Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Why does the right push that darn, "Chicken Little" mentality?
Death Panels
Redistribution of Wealth (which most of them don't have)
Kill Grandma
al Queda is comming
Government is watching
It must be really stressful to live in this constant state of "alarm". No wonder so many drink.
I don't see this as a liberal/conservative issue, but good article.
My objection to the direction that public education, known as 'progressive' since Dewey, is that protagonists have replaced academic content, as you see in the article, with the quasi-Marxist 'social justice.'
If you liked the article, I recommend this one to you:
1. At a recent meeting of the New York Teaching Fellows program (Teach for America: provides an alternate route to state certification for about 1,700 new teachers annually) , Sol Stern found the one book that the fellows had to read in full was Pedagogy of the Oppressed, by the Brazilian educator Paulo Freire.
This book has achieved near-iconic status in Americas teacher-training programs. In 2003, David Steiner and Susan Rozen published a study examining the curricula of 16 schools of education14 of them among the top-ranked institutions in the country, according to U.S. News and World Reportand found that Pedagogy of the Oppressed was one of the most frequently assigned texts in their philosophy of education courses.
2. But rather than dealing with the education of children, Pedagogy of the Oppressed mentions none of the issues that troubled education reformers throughout the twentieth century: testing, standards, curriculum, the role of parents, how to organize schools, what subjects should be taught in various grades, how best to train teachers, the most effective way of teaching disadvantaged students. This ed-school bestseller is, instead, a utopian political tract calling for the overthrow of capitalist hegemony and the creation of classless societies.
3. Freire never intends pedagogy to refer to any method of classroom instruction based on analysis and research, or to any means of producing higher academic achievement for students. [H]e relies on Marxs standard formulation that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat [and] this dictatorship only constitutes the transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society. In one footnote, however, Freire does mention a society that has actually realized the permanent liberation he seeks: it appears to be the fundamental aspect of Maos Cultural Revolution.
4. The pedagogical point of Freires thesis : its opposition to taxing students with any actual academic content, which Freire derides as official knowledge that serves to rationalize inequality within capitalist society. One of Freires most widely quoted metaphors dismisses teacher-directed instruction as a misguided banking concept, in which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing and storing the deposits. Freire proposes instead that teachers partner with their coequals, the students, in a dialogic and problem-solving process until the roles of teacher and student merge into teacher-students and student-teachers.
Pedagogy of the Oppressor by Sol Stern, City Journal Spring 2009
If we cannot reclaim the schools, it is the end of America.
Educated people reject Socialism, hence our sabotaged educational system tries to keep people ignorant.
This thread was never about education...PC's opening post was merely pretext for her real agenda...pinning Marxism to the left nefariously through Paulo Freire...
The thread died from that point on...PC has no real interest in the outcome of "others"
And when all else fails, paint those who oppose your politics as mentally unbalanced.
Nope, nothing haughty and elitist about that.
And when all else fails, paint those who oppose your politics as mentally unbalanced.
Nope, nothing haughty and elitist about that.
What would be the point in repudiating self-evident deflection and blatant elitist snobbery, when it refutes itself?And when all else fails, paint those who oppose your politics as mentally unbalanced.
Nope, nothing haughty and elitist about that.
And when you don't have any ability to repudiate facts, resort to "cliches"
Nope, nothing lazy ass or ignorant about that
Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:
creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;
augmenting primitive feelings of envy;
rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.
"The roots of liberalism and its associated madness can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind," he says. "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."
Educated people reject Socialism, hence our sabotaged educational system tries to keep people ignorant.
Of course, two can play Midcant's idiotic game:
Dr. Rossiter says the liberal agenda preys on weakness and feelings of inferiority in the population by:
creating and reinforcing perceptions of victimization;
satisfying infantile claims to entitlement, indulgence and compensation;
augmenting primitive feelings of envy;
rejecting the sovereignty of the individual, subordinating him to the will of the government.
"The roots of liberalism and its associated madness can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind," he says. "When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious."
LiveLeak.com - Top psychiatrist concludes liberals clinically nuts
And when all else fails, paint those who oppose your politics as mentally unbalanced....
And when all else fails, paint those who oppose your politics as mentally unbalanced....
A curious comeback that contains a kernel of truth the author may not agree with - not 'unbalanced' but certainly not balanced. LOL
See: [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Are-Doomed-Reclaiming-Conservative-Pessimism/dp/0307409589/ref=tag_cdp_bkt_edpp_url]Amazon.com: We Are Doomed: Reclaiming Conservative Pessimism (9780307409584): John Derbyshire: Books[/ame]
This is consistent with the Berkeley study and other comments from the more liberal and balanced folk above.
I see a lot of ignorance regarding the teaching of arithmetic.
6 year old children do not have the development to learn abstract algebra.
They can learn basic addition.
A good founding in arithmetic is essential to a better understanding of algebra in high school.
First grade math should drill the students daily in addition. Weekly tests measure their retention.
Second grade students drill daily in subtraction, with weekly tests.
Third grade Multiplication drills and tests
4th grade long division
5th grade fractions
Just like sports, the secret is drill, drill, drill.
It is not glamorous, it is not fun for the teacher, it is not a lot of things.
It is necessary to teach the children how to do basic arithmetic.
Calculators do not help, they hinder. They hinder because they become a crutch and excuse in one "I can use a calculator when I'm not in class."
Yes, but only if you can frame the right question. Which requires understanding the math, and that understanding begins with a facility at arithmetic which is sadly lacking in too many young people today.
You can catch up at a latter date, learning everything you need to know in college, but that tends to produce what I term neo-idiot savants; people who are highly trained in a very narrow field. Had they but received a better primary education they might be well rounded, but they are not, and the competitive nature of the workplace forces specialization which makes replacing those lost years all the harder.
Of course the math drill method is a very conservative teaching method, going back centuries, so it might not appeal to brain damaged liberals who want the "newest" trend.
Obviously you haven't quite the capacity to properly analyze the work. That's OK, though; it's not your fault.This thread was never about education...PC's opening post was merely pretext for her real agenda...pinning Marxism to the left nefariously through Paulo Freire...
The thread died from that point on...PC has no real interest in the outcome of "others"
I agree and most wingnuts exhibit the classic conservative worldview.
"Researchers help define what makes a political conservative"
'Four researchers who culled through 50 years of research literature about the psychology of conservatism report that at the core of political conservatism is the resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and that some of the common psychological factors linked to political conservatism include:'
Fear and aggression
Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity
Uncertainty avoidance
Need for cognitive closure
Terror management
07.22.2003 - Researchers help define what makes a political conservative
I see a lot of ignorance regarding the teaching of arithmetic.
6 year old children do not have the development to learn abstract algebra.
They can learn basic addition.
A good founding in arithmetic is essential to a better understanding of algebra in high school.
First grade math should drill the students daily in addition. Weekly tests measure their retention.
Second grade students drill daily in subtraction, with weekly tests.
Third grade Multiplication drills and tests
4th grade long division
5th grade fractions
Just like sports, the secret is drill, drill, drill.
It is not glamorous, it is not fun for the teacher, it is not a lot of things.
It is necessary to teach the children how to do basic arithmetic.
Calculators do not help, they hinder. They hinder because they become a crutch and excuse in one "I can use a calculator when I'm not in class."
Yes, but only if you can frame the right question. Which requires understanding the math, and that understanding begins with a facility at arithmetic which is sadly lacking in too many young people today.
You can catch up at a latter date, learning everything you need to know in college, but that tends to produce what I term neo-idiot savants; people who are highly trained in a very narrow field. Had they but received a better primary education they might be well rounded, but they are not, and the competitive nature of the workplace forces specialization which makes replacing those lost years all the harder.
Of course the math drill method is a very conservative teaching method, going back centuries, so it might not appeal to brain damaged liberals who want the "newest" trend.
You seem to have experience in this area.
And it is interesting that none of our reliably doctrinaire liberal friends have found it beneficial to argue the points you made.
We use a curriculum pretty much as you outline it, and, of course, don't allow calculators.
Ah, we hear from an NEA sponsor.6 year old children do not have the development to learn abstract algebra.
Demonstrably false, as most blanket statements turn out to be. Any child that can tell time can learn modular arithmetic. Once they learn modular arithmetic they can learn the basics of finite abellian groups. That's the building block of most 300 level University abstract algebra courses. See Gallian's wonderful book.
The real debate is should a younger students be taught the basics of abstract algebra or should we be focusing on just arithmetic. That speaks to the goal of math education. If you want a population that is merely math literate, then arithmetic is enough. If you want to produce more mathematicians, then maybe we should push harder.
of the issues in the educational system is that tests are not cummulative enough and students frequently can't recall what they learned last week, much less last year.
Actually, the Drill method is new compared to the Moore Method as used in Euclid. What the NCTM is advocating is actually a very old method. You have it backwards.Of course the math drill method is a very conservative teaching method, going back centuries, so it might not appeal to brain damaged liberals who want the "newest" trend.
