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.
That's kind of what's behind my question. I don't believe anyone would ask about politics in an interview. Nor do I believe there is some organized conspiracy to put only liberals into teaching. But I do believe there is something about the field of teaching that selects for liberal viewpoints.
Just as someone else pointed out earlier up thread, they'd never seen an "indoctrination" day or course. Well of course not. But when you have only one viewpoint presented in how textbooks are written -- what they say and more importantly, what they don't say. In what reading assignments and stories, books, articles are required. In what the "correct" answer is. In what "facts" are presented or not.
The net result is a system that biases toward producing a liberal minded output. Training students to be liberal adults. Contrary to the purpose of an education system which is to produce informed, critically thinking adults.
Which leads back to the question: What about the education system selects for liberal teachers and against conservative?
If only one textbook is being presented, the school is definitely not following the Common Core standards. The system is not then hiring liberal teachers. It is hiring teachers who can't teach Common Core. That doesn't make one liberal. There are conservatives who can't teach to the Common Core.
Instead of having schools that impose a one-size-fits-all, rigid curriculum on everyone, what if we instead had "public superlibraries" which were basically libraries, plus miniclasses ( a miniclass is like a class that results in a certification at the end), plus mentors and counselors to help guide learners, plus daycare for young children? I would propose having a system like this, where children 0 to 8 would be eligible for free day care, young people 5-18 would be eligible for up to 7-8 hours of free miniclasses per weekday, and adults would be eligible for one free miniclass per day as a poverty-fighting measure? Obviously some fine-tuning would be needed but with the appropriate conditions, replacing schools with superlibraries could be made approximately revenue-neutral.
Thoughts?
Because the vast majority of children are flat out lazy and will spend all their time fooling around.
This supposed "desire to learn" that you hear about constantly does exist sometimes, but if left up to the child, it will be mostly applied to things like video games and torturing small animals.
Perhaps the best question for you to ponder is why so few conservatives go into teaching/education.
Hah!
Big city urban district public school teachers are conservative for the same reasons that big city police officers and emergency room physicians at big city public hospitals are.
Let's just say "they've seen it all" and leave it at that.
Because the vast majority of children are flat out lazy and will spend all their time fooling around.
This supposed "desire to learn" that you hear about constantly does exist sometimes, but if left up to the child, it will be mostly applied to things like video games and torturing small animals.
It only took 171 posts to get to the correct answer!
Instead of having schools that impose a one-size-fits-all, rigid curriculum on everyone, what if we instead had "public superlibraries" which were basically libraries, plus miniclasses ( a miniclass is like a class that results in a certification at the end), plus mentors and counselors to help guide learners, plus daycare for young children? I would propose having a system like this, where children 0 to 8 would be eligible for free day care, young people 5-18 would be eligible for up to 7-8 hours of free miniclasses per weekday, and adults would be eligible for one free miniclass per day as a poverty-fighting measure? Obviously some fine-tuning would be needed but with the appropriate conditions, replacing schools with superlibraries could be made approximately revenue-neutral.
Thoughts?
Who is going to make sure that the students are learning the subject matter properly and are meeting academic standards? Who is going to administer tests and oversee academic dishonesty?
These superlibraries are sounding pretty much like schools to me.
If only one textbook is being presented, the school is definitely not following the Common Core standards. The system is not then hiring liberal teachers. It is hiring teachers who can't teach Common Core. That doesn't make one liberal. There are conservatives who can't teach to the Common Core.
I didn't say one textbook. I said one viewpoint in the text books. None of which has anything to do with common core. Different argument.
I never remember having liberal or conservative teachers. They were not allowed to let their political view be known to the students. We used to ask them but they wouldn't tell us.
I don't remember our textbooks being conservative or liberal either. But our school system emphasized learning to THINK. Maybe that's what made me liberal. In high school I used to sit and ponder things.
Well, it seemed to me at the time that my teachers were presenting an unbiased viewpoint, but in adulthood I have come to recognize their biases. In many cases (for example American history) they were presenting the mainstream view points of historical analysis at the time and the ensuing years have changed our perspective on past events. Examples might be the reputations of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Woodrow Wilson, William Howard Taft, and Andrew Johnson.
I think some people are conflating liberal as in "liberal arts," or liberal as in "classical liberalism," with liberal as in "on the left in American politics." Pretty much every public school teacher will be the former, as that's what our education system is predicated upon.
As far as the latter goes, well, the majority of college educated middle class Americans vote Democratic. It's no surprise that teachers, who are part of that demographic, would also trend that direction. That said, I know plenty of teachers who vote Republican.
In my experience most professionals mostly keep their personal political views out of the workplace, teachers included.
Well, it seemed to me at the time that my teachers were presenting an unbiased viewpoint, but in adulthood I have come to recognize their biases. In many cases (for example American history) they were presenting the mainstream view points of historical analysis at the time and the ensuing years have changed our perspective on past events. Examples might be the reputations of Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Woodrow Wilson, William Howard Taft, and Andrew Johnson.
History is pretty much always going to have some bias in instruction, I think - even the education who's the most conscientious about showing multiple viewpoints has to select what material they have time to present, and what one considers important enough to include or exclude is a form of bias in and of itself. I think the important thing is to teach students how the historical record develops, and how interpretations can change depending on audience and context, so they learn not to be dogmatic about history, but to be open to new information that recontextualizes what they've already learned.
That said, some folks get very heated up if there's any questioning of the most mainstream historical narrative. I know a US history teacher who got himself in trouble having students debate whether the American Revolution was a just war, which to me seems like a pretty reasonable thought exercise, but apparently really set some folks in his community off.
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.
