New Hampshire Lawmakers Pass Law Allowing Parental Objections To Curriculum

[dblack]

Go read the founders on their general attituded about the mass of citizens voting. Almost none of the minorities had the vote, only New Jersey permitted women until ended in 1804, and all that many of white men.

John Hancock and others would have voted against the law.

But what does this have to do with voting?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Ok so N.H. wants to take the power out of the hands of the Dept of Education and put it into the hands of the citizens of their state.

Just how does this show they want more govt in their lives (aka big govt)?

The governor was correct in vetoing this democratic assault on republican government.

Well why didn't you just say "I don't want to talk about it I just want to use this thread as an excuse to spew talking points"

Plymco, it is called political philosophy of the founders, who eschewed leftist democracy, which is exactly what this bill has become.

And you support it?

Once again....the people in N.H. have gotten it so THEY (you know the citizens not the govt) control the cirriculum in THEIR schools instead of the Dept of Education (the govt). Just how is this being for big govt as you originally claimed?

This a progressive left-wing big government action. Show me how the founders would have approved of this.

Representative republicanism by the founders envisioned the elected representatives making such decision. Thus the voters would elect a school board, which would appoint a Superintentendent, who would personnel to design and impliment programs.

You are creating a left-wing democratic movement that will shatter public education.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

The governor was correct in vetoing this democratic assault on republican government.

Plymco, it is called political philosophy of the founders, who eschewed leftist democracy, which is exactly what this bill has become.

And you support it?

Once again....the people in N.H. have gotten it so THEY (you know the citizens not the govt) control the cirriculum in THEIR schools instead of the Dept of Education (the govt). Just how is this being for big govt as you originally claimed?

This a progressive left-wing big government action. Show me how the founders would have approved of this.

Representative republicanism by the founders envisioned the elected representatives making such decision. Thus the voters would elect a school board, which would appoint a Superintentendent, who would personnel to design and impliment programs.

You are creating a left-wing democratic movement that will shatter public education.

So, in other words, "Yeah pilgrim they aren't creating bigger government by taking away some govt controls, I was wrong but for some weird reason wont say so"

 

[chanel]

College admissions staff look at a student's grades, class rank, SATs AND the RIGOR of the school's curriculum. If they see "modified" or "alternative" curriculum on a HS transcript, most likely they will say "Next".

Frankly, I don't think too many parents (if any) would spend the kind of money it would take to set up an individualized program for their kid. This law is probably more of a statement than an action plan.

When my students whine and complain about the serious issues that concern them (like school lunches or dress code), I tell them the following:
a. Talk to the principal
b. Take it to student council
c. Attend a school board meeting
d. Write a letter to the local paper
e. Start a petition

I'd be curious to know how many of those avenues were attempted before the proponents of this bill demanded a statute. Zero?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Once again....the people in N.H. have gotten it so THEY (you know the citizens not the govt) control the cirriculum in THEIR schools instead of the Dept of Education (the govt). Just how is this being for big govt as you originally claimed?

This a progressive left-wing big government action. Show me how the founders would have approved of this.

Representative republicanism by the founders envisioned the elected representatives making such decision. Thus the voters would elect a school board, which would appoint a Superintentendent, who would personnel to design and impliment programs.

You are creating a left-wing democratic movement that will shatter public education.

So, in other words, "Yeah pilgrim they aren't creating bigger government by taking away some govt controls, I was wrong but for some weird reason wont say so"

So, in the correct word, "The representatives are refusing the republican duty laid on them by the founders and giving primary decision-making to the people." The 'People', for the most part, are not capable to creating cirricula for their children grades k through 12.

 

[dblack]

College admissions staff look at a student's grades, class rank, SATs AND the RIGOR of the school's curriculum. If they see "modified" or "alternative" curriculum on a HS transcript, most likely they will say "Next".

Frankly, I don't think too many parents (if any) would spend the kind of money it would take to set up an individualized program for their kid. This law is probably more of a statement than an action plan.

When my students whine and complain about the serious issues that concern them (like school lunches or dress code), I tell them the following:
a. Talk to the principal
b. Take it to student council
c. Attend a school board meeting
d. Write a letter to the local paper
e. Start a petition

I'd be curious to know how many of those avenues were attempted before the proponents of this bill demanded a statute. Zero?

You forgot 'f', quit school and take charge of your own education.

 

[dblack]

So, in the correct word, "The representatives are refusing the republican duty laid on them by the founders and giving primary decision-making to the people." The 'People', for the most part, are not capable to creating cirricula for their children grades k through 12.

Jake, you appear to be deeply confused. You're mixing up the issue of how government makes decisions with the question of whether or not government should be making the decision in the first place. The question here isn't whether school curricula should be decided via direct democracy, or representative democracy, or dictatorial fiat (or whatever). It's whether the curriculum for each student should be decided by government or by parents.

I actually understand how this could be a pain in the butt for public schools, but I care more about the freedom of parents and students to get the education they want than the convenience of teachers and staff.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So much for the TP being concerned with spending and big gov't. In New Hampshire, parents can now object to school curriculum, forcing the school district to come up with new lesson plans for the children of the parents who file the objection.

Great job, guys. I see you have your priorities in line.

New Hampshire Lawmakers Pass Law Allowing Parental Objections To Curriculum

The Tea Party dominated New Hampshire Legislature on Wednesday overrode the governor's veto to enact a new law allowing parents to object to any part of the school curriculum.

The state House voted 255-112 and Senate 17-5 to enact H.B. 542, which will allow parents to request an alternative school curriculum for any subject to which they register an objection. Gov. John Lynch (D) vetoed the measure in July, saying the bill would harm education quality and give parents control over lesson plans.

"For example, under this bill, parents could object to a teacher's plan to: teach the history of France or the history of the civil or women's rights movements," Lynch wrote in his veto message. "Under this bill, a parent could find 'objectionable' how a teacher instructs on the basics of algebra. In each of those cases, the school district would have to develop an alternative educational plan for the student. Even though the law requires the parents to pay the cost of alternative, the school district will still have to bear the burden of helping develop and approve the alternative. Classrooms will be disrupted by students coming and going, and lacking shared knowledge."

Under the terms of the bill, which was sponsored by state Rep. J.R. Hoell (R-Dunbarton), a parent could object to any curriculum or course material in the classroom. The parent and school district would then determine a new curriculum or texts for the child to meet any state educational requirements for the subject matter. The parent would be responsible for paying the cost of developing the new curriculum. The bill also allows for the parent's name and reason for objection to be sealed by the state.

There. I made the fine print a little bigger.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This plan moves the process closer to the concept of 'pure democracy',

aka 'mob rule' that conservatives normally object to. Notice how that when the outcome is perceived to be preferable,

conservatives throw principle under the bus?

 

[dblack]

This plan moves the process closer to the concept of 'pure democracy',

aka 'mob rule' that conservatives normally object to. Notice how that when the outcome is perceived to be preferable,

conservatives throw principle under the bus?

This sounds like what Jake is trying to say, but it doesn't make any more sense. Democracy is a group of people making a decision together, with the majority getting the final say. This isn't even a question of democracy because it's taking the decision away from the state and letting parents decide for themselves.

Deciding for yourself isn't democracy. Democracy is the majority deciding for everyone else.

 

[AmericanFirst]

So much for the TP being concerned with spending and big gov't. In New Hampshire, parents can now object to school curriculum, forcing the school district to come up with new lesson plans for the children of the parents who file the objection.

Great job, guys. I see you have your priorities in line.

New Hampshire Lawmakers Pass Law Allowing Parental Objections To Curriculum

The Tea Party dominated New Hampshire Legislature on Wednesday overrode the governor's veto to enact a new law allowing parents to object to any part of the school curriculum.

The state House voted 255-112 and Senate 17-5 to enact H.B. 542, which will allow parents to request an alternative school curriculum for any subject to which they register an objection. Gov. John Lynch (D) vetoed the measure in July, saying the bill would harm education quality and give parents control over lesson plans.

"For example, under this bill, parents could object to a teacher's plan to: teach the history of France or the history of the civil or women's rights movements," Lynch wrote in his veto message. "Under this bill, a parent could find 'objectionable' how a teacher instructs on the basics of algebra. In each of those cases, the school district would have to develop an alternative educational plan for the student. Even though the law requires the parents to pay the cost of alternative, the school district will still have to bear the burden of helping develop and approve the alternative. Classrooms will be disrupted by students coming and going, and lacking shared knowledge."

Under the terms of the bill, which was sponsored by state Rep. J.R. Hoell (R-Dunbarton), a parent could object to any curriculum or course material in the classroom. The parent and school district would then determine a new curriculum or texts for the child to meet any state educational requirements for the subject matter. The parent would be responsible for paying the cost of developing the new curriculum. The bill also allows for the parent's name and reason for objection to be sealed by the state.

So you support the idea parents have no say so in what the schools teach their children? You are a perfect example of the stupidity in this country. Fool.

 

[initforme]

Schools need to be teaching STRICTLY to the state tests. That way test scores increase. Get the exact type of questions and teach to those. I frankly dont understand why it is taught any other way. If I am going to be judged on test scores then why not teach to the test? The odds are stacked GREATLY against educators.

 

[dblack]

Schools need to be teaching STRICTLY to the state tests. That way test scores increase. Get the exact type of questions and teach to those. I frankly dont understand why it is taught any other way. If I am going to be judged on test scores then why not teach to the test? The odds are stacked GREATLY against educators.

Seriously?

 

[NYcarbineer]

This plan moves the process closer to the concept of 'pure democracy',

aka 'mob rule' that conservatives normally object to. Notice how that when the outcome is perceived to be preferable,

conservatives throw principle under the bus?

This sounds like what Jake is trying to say, but it doesn't make any more sense. Democracy is a group of people making a decision together, with the majority getting the final say. This isn't even a question of democracy because it's taking the decision away from the state and letting parents decide for themselves.

Deciding for yourself isn't democracy. Democracy is the majority deciding for everyone else.

Well, maybe. Maybe it's closer to anarchy.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So much for the TP being concerned with spending and big gov't. In New Hampshire, parents can now object to school curriculum, forcing the school district to come up with new lesson plans for the children of the parents who file the objection.

Great job, guys. I see you have your priorities in line.

New Hampshire Lawmakers Pass Law Allowing Parental Objections To Curriculum

The Tea Party dominated New Hampshire Legislature on Wednesday overrode the governor's veto to enact a new law allowing parents to object to any part of the school curriculum.

The state House voted 255-112 and Senate 17-5 to enact H.B. 542, which will allow parents to request an alternative school curriculum for any subject to which they register an objection. Gov. John Lynch (D) vetoed the measure in July, saying the bill would harm education quality and give parents control over lesson plans.

"For example, under this bill, parents could object to a teacher's plan to: teach the history of France or the history of the civil or women's rights movements," Lynch wrote in his veto message. "Under this bill, a parent could find 'objectionable' how a teacher instructs on the basics of algebra. In each of those cases, the school district would have to develop an alternative educational plan for the student. Even though the law requires the parents to pay the cost of alternative, the school district will still have to bear the burden of helping develop and approve the alternative. Classrooms will be disrupted by students coming and going, and lacking shared knowledge."

Under the terms of the bill, which was sponsored by state Rep. J.R. Hoell (R-Dunbarton), a parent could object to any curriculum or course material in the classroom. The parent and school district would then determine a new curriculum or texts for the child to meet any state educational requirements for the subject matter. The parent would be responsible for paying the cost of developing the new curriculum. The bill also allows for the parent's name and reason for objection to be sealed by the state.

So you support the idea parents have no say so in what the schools teach their children? You are a perfect example of the stupidity in this country. Fool.

Parents have the following 'say':

1. They get to vote for state representatives

2. They get to vote for school board members

3. They have the right to put their children in private schools

4. They have the right to homeschool

5. They have the right to move

 

[dblack]

This sounds like what Jake is trying to say, but it doesn't make any more sense. Democracy is a group of people making a decision together, with the majority getting the final say. This isn't even a question of democracy because it's taking the decision away from the state and letting parents decide for themselves.

Deciding for yourself isn't democracy. Democracy is the majority deciding for everyone else.

Well, maybe. Maybe it's closer to anarchy.

Freedom is not anarchy.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So, in the correct word, "The representatives are refusing the republican duty laid on them by the founders and giving primary decision-making to the people." The 'People', for the most part, are not capable to creating cirricula for their children grades k through 12.

Jake, you appear to be deeply confused. You're mixing up the issue of how government makes decisions with the question of whether or not government should be making the decision in the first place. The question here isn't whether school curricula should be decided via direct democracy, or representative democracy, or dictatorial fiat (or whatever). It's whether the curriculum for each student should be decided by government or by parents.

I actually understand how this could be a pain in the butt for public schools, but I care more about the freedom of parents and students to get the education they want than the convenience of teachers and staff.

You are the one who is truly confused between republicanism and democracy in the small "r" and the small "d" in comfort. To move direct decision making about government issues for elected representatives (republicanism) to the people themselves (democracy) is progressive left wing non-classical liberalism.

You will get (1) mass confusion and (2) very poor schooling for your children.

This has nothing to do about convenience for the teachers and administrators.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This plan moves the process closer to the concept of 'pure democracy',

aka 'mob rule' that conservatives normally object to. Notice how that when the outcome is perceived to be preferable,

conservatives throw principle under the bus?

Supposed conservatives on this issue have moved into a progresssive left-wing mob mentality.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This plan moves the process closer to the concept of 'pure democracy',

aka 'mob rule' that conservatives normally object to. Notice how that when the outcome is perceived to be preferable,

conservatives throw principle under the bus?

This sounds like what Jake is trying to say, but it doesn't make any more sense. Democracy is a group of people making a decision together, with the majority getting the final say. This isn't even a question of democracy because it's taking the decision away from the state and letting parents decide for themselves.

Deciding for yourself isn't democracy. Democracy is the majority deciding for everyone else.

Democracy is the whole deciding. Republicanism is the elected representatives of the whole deciding. The representatives kicked their responsibility back to the whole (left wing progressivism) to decide on education.

This is an absolute recipe for disaster.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So much for the TP being concerned with spending and big gov't. In New Hampshire, parents can now object to school curriculum, forcing the school district to come up with new lesson plans for the children of the parents who file the objection.

Great job, guys. I see you have your priorities in line.

New Hampshire Lawmakers Pass Law Allowing Parental Objections To Curriculum

The Tea Party dominated New Hampshire Legislature on Wednesday overrode the governor's veto to enact a new law allowing parents to object to any part of the school curriculum.

The state House voted 255-112 and Senate 17-5 to enact H.B. 542, which will allow parents to request an alternative school curriculum for any subject to which they register an objection. Gov. John Lynch (D) vetoed the measure in July, saying the bill would harm education quality and give parents control over lesson plans.

"For example, under this bill, parents could object to a teacher's plan to: teach the history of France or the history of the civil or women's rights movements," Lynch wrote in his veto message. "Under this bill, a parent could find 'objectionable' how a teacher instructs on the basics of algebra. In each of those cases, the school district would have to develop an alternative educational plan for the student. Even though the law requires the parents to pay the cost of alternative, the school district will still have to bear the burden of helping develop and approve the alternative. Classrooms will be disrupted by students coming and going, and lacking shared knowledge."

Under the terms of the bill, which was sponsored by state Rep. J.R. Hoell (R-Dunbarton), a parent could object to any curriculum or course material in the classroom. The parent and school district would then determine a new curriculum or texts for the child to meet any state educational requirements for the subject matter. The parent would be responsible for paying the cost of developing the new curriculum. The bill also allows for the parent's name and reason for objection to be sealed by the state.

So you support the idea parents have no say so in what the schools teach their children? You are a perfect example of the stupidity in this country. Fool.

That is what you are saying, American First, no one else.

Parents have their say in (1) electing school boards and (2) volunteering in school activities. Do you do these basic requirements of American citizenship?