Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Anyone writing curriculum at the Federal Level is so far removed from the classrooms that it's not funny.
Self reflection, active learning, group cohesion, peer educating, and just plop them down in front of a computer and they will "seek out the knowledge themselves".
These people have NO CLUE and probably have no kids in school.
You want a good curriculum written up...get good TEACHERS from each field and have them do it.
Yep, which is why the governments role should be as vague and generalized as the concepts they promote. That is, to promote general concepts to which localized communities can use as a guide line (not a policy) to the implementation of their curriculum.
As an example, a guide line should be that of general concepts (honesty, integrity, respect, discipline, etc...) while the localized communities decide in exactly how they will teach such concepts within their own systems. This way, the government promotes, yet does not dictate or establish methods that it has no real understanding of.
I think his point is that these departments have no authority to regulate under their name. That is, the power of the federal government is limited to the promotion of the general welfare, not the providing of it and its ability to dictate standards is without legitimate claim.
The danger of such is that government is highly susceptible to corruption and the design of our government while resilient to a point of such is so based on its limited powers and authority. By giving more and more powers to the government, we break down the very aspect of our system that helps protect us from its tyrannical nature.
One can not claim these are acceptable interferences by the government and then claim that politicians are crooked without being a hypocrite. As I said, the benefit of our systems original design and intent was to limit the powers and involvement of the government to the point of making them inefficient and unproductive in order to prevent it from usurping power from the people and enslaving them.
Excellent Post!
I find it particularly disturbing that our young people are not being taught the rights of individuals and the states in public schools anymore. Amendments Nine and Ten seem to be missing in the Federal Curriculum text. Out of sight; out of mind, I guess.
No, the topic is indoctrination, it was YOUR topic and YOUR thread. A video about the proliferation of stuff might best fit into a math class for there isn't any other class that deals with large numbers and the environment except a science class, something they don't offer at that age level I believe. Your complaint that it was a bad placement for that kind of teaching doesn't support your claim of indoctrination. You still appear to claim that teaching kids about the environment is a indoctrination, and I posted an opinion that opposed that belief.
I offered that I agree our educational system needs improvement and agree that basics should be reemphasized, but all you did here was insult me. Gee, I see you take this thing personally and you also probably think your children are being attacked by the horrors of socialism and environmentalism. Too bad for you. At least your children will turn out to be better thinkers and will offer solutions instead of blaming others.
Talk about tangential teaching! "The Story of Stuff" belongs in a math class because it "deals with large numbers." WOW! Now that is some rationalization. I am still chuckling over the "creative thinking" and tangential associations going on here. I guess it opens up the door to teach just about anything in the classroom with this kind of thinking - and they do!!!
Teaching about the environment belongs in a science class, which 5th graders in private school have, by the way. But, the public schools have long ago decided that "teaching" about the environment isn't good enough. The schools need to promote "environmental activism," so they incorporate their agenda into all subject matter - at the expense of time spent actually learning the academic subject matter.
Oh, I see. And your telling me to "get an education" wasn't insulting? Liberal definitions and rules of discourse are so confusing.
I find it particularly disturbing that our young people are not being taught the rights of individuals and the states in public schools anymore. Amendments Nine and Ten seem to be missing in the Federal Curriculum text. Out of sight; out of mind, I guess.
The good of the collective has higher priority over the good of the individual.
Group learning, group assessment is where it's at today. It's called "cooperative learning".
It's not the individual that succeeds, it's the group that succeeds.
Remember.."Everyone is a winner".
I've seen it in action and the only comment I have is what do you do with those that do no work and just copy the answers from those that do and get the same grade ?
Cooperative learning - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Cooperative learning is an approach to organizing classroom activities into academic and social learning experiences. Students must work in groups to complete tasks collectively. Unlike individual learning, students learning cooperatively capitalize on one another’s resources and skills (asking one another for information, evaluating one another’s ideas, monitoring one another’s work, etc.).[1][2] Furthermore, the teacher's role changes from giving information to facilitating students' learning. [3][4]Everyone succeeds when the group succeeds.
A few things: one, more money is headed to weapons and actions of war than to education. You should look there for your money. Another thing. Considering how you complained about having 20,000 with someone richer had 200,000, I think the richer should pay higher taxes.
I DO want reduced spending on military. This does not take away from what I said previously. My statements do not have to do with the rich paying more taxes. I just believe they should be footing their own bill for sending their children to school. Why are they getting welfare?
Somehow I made it through 12 years public school, and 4 years of a public university without being indoctrinated into communism or any fringe left wing groups.. Actually, I'm fully capable of making my own mind up about things, and have my own views (personally I think both D's and R's, libs and neocons are all full of BS). And somehow my child has been in public school, and I haven't noticed him coming home with any applications to the join the communist party.
I'll bet all of you people wouldn't be screaming "indoctrination" if the public schools decided to start teaching fundamentalist Christianity in the classroom.
Reason for Editing:
I agree it seems to me that many people are mad because it does not agree with their opinions..
On another note I went to a private college for 4 years, graduated from public school, I still think for myself and make some good and not so good decisions.
The Blaze and Beck, no thanks I do not watch propaganda on purpose since it only tends to be a diversion from the truth and reality, does not matter if it is right-wing or left-wing, propaganda is always the same half-truths, some truth and outright lies all mixed together.
Don't like the public schools get involved, go to PTA meetings and get involved or go further and get your children out of the schools and you can indoctrinate your children yourself or have someone that agrees with your POV teach them as you see fit.
Casper
The Blaze and Beck, no thanks I do not watch propaganda on purpose since it only tends to be a divertion from the truth and reality, does not matter if it is right-wing or left-wing, propaganda is always the same half-truths, some truth and outright lies all mixed together.
Don't like the public schools get involved, go to PTA meetings and get involved or go further and get your children out of the schools and you can indoctrinate your chidren yourself or have someone that agrees with your POV teach them as you see fit.
Casper
The PTA is not the place to go for curriculum changes.
The board of trustee meetings, national and federal teacher organizations.
The key is to be aware of the changes and the pros/cons of those changes.
I don't think you quite "get" outcome based education. It's another term for "results" based. You study math, the outcome should be you know the math. ETC.
Outcome Based education was previously called Competency Based education. It's goal is to educate students toward the 'workforce'. NH has implemented a 'school-to-work' initiative, where school districts, with the support of local corporations determine and guide students toward areas of study. While this sounds great to many, we have eliminated many vo-tech schools where specific competencies training is more appropriately achieved by student/parent choices.
Along with Marc Tucker's outcome based education, our teachers are OVER using the constructivist methodology. Classes truly are like social workshops and little is directly instructed. You will not find the traditional liberal arts education, as competencies, along with attitudes and values are the outcomes, reform math is substituted for rigorous math which provides the foundation necessary for higher math. Traditional algorithms proven for centuries are never taught. Repetition of basic math skills is not seriously undertaken. Students are not learning much outside of being able to speak for themselves and create a variety of new and different methods without consistency.
The new basis for merit in such a system is not academic or knowledge based, but instead confidence and creativity based. The tragic part is that many of our brightest students, the hope for our future, are being trusted to such a system and its trusted ed professionals are determining what they should do and therefore the limitations of what they will need to learn. While Germany is moving away from such a system, we are implementing it. Especially tragic is the effect such a non-disciplined system has on boys and more logical girls who do not have the challenging academic opportunities which lead to genuine self esteem.
Combine the ego-centric constructivist methodology and non-instruction of project based learning, reform math, and social emphasis with texts diminishing the role of authority figures, especially parents and which paint dysfunctional families as normal and you have a general overview of public ed in NH and many other states and soon in most states.
Yes, parents are to blame for trusting educational 'professionals' to the degree they do and not being actively involved.
The PTA is not the place to go for curriculum changes.
The board of trustee meetings, national and federal teacher organizations.
The key is to be aware of the changes and the pros/cons of those changes.
You don't get that info at the PTA meetings.
That's not true, there are PTA representatives on most school boards, at local and state levels. One can personally approach these bodies, or go through your representatives. Also most school boards make their curriculums and materials available to the public. When our school board makes curriculum changes it is available for review prior to implementation, and any new books are made available for parents to review before they are circulated. Most people are just not interested in these events.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
