the late 19th and early 20th century and of course the exciting nature of Hoover's response to the Great Depression are enough to make some peoples' eyes glaze over.  It is complicated, and at times boring to understand, but its all there if you really dig into it.  It, like most social change (the Rise of Conservatism, Imperialism, the abolition movement etc.) grew from a complicated past.

 

America is opening itself up to progressive ideals and liberal principals for a number of reasons.  I imagine McCarthyism in the 50's didn't help the conservative cause against socialism.  


I think Rand Paul put it interestingly about the conservative party:


"We need a more diverse party. People with tattoos, and without tattoos. With earrings, and without earrings.”

The Republican Party has alienated some groups of people (and the Democratic Party can be just as guilty of this, though the people they have alienated have been on the decline, which explains the leftward shift).  I mean both groups can be really offensive and downright ornery.  For every Jerry Falwell you have an Al Sharpton.  Though it seems that the left consider Sharpton more like the distant cousin they don't like to talk about, while the right considers Falwell as their well-meaning Uncle.  


The idea that those who attended public school have been indoctrinated is a bit insulting, as is the idea that those who are sending their kids to public school are letting their children be indoctrinated, and that those who are teachers are indoctrinating kids.  Especially since it's based on notions that people have beliefs that don't align with their own.  As if to say "If you don't agree with me, you're either dumb or you've been brainwashed."


Of course there's other causes behind it, and there's natural progression through the years (often learning from our past mistakes -- which is certainly a good thing.  Or at least I think it is.)



 

Quote:Nope, we have more guns.

Oh so you and your views potentially being left behind would cause you to threaten what exactly here cheif?

Quote:America is opening itself up to progressive ideals and liberal principals for a number of reasons. I imagine McCarthyism in the 50's didn't help the conservative cause against socialism.


I think Rand Paul put it interestingly about the conservative party:


"We need a more diverse party. People with tattoos, and without tattoos. With earrings, and without earrings.”

<span style="font-size:14px;">The Republican Party has alienated some groups of people (and the Democratic Party can be just as guilty of this, though the people they have alienated have been on the decline, which explains the leftward shift). I mean both groups can be really offensive and downright ornery. For every Jerry Falwell you have an Al Sharpton. Though it seems that the left consider Sharpton more like the distant cousin they don't like to talk about, while the right considers Falwell as their well-meaning Uncle.


The idea that those who attended public school have been indoctrinated is a bit insulting, as is the idea that those who are sending their kids to public school are letting their children be indoctrinated, and that those who are teachers are indoctrinating kids. Especially since it's based on notions that people have beliefs that don't align with their own. As if to say "If you don't agree with me, you're either dumb or you've been brainwashed."


Of course there's other causes behind it, and there's natural progression through the years (often learning from our past mistakes -- which is certainly a good thing. Or at least I think it is.)
</span>

Well said.

Quote:As a teacher and someone who is NOT a big fan of Common Core I have to disagree with the idea that it is based on having a standard answer.  As a matter of fact, that is the argument that many  people have with it, that if you can explain how you come to your answers you can still get points.  I know that in Social Studies they encourage students not to memorize facts, but focus on argumentation and cause and effect relationships.

 

I know that in the Social Studies curriculum changes encourage thinking like the example below:

 

Old way - Explain why Gettysburg was the turning point of the Civil War.

 

New Way - Explain which of the following battles best represents the turning point of the Civil War:

 

Antietam               (You could argue it discouraged foreign powers from entering the war (battle itself and issuance of Emancipation Proclamation) and thus killed any chance the South                                                                had of winning)

Vicksburg             (You could argue that the North gains control of the Mississippi and divides the South in half)

Gettysburg           (Last major offensive in the North for the South and no major victories after it)

 

Each could be correct, and there is no real definitive answer.  When I grew up the right answer was Gettysburg, period.

 

I agree that Common Core limits my ability as a teacher to focus on areas of interest for students and that the tests that measure the students growth focus on things other than the historical thinking skills that they want the kids to use, but I think if we want to fix it or get real change we can't have statements that try to identify it as one particular way, that it is only detrimental.

I agree with you, and if all subjects were taught in that way there would be no issue.  The complaint I hear from teachers however is that they spend all of their time teaching to pass the standardized test and as you stated are limited in their ability to actually teach.  The way math is taught in common core is beyond ridiculous.  

Quote: 

America is opening itself up to progressive ideals and liberal principals for a number of reasons.  I imagine McCarthyism in the 50's didn't help the conservative cause against socialism.  


I think Rand Paul put it interestingly about the conservative party:


"We need a more diverse party. People with tattoos, and without tattoos. With earrings, and without earrings.”

The Republican Party has alienated some groups of people (and the Democratic Party can be just as guilty of this, though the people they have alienated have been on the decline, which explains the leftward shift).  I mean both groups can be really offensive and downright ornery.  For every Jerry Falwell you have an Al Sharpton.  Though it seems that the left consider Sharpton more like the distant cousin they don't like to talk about, while the right considers Falwell as their well-meaning Uncle.  

The idea that those who attended public school have been indoctrinated is a bit insulting, as is the idea that those who are sending their kids to public school are letting their children be indoctrinated, and that those who are teachers are indoctrinating kids.  Especially since it's based on notions that people have beliefs that don't align with their own.  As if to say "If you don't agree with me, you're either dumb or you've been brainwashed."


Of course there's other causes behind it, and there's natural progression through the years (often learning from our past mistakes -- which is certainly a good thing.  Or at least I think it is.)

<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:10pt;font-familyans-serif;">

 
 

</div>

 

There are stories every day of liberal bias in public school classrooms.  What is insulting is this homework assignment given to 6th graders comparing President Bush to Adolph Hitler.

 

There are several other examples in this blog post with links to various news stories.  One example is to credit Mikhail Gorbachev for ending the Cold War rather than President Reagan.

Quote:There are stories every day of liberal bias in public school classrooms.  What is insulting is this homework assignment given to 6th graders comparing President Bush to Adolph Hitler.

 

There are several other examples in this blog post with links to various news stories.  One example is to credit Mikhail Gorbachev for ending the Cold War rather than President Reagan.

In the first case... the teacher got in trouble for the assignment.  So... where's the bias exactly?  Though I don't think the assignment seems all that bad.  Both Hitler and Bush did abuse their powers in different ways (I'm sure you're a big Bush supporter, which I find strange since he grew the government like crazy)  I'm sure if this was Obama, you'd probably be praising the teacher for having 'right wing values' 


As for the second... well I know you won't believe it since it's not a right wing blog or anything, but I'll post it for any third parties who are reading this, so they can decide for themselves about Howard Zinn's Textbook (and it's 'alleged' popularity in high schools)... http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...-history-/


I know for example my wife does not use Zinn's textbook for any of her classes.  In fact every History teacher at the school uses the same textbook.  And I know that my children do not have a textbook by Howard Zinn either.  


I'm sure some teachers may choose to assign the book.  Just from a quick search (though it seems optional, and that's a teacher by teacher basis)


Most people have some natural biases, and they shouldn't let it interfere with their work.  But it's certainly not an indoctrination by the public schools, and you'll curiously rarely hear about the efforts of good teachers.


I also imagine you'd have more conservative bias in public schools as well if you had more conservative teachers (but conservatives tend not to go into the profession)

Quote:Oh so you and your views potentially being left behind would cause you to threaten what exactly here cheif?

Its the same when any group is disenfranchised, at some point those who's voice is silenced lash out.

Quote:In the first case... the teacher got in trouble for the assignment.  So... where's the bias exactly?  Though I don't think the assignment seems all that bad.  Both Hitler and Bush did abuse their powers in different ways (I'm sure you're a big Bush supporter, which I find strange since he grew the government like crazy)  I'm sure if this was Obama, you'd probably be praising the teacher for having 'right wing values' 


As for the second... well I know you won't believe it since it's not a right wing blog or anything, but I'll post it for any third parties who are reading this, so they can decide for themselves about Howard Zinn's Textbook (and it's 'alleged' popularity in high schools)... http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...-history-/

I know for example my wife does not use Zinn's textbook for any of her classes.  In fact every History teacher at the school uses the same textbook.  And I know that my children do not have a textbook by Howard Zinn either.  


I'm sure some teachers may choose to assign the book.  Just from a quick search (though it seems optional, and that's a teacher by teacher basis)


Most people have some natural biases, and they shouldn't let it interfere with their work.  But it's certainly not an indoctrination by the public schools, and you'll curiously rarely hear about the efforts of good teachers.


I also imagine you'd have more conservative bias in public schools as well if you had more conservative teachers (but conservatives tend not to go into the profession)

 

In the first case, let's look at it this way.  Is it ever appropriate to compare any U.S. President with Adolph Hitler?  The answer is no, no matter if the President is left wing or right wing.  However, comparing President Bush to Adolph Hitler was very much common among the far left.  The fact that this goes all the way to a public school classroom should outrage most people, however you seem to be alright with it.

 

Put it this way, what if the same comparison is made between President Obama and Adolph Hitler?  After all, they both "abused their powers".  What if President Obama was compared to the likes of Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong or Kim Jong Il?  After all, they all have communist leanings.  Would it be appropriate in a 6th grade classroom?

 

By the way, yes I did support President Bush though I wasn't happy with some of his policies during his second term.  Liberals are always quick to point out how government grew under his "regime" as they like to put it.  (Incidentally, using the term "regime" when referring to President Obama's administration tends to irk liberals).  However, the growth of government and bureaucracy under President Obama's regime is largely ignored.  Why is that?  I would venture to say that it's because of "Barrak Hussien Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm"!

 

As far as the second link that I provided, it pretty much came up on a simple google search.  Many of the links on that page point to news stories that support the claims.  For example, who did the most to end The Cold War?  What is behind the textbook debate/situation in Texas?  What about religion in schools?

 

Take a look at how children are taught and brought up today.  Everyone gets a "medal" or a "prize" just for "participating".  They are not taught that there are winners and losers.  There is no playing "cowboys and indians" or no playing with plastic army soldiers.  Heck, students even get sent home for wearing clothing honoring the military or wearing clothing that includes the U.S. Flag.  What about a student getting sent home for eating a pop tart in the shape of a gun? (That last link comes from what I suspect is one of your favorite websites, the huffington and puffington post).  What about a student sent home for wearing a shirt showing his support for the NRA?  Here is another example of a school indoctrinating students.

 

I could go on and on with examples of how children are "indoctrinated" in today's public schools.  To say that it's "insulting" and not happening is completely false.  The only thing that is "insulting" is the fact that those on the far left refuse to acknowledge that it is in fact happening, and they encourage it.

 

I'm not saying that your wife does it, but to say that indoctrination in public schools is not happening is completely false.

Quote:In the first case, let's look at it this way. Is it ever appropriate to compare any U.S. President with Adolph Hitler? The answer is no, no matter if the President is left wing or right wing. However, comparing President Bush to Adolph Hitler was very much common among the far left. The fact that this goes all the way to a public school classroom should outrage most people, however you seem to be alright with it.


Put it this way, what if the same comparison is made between President Obama and Adolph Hitler? After all, they both "abused their powers". What if President Obama was compared to the likes of Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong or Kim Jong Il? After all, they all have communist leanings. Would it be appropriate in a 6th grade classroom?


By the way, yes I did support President Bush though I wasn't happy with some of his policies during his second term. Liberals are always quick to point out how government grew under his "regime" as they like to put it. (Incidentally, using the term "regime" when referring to President Obama's administration tends to irk liberals). However, the growth of government and bureaucracy under President Obama's regime is largely ignored. Why is that? I would venture to say that it's because of "Barrak Hussien Obama, mmm, mmm, mmm"!


As far as the second link that I provided, it pretty much came up on a simple google search. Many of the links on that page point to news stories that support the claims. For example, who did the most to end The Cold War? What is behind the textbook debate/situation in Texas? What about religion in schools?


Take a look at how children are taught and brought up today. Everyone gets a "medal" or a "prize" just for "participating". They are not taught that there are winners and losers. There is no playing "cowboys and indians" or no playing with plastic army soldiers. Heck, students even <a class="bbc_url" href='http://archive.militarytimes.com/article/20100617/NEWS/6170312/Student-sent-home-wearing-soldier-clad-hat'>get sent home for wearing clothing honoring the military</a> or <a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.ijreview.com/2015/03/283554-high-court-decide-whether-kids-can-wear-american-flag-shirts-school-one-particular-day/'>wearing clothing that includes the U.S. Flag</a>. What about a student getting sent home for <a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/18/student-suspended-for-pop-tart-gun_n_2903500.html'>eating a pop tart</a> in the shape of a gun? (That last link comes from what I suspect is one of your favorite websites, the huffington and puffington post). What about a student sent home for wearing a shirt showing <a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.huffingtonpost.com/student-press-law-center/first-amendment-lawsuit-student-was-punished-for-wearing-a-t-shirt-advocating-gun-rights_b_7295046.html'>his support for the NRA</a>? <a class="bbc_url" href='http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_3560566'>Here</a> is another example of a school indoctrinating students.


I could go on and on with examples of how children are "indoctrinated" in today's public schools. To say that it's "insulting" and not happening is completely false. The only thing that is "insulting" is the fact that those on the far left refuse to acknowledge that it is in fact happening, and they encourage it.


I'm not saying that your wife does it, but to say that indoctrination in public schools is not happening is completely false.

In fairness, these examples are not because of Common Core (which again, I'm not a fan of) and some of the examples are almost a decade old. When I graduated high school 20 odd years ago I had a government teacher complain daily about Clinton. I had an American History teacher tell us that Reagan was the greatest president that ever lived and made us do a research project on him. I recently worked with an uber conservative that claimed that plastic was natural (because all of the ingredients to make it at from Earth...I know, I know) and therefore not bad for the environment. My point is that you can find examples of teachers embedding their personal opinion everywhere, but it isn't necessarily indoctrination (though I think we would all agree it's inappropriate.) From the examples you provided, it would seem as though my experiences in high school were indoctrination too, though I would not label it that.


My department at work is a healthy balance of liberals conservatives and moderates. So was the other school I worked at. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but a few examples of teachers acting like idiots doesn't really prove much of anything.

Teachers are irrelevant, it's the curriculum writers who really matter.

When a state ran school teaches only state approved history, science, and philosophy you have indoctrination. It doesn't matter at what level or if the material is accurate it's state approved or it's not taught that is indoctrination by the state. Would you ever expect state ran schools to approve teaching on dangers of the state or dependence on the state? Will they every teach non-state approved views on history or science?


Of course the state will seek to teach the next generation their view on everything from morals to science to history it insures another generation that thinks like them that votes like them and that functions like them.


Remember the state always has one goal in mind above all else, self preservation.

Anyone who knows a teacher can tell you how backwards teaching for a test really is. This is what America keeps striving for and we keep falling farther and farther behind the rest of the world.

Quote:There are stories every day of liberal bias in public school classrooms.  What is insulting is this homework assignment given to 6th graders comparing President Bush to Adolph Hitler.

 

There are several other examples in this blog post with links to various news stories.  One example is to credit Mikhail Gorbachev for ending the Cold War rather than President Reagan.

Is it just a perceived liberal bias you have a problem with? Is it ok to have conservative bias?

Quote:Its the same when any group is disenfranchised, at some point those who's voice is silenced lash out.

So violence then? It's ok to just say it.

Quote:When a state ran school teaches only state approved history, science, and philosophy you have indoctrination. It doesn't matter at what level or if the material is accurate it's state approved or it's not taught that is indoctrination by the state. Would you ever expect state ran schools to approve teaching on dangers of the state or dependence on the state? Will they every teach non-state approved views on history or science?


Of course the state will seek to teach the next generation their view on everything from morals to science to history it insures another generation that thinks like them that votes like them and that functions like them.


Remember the state always has one goal in mind above all else, self preservation.

Science is science. Despite what some crazies would have you think, Science is science. There is no indoctrination behind it There are no views behind it. It's insulting to everyone in a science based field to suggest otherwise. 

 

In Florida, I was taught an extremely glossed over and polished version of US history. Not that I know more, it was an extremely conservative version of US history where patriotism is the way and the US nor anyone had done wrong. Is that ok? Or should it just be facts as it is with math's and science.

Quote:So violence then? It's ok to just say it.

I'm a staunch supporter of the 4 Box method of political action.

Quote:Science is science. Despite what some crazies would have you think, Science is science. There is no indoctrination behind it There are no views behind it. It's insulting to everyone in a science based field to suggest otherwise.


In Florida, I was taught an extremely glossed over and polished version of US history. Not that I know more, it was an extremely conservative version of US history where patriotism is the way and the US nor anyone had done wrong. Is that ok? Or should it just be facts as it is with math's and science.

Science isn't settled the theories of origin for example, or how old the earth is, climate change and human impact, all of these are debatable topics but are taught as fact in state schools.


History is probably the most corrupted subject in State schools your right history is taught from a perspective of glorification of the state. Just like the civil war is taught as a subject about slavery and glosses over the issue of federalism or that less then 2% of the south owned slaves.


All of that ignored the most dangerous thing about state schools is the state dictating parental teaching in issues of morality such as sex education. When did it become that states role to educate my child about sex and it's appropriate roles?

Quote:History is probably the most corrupted subject in State schools your right history is taught from a perspective of glorification of the state. Just like the civil war is taught as a subject about slavery and glosses over the issue of federalism or that less then 2% of the south owned slaves.

 

No, the Civil War is taught as having many causes, slavery certainly being one of them.  (Of course pro-confederates like to gloss over the subject of slavery, and would prefer their children to think I suppose that slavery wasn't really all that bad).  It doesn't matter what portion of the south owned slaves -- though it certainly isn't the low 'less than 2%' that you use.  Going by the 1860 census results 25% of southern families owned slaves. (Just 8% of all american families, though that includes the North)  

Quote:Science isn't settled the theories of origin for example, or how old the earth is, climate change and human impact, all of these are debatable topics but are taught as fact in state schools.


History is probably the most corrupted subject in State schools your right history is taught from a perspective of glorification of the state. Just like the civil war is taught as a subject about slavery and glosses over the issue of federalism or that less then 2% of the south owned slaves.


All of that ignored the most dangerous thing about state schools is the state dictating parental teaching in issues of morality such as sex education. When did it become that states role to educate my child about sex and it's appropriate roles?

Sigh.... Science is science. Personal beliefs do not make science untrue as much as it may bring them into question. Radiocarbon dating is not a made up psuedo science and neither is the theory of evolution. Scientific theories are not the same thing as regular theories, they are backed by years upon years of testing and experimentation. 

Quote:I'm a staunch supporter of the 4 Box method of political action.

 

4 boxes of bullets? You terrorist. 

 

Would you care to elaborate since google shows nothing to explain what this is?